Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim in CT
pete those countries do t have more guns than people. we do. your facts are correct. and they are precisely why prospective gun laws won’t do
much
All you have to do, is look at places that enacted very strict gun laws, and see what the effects were.
the cops weren’t afraid as a group. you’re lying. you’re muting about this massacre if
kids, to attempt to win a political
argument.
The commander incorrectly decided it was not an active shooter, and followed the barricaded entrant protocol.
If you have evidence that cops stayed out because they were ll o sated, let’s see it.
if you don’t, then shame on you .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
|
You always believe the party line.
Change is not impossible and there’s no simple magic law, it’s going to be a long hard slog to get us out of the place we are in with all the play soldiers.
We are seeing lots of changes to the story given by officers, as they coordinate their stories.
Take every one with a grain of salt. ANY statement from police departments that uses the passive voice ("projectile impact responsible for death of man near officer-involved incident") is an attempt to hide something, if not an outright lie, and media often publish them verbatim.
Every department has training that acknowledges danger. This does not mean there is an obligation to take risks.
A common instruction around precincts is "better to be judged by twelve than carried by six."
Which is to say, a cop should murder someone before taking risks.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Threaded Mode