Who was wrong

[TargeT]

Who, in this situation, was in the wrong?

Man walks into police station in mask with AK47
cr6zQLvPMpw

[joeecho]

One can be right and dead at the same time.

[Satori]

Very, very foolish thing to do. Legally, the guys who walked into the police station may be on solid ground (although myriad federal and state laws prohibit carrying weapons on government "property"), but they were more to the stupid than to the correct. That could have ended badly.

[TargeT]

One can be right and dead at the same time.

By the definition of "can" I agree with you.

By the definition of "lawfully right" or " legally compliant" I do not agree.


That could have ended badly.

I'm actually pretty surprised.

[joeecho]

One can be right and dead at the same time.

By the definition of "can" I agree with you.

By the definition of "lawfully right" or " legally compliant" I do not agree.


That could have ended badly.

I'm actually pretty surprised.

I agree with you but I don't think being dead is the greatest way to prove a point.

And I am surprised as well.

[Dennis Leahy]

One can be right and dead at the same time.

By the definition of "can" I agree with you.

By the definition of "lawfully right" or " legally compliant" I do not agree.


That could have ended badly.

I'm actually pretty surprised.
I wonder what would have happened if the guys walking in with weapons were Black. I'll bet there would be 2 dead Black guys (because the laws are enforced according to melanin output.)

[TargeT]

. I'll bet there would be 2 dead Black guys (because the laws are enforced according to melanin output.)

Hmm,, I dunno, I think "Terrorist" wins on that front.


Thought this was funny/good point:
siEK0iIFM10

[Justplain]

I cant see how these two can believe its lawful to carry weapons into a police station. These guys are a bit crazy.

[Ashy67]

I don't pretend to know about the gun laws in the US but anyone who walks into a police station with an AK 47 and wearing a balaclava can only expect that type of welcome no matter where you are in the world. They may have been trying to make a valid point but given the tensions in the world right now I feel this was rash (given they were only pulled over an hour before) and extremely ill conceived.

[Ewan]

Don't know about right or wrong but I sure know about stupid. Surely this guy will find himself the winner of a Darwin Award sooner or later. :)

[Bubu]

The question should be; whats the point? If its to prove legality, well nowadays more often than not legality is insanity. So in dealing with others I always try to use common sense more so conscience. Its because I've have learned that if we use laws in dealing there will always be conflicts. Using the conscience however promotes harmony.
I can only describe this act as, stupidity

[Jules]

With the many cop shootings by criminals, I heard from my brother-in-law who was a former cop that their first priority is being safe and coming home alive. Of course not to abuse the public is a top priority, even if there are dirty cops out there, cops that are bought and paid for by beyond evil men. I think if someone walks in to a police station with a mask and an AK47, well how could a person not get a reaction? I think the police there handled that pretty well. I thought I'd mention that Dearborn, MI has a large Muslim population, and the cops look the other way if muslims commit crimes like rape and murder in their religious traditions within their own people in that community. It is known that women wanting to escape that lifestyle tend to have "honor" killings and beheadings. I know some people will not agree with me on this topic, however these issues are out there.

[Cidersomerset]

I may of over thought this....LOL


Good question Targe ? my logical and emotional response in these times is
it was a provocative and silly thing to do. I know it is legal and they were
making a statement but that's how situations get out of hand.

But our gun culture is totally different and the US born from the sword/musket
and now guns that are far more power full including the AK 47 a rugged military
weapon the choice of freedom fighters and terrorists since WW11 is a very
dangerous tool in the wrong hands.

An article I saw a few days ago reminded me of this legal/illegal weapons
carry and although guns are not wide spread over here though they are
illegally available from Europe and else ware . Knife carry and crime has
resurfaced , it was a problem a decade or so ago but it is rising again
in the cities though its always been around. Most if not all countries have
violent crime of some description



So I do not have a definitive answer either way....Is it morel ? to abide by
the law or not ? A law is only a consensual rule that is a guide line that
can be interpreted by a Judge and Jury or a fine of some kind. So a
law in one state or country can be different who is to say which is right
or wrong ? usually consensus/society or the legal system.

