War Hoop and EjFord like this.
Bill Martin likes this.
Bill Martin likes this.
Red likes this.
FunCycle and Red like this.
FunCycle, War Hoop and Bill Martin like this.
FunCycle likes this.
edwardaneal and EjFord like this.
EjFord likes this.
EjFord likes this.
FunCycle likes this.
EjFord and Bill Martin like this.
I figure since he worked for the local government, he was probably a registered dumbocrat.
They probably don't want the public to know that or that info to become viral.
More ammo for the repubs.
Come on...you don't believe "dumbocrats" own guns.
Also, I work for the local government and again contrary to Republican talking points more than half of the 100+ employees I have contact with voted for Trump (though for many, their support for him is waivering).
All I can say about Illinois Democrat’s is not good. Just like every other democrat controlled state they are going broke and passing laws that finally want me to sell my home here and move to Florida.
Illinois just passed new abortion rights Friday and bill is going to the governor to sign.
This bill allows abortion including birth abortions. What a shame we are here. To think anyone would want to get rid of the electoral college and allow these idiots control over the US to destroy our great country. Why do they think our forefathers built this great constitution to protect our country from these idiots.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
It's not that they aren't using his name that's interesting, I understand the concept of denying notoriety. It would appear that his politics, background, education and religious preference doesn't fit the current agenda of the left.
The left wants higher taxes and a poor economy so they can keep more people on welfare and give illegals everything they want and to hell with US citizens. Also they have people in congress that have no business there. God help us if they get control in 2020. My 2 cents.
It's not that they aren't using his name that's interesting, I understand the concept of denying notoriety. It would appear that his politics, background, education and religious preference doesn't fit the current agenda of the left.
Both sides have agendas, how quick is FOX to call out somebody as Muslim?
However when I think of the most recent shootings, Vegas... None of the media have jumped into that pit. Maybe all media is starting to realize their methods of reporting were/are toxic and provoke more of the same.
Both sides have agendas, how quick is FOX to call out somebody as Muslim?
However when I think of the most recent shootings, Vegas... None of the media have jumped into that pit. Maybe all media is starting to realize their methods of reporting were/are toxic and provoke more of the same.
I'm guessing that may be the case, until the next shooter has a picture wearing a MAGA or posing with a Confederate flag.
I'm guessing that may be the case, until the next shooter has a picture wearing a MAGA or posing with a Confederate flag.
Well Crap! I have the cap for each day of the week and the Confederate flag flying
Well Crap! I have the cap for each day of the week and the Confederate flag flying
Don't go shooting up the place or we'll all get to see your picture.
Don't go shooting up the place or we'll all get to see your picture.
You want to see me just got to parade video. That is me standing on the side of the street waving
.
It's no wonder congressional dems are obsessed with Россия, they are using their playbook ......
..... 
.
Very interesting case in the news today. The Parkland High security officer has been charged for his cowardice in doing nothing to stop the maniac shooter. Your first thought may be he deserves to be prosecuted for child negligence which the DA clearly thinks he can win. On the other hand could this set a dangerous precedent going forward for law enforcement. Could any officer be charged for “not engaging” a dangerous suspect. I know there are rules that are intended to dictate an officers reaction to cover just about any scenario an officer may encounter but human reaction is very far from those rules sometimes - should they be prosecuted for it?? After all - whether some don’t want to admit it - cops are human - can anybody really say how they would react until they are under fire?? He is also charged with perjury - if so - prosecute to the fullest. Red - you are long tome LEO - what is your opinion —- or anybody else for that matter.
It's been a long standing position that an officer isn't accountable for the actions of another person if they aren't present to intervene. It's also not uncommon to discipline an officer for failing to act if they are present. From all the info I have in this case I believe he holds some responsible for failing to act. His assignment was at the school and had received active shooter training.(It has been reported that he actually was an instructor for this training.) His excuse that he didn't know where the shooter was is diminished by the video of him standing outside the door and not looking for the suspect. His failure to act when he was equipped, trained and present makes him accountable. Whether he is criminally responsible we will see. At a minimum his walking away with his pension and no accountability would infuriate me if I had a child or loved one there. I can't imagine what made him stand there while children were being slaughtered when he had the tools to address it.
