I don't agree with OP's political views. However it would be pretty hypocritical of me to instantly blame the cop here since I don't know any of the particulars of this shooting other than the whole thing sounds odd. But so did the shooting of the black dude in his car there in Minnesota. After some of the facts of that one came out I'm still not sure what to think. But he did have a gun and apparently didn't comply with the officers instructions. So I think that one was a tragic mistake that probably could have been avoided if either party had acted differently. I personally will wait to see what facts come out on this one before jumping the gun.
POLITICAL THREAD
- Thread starter kybobcat
- Start date
I don't agree with OP's political views. However it would be pretty hypocritical of me to instantly blame the cop here since I don't know any of the particulars of this shooting other than the whole thing sounds odd. But so did the shooting of the black dude in his car there in Minnesota. After some of the facts of that one came out I'm still not sure what to think. But he did have a gun and apparently didn't comply with the officers instructions. So I think that one was a tragic mistake that probably could have been avoided if either party had acted differently. I personally will wait to see what facts come out on this one before jumping the gun.
It's never been harder to fill a job in America.
It has never been harder to fill an open job in the United States.
According to a chart from Deutsche Bank economist Torsten Sløk, it now takes 31 days to fill an open job in America, up from 23 days in 2006 and about 15 days in 2009.
There is perhaps no better way to visualize the “tight labor market” (a decidedly wonky term) that economists and folks on Wall Street often talk about — if you’re looking for workers, it’s tough to find help.....
#MAGA.
Maybe it's not that related but it is eye-opening how many hoops employers make people go through to not only apply for a job but to finally fill the position. Just applying for jobs will sometimes take over an hour with you having to fill in the employer spots again even after you uploaded your resume. Then some jerk offs will even make you do an hour-long personality test.
Then if you get in, multiple interviews, background check, waiting for offer letters and others to sign off on it. Too many cooks in the kitchen.
I've seen positions stay open for months. A lot of employers will find someone they like but will keep them warm while shopping for other possibilities and then that person they put on the back burner will end up finding a job elsewhere instead of waiting to be dicked around.
Trump calling out the Republican Senators at lunch today.
Sessions has been a complete flop...weed and now this. Of all the shit he could focus on.
Civil asset forfeiture is, 9 times out of 10, complete bullshit.
Look at how the 2 instances were reported, public reaction, and governments handling.
It wasn't so much we defended the cops, it's was the knee jerk reaction of the public, media, and Govt in those instances. It's one thing to be upset, it's another thing to riot and loot when no one knows what really happened in the days afterwards. Then you also had the Obama admin weighing in stoking the fires.
People are understandably upset about this, but they aren't rioting and looting, the admin isn't weighing in, they're simply letting justice run it's course. That is the difference.
To me as an observer, it doesn't look good that the very first Somali born immigrant hired as a cop shoots an unarmed woman across his partner, through the door and kills her. It has the appearance of political correctness out of control, that the city was trying to appear inclusive, and hired someone to fill an imposed need. I will fully admit I could be wrong.
I did actually just skim that press release or whatever. What portion of it supports that sensationalized headline?
Re: Civil asset forfeiture
Re: Civil asset forfeiture
Sessions has been awful.
Weed. Come'on. Quit picking on the low hanging fruit for gov't spending.
All while Hillary and Soros are running free. Complete bullshit
Weed. Come'on. Quit picking on the low hanging fruit for gov't spending.
All while Hillary and Soros are running free. Complete bullshit
If I was in charge of everything. My priorities.
1.Make sure George Soros is imprisoned or executed
2. Shut down all immigration no matter what
3. Deporting everyone, ending DACA or whatever bull crap and end birthright citizenship
4. Build the wall
5. Make sure Obama/Clinton/Rice/etc get taken down.
6. Make sure DNC Media doesn't have access to me at all.
7. Implementing a way to verify voter rolls and I'd use their accusations of collusion against me as why we need to get to the bottom of this. lol
Weed doesn't make the cut.
1.Make sure George Soros is imprisoned or executed
2. Shut down all immigration no matter what
3. Deporting everyone, ending DACA or whatever bull crap and end birthright citizenship
4. Build the wall
5. Make sure Obama/Clinton/Rice/etc get taken down.
6. Make sure DNC Media doesn't have access to me at all.
7. Implementing a way to verify voter rolls and I'd use their accusations of collusion against me as why we need to get to the bottom of this. lol
Weed doesn't make the cut.
Last edited:
I agree.
* More probable cause documentation on a seizure
Cash seizures of 10k or less:
*pursuant to state warrant
*incident to arrest for an offense relative to seizure
*at same time of sezure o contraband relative to forfeiture
*owner admits property was criminally drived
"Department officials should proceed with caution on whether to consider the forfeiture of personal residences where title or ownership lies with persons not implicated in illegal conduct." <--- maybe the part the headline comes from...I assume that relates to rental houses, "stolen" cars etc?...
Seemed like a keep on keepin on message to me...and I really never liked the Sessions pick.
**Edit: Found more from an interview w/deputy AG:
Rosenstein also defended a newly announced Justice Department decision to expand what’s known as civil asset forfeiture – allowing police to seize property of suspects without proving guilt. The move has spurred some criticism from Republican lawmakers.