So we are back to the dilemma they were legally within their right to do
this demonstration. But was it reckless ? provocative ? stupid ? we
could go around in circles with this one under the circumstances I think.




http://static.bbci.co.uk/frameworks/barlesque/3.20.5/orb/4/img/bbc-blocks-dark.png

Fighting knife crime

3 February 2017 Last updated at 18:03 GMT

It's risen 11% across England and Wales in the last year.
Short vid on link
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-38828402

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

One Night With Knife Crime Crackdown Police Task Force

ZotzMY-k_jI

Published on 8 Feb 2016
Police across England and Wales are beginning a week-long crackdown on knife crime,
which rose significantly in 2015. Sky News spends a night with a police task force
dedicated to fighting back: http://news.sky.com/story/1637700/exc...

==================================================

A decade ago but there was always violent gang killings in one form or another and
I cannot see that changing.


London's knife crime epidemic (CNN)

ARdlFk2_V2s

Uploaded on 12 Jul 2008
July 12, 2008 - A rash of knife attacks in London leaves five dead and two others
fighting for their lives. ITN's Keir Simmons has more.




Theres a load of articles on link...

https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=Fighting+knife+crime

[Sunny-side-up]

Well I'm not religious but they have some good points.
Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.

I don't promote scaring others especially to prove a point.

Those two guys where very lucky to still be alive.

I don't like violence but, if they walked into my home like that and I saw I could get the drop on them (Within the first few seconds), I would rip their arms off lol
(Rambo mode, do don't think, done)
Then ask questions of them, then say sorry :(

[Fellow Aspirant]

"We felt a little afraid for our lives."

So, apparently their adrenaline rush from having been frightened transmuted into an anger response awash in testosterone, wherein they decided to put everyones' lives at risk: petulant children with lethal power.

How else to account for such 'in your face' behaviour? These 'grownups' with grudges got a lot better reception than I would have expected.

Fools.

B.

[TargeT]

I agree with you but I don't think being dead is the greatest way to prove a point.


Sometimes it's a great way, some times its the needed way.



I cant see how these two can believe its lawful to carry weapons into a police station. These guys are a bit crazy.

in quite a few places in the US, it is legal, in Alaska it was.



The question should be; whats the point?

I saw it more of a highlight of the police's behavior. There have been quite a few questionable police shootings in that area recently. (all over the US really)


I heard from my brother-in-law who was a former cop that their first priority is being safe and coming home alive. Of course not to abuse the public is a top priority,

I would assume, being in a type of uniform myself for some 17 years now; that the two statements would be reversed in order. My observation tells me your wording is correct: "look out for #1" is the mentality first, and that is not conducive to "public service" (one of the army's core values is "selfless service", i guess the police are different?).

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CVyht-dUkAAOrXD.jpg

This is a bit of a ridiculous example, but I think it highlights the fact that a lot of police are not what they used to be; and "public servant" is a hard title to apply to quite a few of them anymore.

I want to see more police officials like the Arizona Sheriff (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Arpaio)

They are suppose to investigate crime, protect and serve etc.. they are the lowest level, the "closest to us" of government protective services & over all the activities seem to balance in the negative, rather than the positive.



An article I saw a few days ago reminded me of this legal/illegal weapons
carry and although guns are not wide spread over here though they are
illegally available from Europe and else ware . Knife carry and crime has
resurfaced , it was a problem a decade or so ago but it is rising again
in the cities though its always been around. Most if not all countries have
violent crime of some description


My view on it is very simplistic.

It seems to me that the BEST way (not the safest way) to treat & interact with individuals is as if they are sovereign (http://www.dictionary.com/browse/sovereign); in respect to themselves and their actions.

The world as a whole, for the most part, has been functioning differently from that which causes imbalances of power. Nature abhors imbalance, conflict will ensue.






"We felt a little afraid for our lives."

So, apparently their adrenaline rush from having been frightened transmuted into an anger response awash in testosterone, wherein they decided to put everyones' lives at risk: petulant children with lethal power.

How else to account for such 'in your face' behaviour? These 'grownups' with grudges got a lot better reception than I would have expected.

Fools.

B.

They only put them selves in danger, who else did they put in danger?

When police are out of control, how do you protest... or would you?

Did you put any effort into this thought, or was it just a quick reaction based in emotion?

