- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: You get arrested if disrupt a Law Enforcement Operation
Posted on 1/27/26 at 10:40 am to MoarKilometers
Posted on 1/27/26 at 10:40 am to MoarKilometers
quote:
Pretending this isn't feasible is laughable
What's laughable is judging this situation based on what is "feasible".
What will never change is that the guy chose to bring a loaded firearm to a location where there were federal agents in a tense situation, made a conscious decision to engage in a physical confrontation with them. And now he is dead.
1
Posted on 1/27/26 at 10:43 am to Tmcgin
quote:
So do we owe the rioters in Minn a check like the 1/6 Patriots ??
Reddit’s best and brightest.
Posted on 1/27/26 at 10:44 am to Joshjrn
quote:
That’s fine. My point is “deport every illegal, no exceptions” is a very, very unpopular opinion in this country. And there’s nothing wrong with advocating for a politically unpopular opinion; one simply shouldn’t lose sight of the fact that it is, in fact, politically unpopular.
I think that's another thing where ignorance and lack of perspective give those like you the habit of putting too much stick in polls. Gun-control advocates do exactly the same thing after a highly publicized mass shooting, will cite public opinion polls taken in the aftermath of such events as proof that "public opinion" has shifted and now is the time to take action. In a dew months those same polls inevitably show that it was only a temporary spike as public opinion really hasn't shifted much at all if any.
Posted on 1/27/26 at 10:47 am to MMauler
quote:
Where exactly in FantasyF*ckingLand do you TDS-infected pedophile protectors live?
You leftist whackjobs really need to get some serious f*cking professional help
Says the guy melting down when his lies are confronted with the facts.
Go back to your safe space.
Posted on 1/27/26 at 10:48 am to Clames
quote:
I think that's another thing where ignorance and lack of perspective give those like you the habit of putting too much stick in polls. Gun-control advocates do exactly the same thing after a highly publicized mass shooting, will cite public opinion polls taken in the aftermath of such events as proof that "public opinion" has shifted and now is the time to take action. In a dew months those same polls inevitably show that it was only a temporary spike as public opinion really hasn't shifted much at all if any.
I cited to a poll from a month and a half ago, several weeks before the Good shooting, much less the Pretti shooting.
Next excuse?
ETA: And while the poll came out in mid December, the data was actually collected in mid October.
This post was edited on 1/27/26 at 10:52 am
Posted on 1/27/26 at 10:51 am to Joshjrn
quote:
I cited to a poll from a month and and a half ago, several weeks before the Good shooting, much less the Pretti shooting.
There have been other incidents, many other shootings involved in the calendar year before Good. Think your excuse here remains the same: ignorance.
Posted on 1/27/26 at 10:52 am to UtahCajun
quote:
None of this makes any sense. Congrats on that.
To you. It doesn’t make sense to you. That literally should tell you something.
Posted on 1/27/26 at 11:01 am to Clames
quote:
There have been other incidents, many other shootings involved in the calendar year before Good. Think your excuse here remains the same: ignorance.
In the calendar year before fricking October? Talk about a goalpost move from polls "taken in the aftermath" of "highly publicized" events.
Look, you'll still look like an idiot if you want to fall back on the old "any poll I disagree with is wrong" chestnut, but trying to take the moral and intellectual high ground over a poll tracked in mid October and released in December 2025 makes you look like you're delusional, like you're lying, or both.
Posted on 1/27/26 at 11:04 am to GoCrazyAuburn
quote:
You alert that he is armed and still could be armed. Until he is fully searched, the threat is still there.
Ah yes, the mythical Schrödinger's gat...
Posted on 1/27/26 at 11:08 am to Purple Spoon
quote:
What will never change is that the guy chose to bring a loaded firearm to a location where there were federal agents in a tense situation, made a conscious decision to engage in a physical confrontation with them. And now he is dead.
IYO is the purpose of the 2nd amendment for us to just keep and bear arms in our own homes and definitely do not load them and carry into a "tense situation" of the government's creation? Are we not supposed to exercise the 1st and 2nd amendments simultaneously? Are they mutually exclusive? If these rights are not intended to be used to disrupt government operations, then what the frick are they for?
Honest questions here.
Posted on 1/27/26 at 11:08 am to MMauler
quote:
Where exactly in FantasyF*ckingLand do you TDS-infected pedophile protectors live? You leftist whackjobs really need to get some serious f*cking professional help.
There it is
That emotional squealing when you can’t use words anymore
It’s all you can do when confronted with something indefensible but you’re too married to your ideology to have a single thought that conflicts with it.
Posted on 1/27/26 at 11:13 am to MoarKilometers
quote:
Ah yes, the mythical Schrödinger's gat...
Ignorant.
This post was edited on 1/27/26 at 11:16 am
Posted on 1/27/26 at 11:14 am to sgallo3
quote:
when his lies are confronted with the facts.
You cannot be this fricking stupid, brainwashed, brain dead, and delusional all at the same fricking time.