“In order to seize property, police need probable cause, the same standards that police need to make an arrest,” Rosenstein said. “And when a decision is made to forfeit property federally, we conduct an independent review of the facts and circumstances.”
Hell, I don't know - makes it more confusing.
Last edited:
Can't you see? A lot of the response is exaggerated precisely because the shoe is on the other foot, and the "minority" should know how the "majority" feels when it becomes not about the specific people and the specific facts in a specific instance, but about any racism anywhere at any time, even when the police officer is black and the victim is black. It's a strong assumption (if not a foregone conclusion) that when a white police officer shoots a black man it is because of racism, and that's just as ridiculous as assuming that Officer Noor shot the woman just because he hates white women.
Oh man, I wish I could get Jameslee's 401K. I'd go blow it on white hookers
Speaking of 401K, how about that motherphucking stock market! S&P up over 12 points right now.
14) Trump ends covert CIA program to arm anti-Assad rebels in Syria, a move sought by Moscow
Oh no he is a Russian puppet because he doesn't support overthrowing another government. Stop giving money to foreign wars and fix america.
![[roll]](http://l.yimg.com/j/assets/img/emoticons/classic/roll.r191677.gif "roll [roll]")
So. We finally, finally have a police shooting of a civilian wherein the civilian is completely innocent, and this is the best you can come up with? You and others of your ilk are much quicker to condemn in other, less clear-cut cases, and yet, here, you come up with this crap? Pathetic, but predictable. So predictable, in fact, that I would have bet on it.
I shared that earlier today. She's a nut job. To work in media today, you better be mentally ill to have a shot at most media gigs.
I appreciate your perspective. There are already quite a few facts that have come out here.
1. The victim was the person who initially called 911.
2. She was not suspected of any criminal wrongdoing whatsoever and there is no evidence of any criminal activity on her part, failure to comply with police orders, a criminal history, a history of mental issues, a history of drug abuse, or anything of the sort.
3. She was shot to death.
4. The officer has asserted his 5th Amendment right to remain silent. While he has an absolute right to do so, and any suspect is generally wise to do so, that is not common in a police shooting. When a shooting is justified, the officer invariably shouts his side of the story out loud and clear. Usually, that happens even if it's a hinky shooting, if he has ANY sort of explanation, even if it's a crap explanation.
5. This isn't yet a proven fact, but there are reports that the other officer was absolutely stunned the shots were fired.
There are still other facts that will come out, but I suspect they are only going to solidify what basically everyone is already assuming. I think the officer deserves the benefit of the doubt, and comments that he was "engaging in jihad" or that he probably just wanted to kill a white person sound like nonsense. Sounds to me like he just might have been a poorly trained, unqualified buffoon who heard a loud noise (which wasn't even caused by the victim) and hit the panic button, with the tragic result being that the panic button in this case happened to be a trigger. I am not necessarily saying that this guy needs to go to prison but it's looking increasingly likely that someone is going to be looking at a literal 8 figure settlement- literally, not figuratively. And, frankly, if turns out that if this officer was anything other than the most qualified candidate for the job at the time of his hiring, I hope that whatever damages that there would otherwise be, get tripled.
She's either nuts, or crazy like a fox. I have no doubt that she is getting paid by someone for this nonsense. The biggest joke is that she's not a liberal. She's a NeverTrump neo-conservative. Looks like the joke conservatives may be becoming just as unhinged as the moonbats.
It has to be a troll job I think. There is absolutely no way shes truly believes anything she says.
I still have to believe it was an accident. I had a gun go off by accident. Fortunitly, it was pointed down range but it still scared the he'll out of me. Makes me even more careful to keep my finger off the trigger.
That said, why the he'll did the fool have his gun out in the first place?
And what should his penalty be? Fired for sure.
If that's the case, depending on Minnesota law, he may still face criminal charges for reckless or negligent homicide. He's in much better shape if one shot was fired, but, as you mentioned, even then, there is an explanation needed for why the gun was drawn, and why his finger was on the trigger, and why it just happened to be pointed at a non-suspect. If it's an accident, he may only get fired, and he may not get convicted of a crime. That's not going to help the city of Minneapolis. The victim's family will soon own that city.
Video exists of unarmed man running on foot from police after a traffic stop and he is shot in the back multiple times... video of an unarmed man walking down the street while multiple cops watching and he is shot 16 times...14 of those when he is already on the ground and not moving...
No, what is pathetic is the reflex to blame the victim until it's someone who looks like you or perhaps your mother or sister. When it gets close to home your attitude changes. The cop was wrong in each of those cases but y'all want to justify the shootings if it takes place in the hood.
Here's a challenge for you, then. Start by naming the victims in the two cases you just mentioned, because I have no idea what you are even talking about. Then, after you do that, name the specific posters on this specific thread who justified either of those shootings. I'll bet you that either (1) no one here has tried to justify either of those two shootings, or (2) that you are lying about some of the underlying facts, just as others of your ilk with that "hands up, don't shoot" crap, or (3) that you are telling the truth about some facts, but conveniently leaving out other facts.
Similar threads