Do you know where Dearborn (https://www.google.com/search?num=50&site=&source=hp&q=Dearborn+Police+shooting&oq=Dearborn+Police+shooting&gs_l=hp.3..0j0i22i30k1.1569.5900.0.7195.11.8.0.0.0.0.758.1805.0j2j1j0j1j0j1.5.0....0...1c.1.64.hp..6 .4.1316.0..0i131k1j0i3k1.mlKHGGd33zc) is? Do you have any clue what is happening in Detroit right now?

I could emotionally react about how insensitive you seem, I could tell you the story of the 31 year old mentally ill woman they shot and killed last year.

I could tell you to be less shallow.

But I don't think emotional reactions are helpful, I can't think of an instance where they would be helpful actually; when trying to understand something.


Funny how easy it is to react to a simple, short video... did anyone do any research? did anyone know this was in the Detroit area? Did it seem like it was somewhere else because white people were involved?


Are we all culturally indoctrinated?

[Ernie Nemeth]

I've seen suicide by police less threatening than these two. They're lucky to be alive.

But you Americans are crazy for your guns. That's why I would never go to your country anymore.

Bunch of gun-toting yahoos.

The guns were to protect citizens from tyrannical government...so? WHY NOT USE THEM NOW FOR THIER INTENDED PURPOSE?

[TargeT]

The guns were to protect citizens from tyrannical government...so? WHY NOT USE THEM NOW FOR THIER INTENDED PURPOSE?

I'm pretty sure that's exactly what they were doing ;)

In their own strange way.

[Matthew]

Both sides are wrong but some are more wrong than others. The police response is not a surprise so the joker with the AK47 is more wrong I'd say. I will confess I laughed hard at the very start but the shouting and thinking about it afterwards ..not so much. :facepalm:

[DebJoy]

These guys were incredibly stupid and deserved worse.
The police were very professional, insistent, and well within their rights to do what it took to stay alive. They exercised incredible restraint, IMHO.
Who would NOT have perceived a threat from these guys? Really?
The AK47 toting guy and companion are idiots and they did a disservice to their cause about the right to bear arms.
If they had entered my home / office that way, I would have felt threatened and would have done whatever was needed to protect myself.
Idiots!

[TargeT]

These guys were incredibly stupid and deserved worse.
The police were very professional, insistent, and well within their rights to do what it took to stay alive.

To stay alive?? there was absolutely no threat there, they were litterally carrying tools, that are legally allowed to be carried openly.


They exercised incredible restraint, IMHO.
Who would NOT have perceived a threat from these guys? Really?

probably 1 in 8 people in the middle east walk around with AK47's slung just like that... I never lost my **** and acted like that.


The AK47 toting guy and companion are idiots and they did a disservice to their cause about the right to bear arms.

So, the law doesn't matter. your feelings do?

This is exactly the problem, laws are either followed or changed. there's no gray ground... when there is corruption sneaks its way in.



If they had entered my home / office that way, I would have felt threatened and would have done whatever was needed to protect myself.
Idiots!

Why?

Should women dressed provocatively be treated the same?


Its winter, and open carry is allowed, my training dictates I keep that in mind when I exercise ROE. (Rules of engagement) these officers violated ROE.


This was a very good way to illustrate the issue with officers today, if they see anyone with a weapon other than police they react like this. This is why cops shoot children with toy guns.

This is a serious problem, and your attitude can be seen as supportive of it.

A person in a costume with a gun should be a very scrutinized position.

[Ernie Nemeth]

I know about the law for open carry, but I wonder what the law is on face masks and open carry.

To conceal one's identity and enter a police station armed with an automatic weapon, loudly, abruptly, and with calculated movements and obvious premeditated (although unknown) intent - is threatening.

[Bob]

Where I live currently our Sheriff has said plainly OPEN carry, or if one has had the training and registered, do perform Concealed Carry.

I have both and adhere to both for the reason where I live I am accosted by criminal elements, and our Sheriff has said, do not let a criminal element take over one's rights. Interesting viewpoint.

Colorado Sheriff's insist that people have the right to protect themselves from perps, criminals, stalkers and other unsavory elements. The Sheriff's are not like California or New York State.

If one is trained in the use of self defense against any perps, if they threaten, to not defend oneself whence accosted is to be a Shmoo (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shmoo)..

==update==

As far as walking into a secure facility out here, such as a Police station, or Court house, there is usually a sign which says "Check your weapons (here ________)" . And that's that, no big deal, pick up your weapon when leaving the security demarked area.