No "facts" have been offered. You nutjobs believe everything that Rachel Madcow, PMSNBC, and the rest of the corrupt mainstream media has told you. You then go around regurgitating this fricking garbage as though it’s "fact." And you do this despite the fact that everything they’ve told you over the last 10 years has been proven to be all fricking lies. From the Russian collusion hoax to the Hunter Biden laptop to the absolutely fricking absurd contention that Joe Biden was cogent and not suffering from a severe case of fricking dementia.
You bought it all. And now you just come here and regurgitate the next lie these scumbag motherfrickers tell you.
I mean it when I say, get some serious fricking professional psychiatric help. And make sure that whoever you choose has an extensive background in deprogramming from cults. You are literally in a fricking cult called the Democrat party.
Seriously, think about it – you voted for a barely functioning fricking retard who’s only “accomplishment" in life is that she sucked and fricked a married senior citizen to get every job she’s ever gotten because she was too stupid to get a real job on her own. And you did this simply because your dear leaders brainwash you, and into thinking she was qualified to be the most powerful person on the face of the planet. Like I said, get some serious fricking professional help.
Posted on 1/27/26 at 11:15 am to MMauler
quote:
You cannot be this fricking stupid, brainwashed, brain dead, and delusional all at the same fricking time.
No "facts" have been offered. You nutjobs believe everything that Rachel Madcow, PMSNBC, and the rest of the corrupt mainstream media has told you. You then go around regurgitating this fricking garbage as though it’s "fact." And you do this despite the fact that everything they’ve told you over the last 10 years has been proven to be all fricking lies. From the Russian collusion hoax to the Hunter Biden laptop to the absolutely fricking absurd contention that Joe Biden was cogent and not suffering from a severe case of fricking dementia.
You bought it all. And now you just come here and regurgitate the next lie these scumbag motherfrickers tell you.
I mean it when I say, get some serious fricking professional psychiatric help. And make sure that whoever you choose has an extensive background in deprogramming from cults. You are literally in a fricking cult called the Democrat party.
Seriously, think about it – you voted for a barely functioning fricking retard who’s only “accomplishment" in life is that she sucked and fricked a married senior citizen to get every job she’s ever gotten because she was too stupid to get a real job on her own. And you did this simply because your dear leaders brainwash you, and into thinking she was qualified to be the most powerful person on the face of the planet. Like I said, get some serious fricking professional help.
Now THAT'S how you melt
Posted on 1/27/26 at 11:20 am to MoarKilometers
quote:
Ah yes, the mythical Schrödinger's gat...
Correct. If anyone can be either armed or unarmed then all citizens regardless of they are armed would need to be treated as a threat to your life.
That isn't a good way to go about things for the most obvious of reasons
Posted on 1/27/26 at 11:23 am to MMauler
Posted on 1/27/26 at 11:26 am to Powerman
quote:
Correct. If anyone can be either armed or unarmed then all citizens regardless of they are armed would need to be treated as a threat to your life.
That isn't a good way to go about things for the most obvious of reasons
It is pretty well established legal precident. If an officer has a reasonable suspicion of being armed and dangerous, the officer is authorized to act as if the person is armed and dangerous. Are we going to sit here and argue that seeing that he is armed is not reasonable suspicion that he is armed and dangerous?
This post was edited on 1/27/26 at 11:27 am
Posted on 1/27/26 at 11:29 am to GoCrazyAuburn
quote:
It is pretty well established legal precident. If an officer has a reasonable suspicion of being armed and dangerous, the officer is authorized to act as if the person is armed and dangerous. Are we going to sit here and argue that seeing that he is armed is not reasonable suspicion that he is armed and dangerous?
Someone being armed and considered "dangerous" does not meet the legal precident of dispatching lethal force. There has to be an IMMINENT threat of death or great bodily harm to the officers.
Posted on 1/27/26 at 11:32 am to Korkstand
quote:
IYO is the purpose of the 2nd amendment for us to just keep and bear arms in our own homes and definitely do not load them and carry into a "tense situation" of the government's creation
So you think that carrying a loaded firearm and physically confronting armed agents is protected by the first and second amendment?
Posted on 1/27/26 at 11:34 am to sgallo3
quote:
Someone being armed and considered "dangerous" does not meet the legal precident of dispatching lethal force. There has to be an IMMINENT threat of death or great bodily harm to the officers.
Has nothing to do with the discussion/poster i'm responding to.
Their use of lethal force is a different matter than their standard operating procedure of assuming someone is still armed until you've been able to fully verify that all threats have been removed. So, even though the one gun has been removed, at that point and time every officer should be treating him as if he is still armed until they can completely verify he is not. They have not been able to perform a full pat down and don't know if that is the only weapon on his body or not. That is fairly standard operating procedure. Now note, I never said that means they can shoot him.
This post was edited on 1/27/26 at 11:38 am
Page 14 of 18
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News