Something else to consider is the concept of a “special relationship”. It's possible that the DA sees the SROs relationship with the persons at the school in this light. If so he has a duty to protect them. Just a thought.
Display More.
It's no wonder congressional dems are obsessed with Россия, they are using their playbook ......
.....
.
That last word should be dickweeds..
Very interesting case in the news today. The Parkland High security officer has been charged for his cowardice in doing nothing to stop the maniac shooter. Your first thought may be he deserves to be prosecuted for child negligence which the DA clearly thinks he can win. On the other hand could this set a dangerous precedent going forward for law enforcement. Could any officer be charged for “not engaging” a dangerous suspect. I know there are rules that are intended to dictate an officers reaction to cover just about any scenario an officer may encounter but human reaction is very far from those rules sometimes - should they be prosecuted for it?? After all - whether some don’t want to admit it - cops are human - can anybody really say how they would react until they are under fire?? He is also charged with perjury - if so - prosecute to the fullest. Red - you are long tome LEO - what is your opinion —- or anybody else for that matter.
Your use of the words "set a dangerous precedent" can and probably has been used to protect murderers, rapist etc. What sets a dangerous precedent is when the law becomes so complicated nobody can make any sense of it anymore. Now lets all of us get out there and make some more senseless gray area law. They are made to make lawyers money, nothing more and nothing less.
It's been a long standing position that an officer isn't accountable for the actions of another person if they aren't present to intervene. It's also not uncommon to discipline an officer for failing to act if they are present. From all the info I have in this case I believe he holds some responsible for failing to act. His assignment was at the school and had received active shooter training.(It has been reported that he actually was an instructor for this training.) His excuse that he didn't know where the shooter was is diminished by the video of him standing outside the door and not looking for the suspect. His failure to act when he was equipped, trained and present makes him accountable. Whether he is criminally responsible we will see. At a minimum his walking away with his pension and no accountability would infuriate me if I had a child or loved one there. I can't imagine what made him stand there while children were being slaughtered when he had the tools to address it.
I agree - termination - loss of pension is a given. It is the prosecution that I am in a quandary over. I’m just not sure that vengeance for political reasons is not at play here. The law is for justice - not political retribution.
Your use of the words "set a dangerous precedent" can and probably has been used to protect murderers, rapist etc. What sets a dangerous precedent is when the law becomes so complicated nobody can make any sense of it anymore. Now lets all of us get out there and make some more senseless gray area law. They are made to make lawyers money, nothing more and nothing less.
I made a living off the law and I love it. It is the only thing that stands between us and anarchy. You are correct that many laws are grey - some bordering on contradictory. Many laws are written by politically biased legislators duly elected by the people. I gotta say “don’t hate the players - hate the game” applies here 
I agree - termination - loss of pension is a given. It is the prosecution that I am in a quandary over. I’m just not sure that vengeance for political reasons is not at play here. The law is for justice - not political retribution.
It would appear that some do not agree with the last line. #witchhunt
I made a living off the law and I love it. It is the only thing that stands between us and anarchy. You are correct that many laws are grey - some bordering on contradictory. Many laws are written by politically biased legislators duly elected by the people. I gotta say “don’t hate the players - hate the game” applies here
I was on a gun forum at one time and it was owned by a Texas lawyer. I left that forum because of the disinformation on it. Went back a year later and everybody was gone. 
If my info is correct he now works for the NRA and you know what kind of trouble they have been in recently (mismanagement of funds). When they ran off Oliver North as president ya gotta know something ain't right with those folks. Just because your a lawyer doesn't mean your a good guy (not directing that at you directly).
I was on a gun forum at one time and it was owned by a Texas lawyer. I left that forum because of the disinformation on it. Went back a year later and everybody was gone.
Agree with you 100% - that’s why I’m retired - thankfully before the stress killed me !!