The issue of "anti-mask laws" - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-mask_laws

or hiding or disguising oneself.. that is another issue specifically in these states:



CALIFORNIA Penal Code Section 182-185
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA (Washington, D.C.) § 22-3312.03
FLORIDA Chapter 876 Criminal Anarchy, Treason and other Crimes Against Public Order
GEORGIA Code Title 16 - Crimes and Offenses,16-11-38
LOUISIANA RS 14:313
MASSACHUSETTS General Laws, Chapter 268 Section 34
MICHIGAN 750.396 Wearing Mask or face covering device
MINNESOTA Statutes, Chapter Criminal Code, Section 609.735
NEW YORK Penal Law 240.35 (4)
NORTH CAROLINA §14-12.7. Wearing of masks, hoods, etc.
OHIO 3761.12 Prohibition against conspiracy while wearing disguise
VIRGINIA Section 18.2-422
WEST VIRGINIA 61-6-22


(refer to http://www.anapsid.org/cnd/mcs/maskcodes.html for the writeups on the laws)

If one entering a public building then concealing oneself from those within using a mask, that could be considered "intimidation" and depending on the laws of the State, other issues arise.


http://chanlo.com/images/masks-1.jpg

BTW, those masked hoodlums in DC and elsewhere during the protests, by covering their faces (California and DC) and being in public did commit violation of the "Mask Laws", and could have on the spot been arrested. Calling such a "protest" would not save them as an escape clause from prosecution. Officers that did not arrest on the spot apparently were in violation of not enforcing the appropriate statute.

DC Mask LAW:
§ 22-3312.03. Wearing hoods or masks.
(a) No person or persons over 16 years of age, while wearing any mask, hood, or device whereby any portion of the face is hidden, concealed, or covered as to conceal the identity of the wearer, shall:

(1) Enter upon, be, or appear upon any lane, walk, alley, street, road highway, or other public way in the District of Columbia;

(2) Enter upon, be, or appear upon or within the public property of the District of Columbia; or

(3) Hold any manner of meeting or demonstration.

(b) The provisions of subsection (a) of this section apply only if the person was wearing the hood, mask, or other device:

(1) With the intent to deprive any person or class of persons of equal protection of the law or of equal privileges and immunities under the law, or for the purpose of preventing or hindering the constituted authorities of the United States or the District of Columbia from giving or securing for all persons within the District of Columbia equal protection of the law;

(2) With the intent, by force or threat of force, to injure, intimidate, or interfere with any person because of his or her exercise of any right secured by federal or District of Columbia laws, or to intimidate any person or any class of persons from exercising any right secured by federal or District of Columbia laws;

(3) With the intent to intimidate, threaten, abuse, or harass any other person;

(4) With the intent to cause another person to fear for his or her personal safety, or, where it is probable that reasonable persons will be put in fear for their personal safety by the defendant's actions, with reckless disregard for that probability; or

(5) While engaged in conduct prohibited by civil or criminal law, with the intent of avoiding identification.

CALIFORNIA Penal Code Section 182-185
185. Section One Hundred and Eighty-five. It shall be unlawful for any person to wear any mask, false whiskers, or any personal disguise (whether complete or partial) for the purpose of: One--Evading or escaping discovery, recognition, or identification in the commission of any public offense. Two--Concealment, flight, or escape, when charged with, arrested for, or convicted of, any public offense. Any person violating any of the provisions of this section shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor.

https://www.thenation.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/RTSWIL62.jpg

==Michigan Law - INTIMIDATION==


750.478a Legal process; intimidation, hindering, or obstruction of public officer or employee.
Sec. 478a.

(1) A person shall not attempt to intimidate, hinder, or obstruct a public officer or public employee or a peace officer in the discharge of his or her official duties by a use of unauthorized process.

(2) Except as provided in subsection (3), a person who violates subsection (1) is guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment for not more than 2 years or a fine of not more than $1,000.00, or both.

Wearing a mask in Michigan - 750.396 Wearing Mask or face covering device.
Sec. 396. A person who intentionally conceals his or her identity by wearing a mask or other device covering his or her face for the purpose of facilitating the commission of a crime is guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment for not more than 93 days or a fine of not more than $500.00, or both.

Therefore - carrying weapon(s) (even with open carry), with wearing a mask, could serve as "intimidation of a public officer" (in Michigan).. entering a police station with such garb and weapons classifies as a crime.

Definition - "Intimidation"
Intimidation (also called cowing) is intentional behavior that "would cause a person of ordinary sensibilities" fear of injury or harm. It is not necessary to prove that the behavior was so violent as to cause terror or that the victim was actually frightened.

Would carrying a weapon into a police station wearing masks be considered a "threatening act" ?

Threat, criminal threatening (or threatening behavior) is the crime of intentionally or knowingly putting another person in fear of bodily injury.

"Threat of harm generally involves a perception of injury...physical or mental damage...act or instance of injury, or a material and detriment or loss to a person."

"A terroristic threat is a crime generally involving a threat to commit violence communicated with the intent to terrorize other."

Could the characters who walked into the Dearborn Police station be cited with more than just a misdemeanor ?? Apparently, they could be charged with "terroristic threatening"..

[TargeT]

I know about the law for open carry, but I wonder what the law is on face masks and open carry.

To conceal one's identity and enter a police station armed with an automatic weapon, loudly, abruptly, and with calculated movements and obvious premeditated (although unknown) intent - is threatening.

Luckily in the US we are still allowed to wear any cloths we want (in fact, the few clothing laws we have mostly concern NOT wearing them), and that was not an automatic weapon, but who cares if it was?

Their attitude is basically: we can have guns and walk around, you can't.. even though the law says you can.

no one sees a problem with this?

no one sees "authority creep"? (similar to scope creep, for you PMP's out there)

[Bob]

I certainly see the "authority creep".. Luckily there are some states where Sheriff's have said NOBODY will remove our defense from us.. Nobody.. TG..




no one sees "authority creep"? (similar to scope creep, for you PMP's out there)

We will defend ourselves and have the support of the authorities from the criminal element.. This is a feeling expressed throughout a large part of Colorado, except for the communist community of Boulder.

[Jules]

I agree with you but I don't think being dead is the greatest way to prove a point.


Sometimes it's a great way, some times its the needed way.



I heard from my brother-in-law who was a former cop that their first priority is being safe and coming home alive. Of course not to abuse the public is a top priority,

I would assume, being in a type of uniform myself for some 17 years now; that the two statements would be reversed in order. My observation tells me your wording is correct: "look out for #1" is the mentality first, and that is not conducive to "public service" (one of the army's core values is "selfless service", i guess the police are different?).


Funny how easy it is to react to a simple, short video... did anyone do any research? did anyone know this was in the Detroit area? Did it seem like it was somewhere else because white people were involved?


Are we all culturally indoctrinated?

I have to say that after watching Mark Passio talk about how the military and cops are used and considered dogs by the so-called elites, and do the evil work toward the people through means of propaganda and mind control that I do have an emotional response to it. The so-called elites order these men to kill innocent people, not knowing the whole story, therefore they get to serve the karma of evil men giving the orders, because these cops and military dogs choose to do the action of evil, not the ones that are behind it through the so-called orders.

The veterans have a high suicide rate from nightmares and learning that everything they know is a lie. I personally would rather the decent people go home alive. I think the system sucks. In addition I do think that anyone profiting from the misfortune of other through brainwashing, propaganda, use of fear, or hiding truth from people causing loss of innocent life or simply destroying life is truly accountable in the end. I just want the military to be more aware as a critical thinking person, not something less. I want a lot of the evil to stop, I am idealistic that way.

I know it is easier said than done. For example: if corporations are using tactics toward consumers to take the local businesses out, then it takes a lot of effort to stop buying from said corporations, and support local people whenever possible. An example is Walmart selling a gallon of milk for $1, and local farmers selling organic milk for $4.50. If I am not poor, then I should buy organic milk. If a company is willingly doing evil to people, like Monsanto, even if I work there with a good salary, I need to get another job that does not support the evil. This is a start, but if I were a poor mother with little money, I might buy the milk for $1 for my children. Judging all people doesn't solve the milk situation, just being aware of what is going on, who is doing this, and why.

[Libico]

Not being as familiar with US law, even if they did have legal authority to do what they did this probably wasn't the best way to go about proving their point. If someone showed up like that in my house or workplace I would think they had a few screws loose and my gut reaction would be to safely and non-violently neutralize the threat and then ask questions later in case the person or persons intended use their weapons, much as the cops did. I have seen numerous videos where the police aren't even aware of the laws they are meant to enforce so trying to present the legality of their actions to a screaming police officer would be meaningless, although a good way to expose this flaw in their knowledge.

If they complied with the police request to disarm (which is sounds like they did) and they were within their legal rights then they shouldn't be charged, although it wouldn't surprise me to see some BS charge brought against them to punish them and circumvent the legal system.

[Eram]

I have to say that after watching Mark Passio talk about how the military and cops are used and considered dogs by the so-called elites, and do the evil work toward the people through means of propaganda and mind control that I do have an emotional response to it. The so-called elites order these men to kill innocent people, not knowing the whole story, therefore they get to serve the karma of evil men giving the orders, because these cops and military dogs choose to do the action of evil, not the ones that are behind it through the so-called orders.


It might be that the elites themselves think that karma works like you and Passio describe, but please keep in mind that in esoteric study groups, the laws of karma are thought of as too complicated and impossible to understand and predict for humans.
Easy to fool ones self.

The basic law of karma is: Every act has an effect and needs to be brought into balance again by the instigator.
"You reap what you sow."
So, I think it is safe to assume that both the cops that shoot people, as well as the elites who direct the cops have a responsibility and build up karma.

[Cidersomerset]

I just saw the article on David ickes headline page , which
shows part of the incident before the demonstration in the
police station.This was definitely stupid even if legal.


Michigan Cops Threaten To Kill Open Carry Activists For
Walking Into Police Station Armed

By David on 8 February 2017 GMT

TNzl26GEW18

Published on 6 Feb 2017

[Krist]

Considering the fact that police in the "us of a" walk in to eating establishments,gas stations,schools,hospitals heavily armed on a daily basis, this is not surprising.
For many outside the us ,the gents in the video seem completely crazy.....As the title of the thread goes "who was wrong"?For those of us growing up in this cult-ure,
watching this video, it should be no surprise at all.Seems both sides here are playing the part to the T

What were they thinking?Whats the difference between us & them ,you & me....In the us,police are 30 percent more likely to kill you than the average citizen according to this site FatalEncounters.org.

Around here If one were to call your gun toting neighbors for some assistance you are much safer than you would be if you called your local gun toting militarized leos who are much more likely to be dangerous to ones safety. If they had walked in with a dog at the same time it would likely have been shot on site....That is not sarcasm.

Pick your battles wisely.Raising awareness of the hypocrisy here? Maybe so.Stupid way to do it? Possibly .....This video is reaching folks from far and wide.
For your average person here ,especially in say my personal social circles.
Many of the professional adults I know have concealed weapon permits for one reason or another.Including women,teachers,heavy equipment operators,nurses, accountants, grandparents on and on.Why? Are they ignorant? Scared for their lives.Why is it that so many people here from all walks of life from the projects to the schools are carrying "heat". Is it not enough here for safety to have the cops ,my mom,grandmother,friend,teacher,banker,son, daughter armed.No ,its not enough and the list of gun totters is rising.

Expect to see more of this here and else where.They just had on the wrong uniform to pull that off.Would it have been less offensive if a priest and a school cross walk assistant walked in with their weapons in the open to have a discussion? I had lunch at my local barbecue joint sitting beside 4 heavily armed leos yesterday.Each one had a night stick ,mace,cuffs,taser,service revolver & multiple high round mags.Why didn't they get harassed for entering a place of public service with such a show of force?

It's part of the overall cult-ure here .What are we all so fearful of to have our mothers and teachers carrying when we have all these great militarized leos & grandfathers toting as well?
Thought provoking video that is bringing many hard to answer questions.

Hopefully my ramblings are not off the topic so much.For someone who has grown up in and around this mentality the gun issue is not as hair raising as it would be to most.
Similarly from this perspective it is hard to relate to the idea of throwing rocks at tanks.

[Desire]

He is dressed like an ISIS terrorist what did he expect. Childish and foolish. The police SHOULD have felt threatened ,he is very lucky.

[TargeT]

It's part of the overall cult-ure here

Great articulation of the point.

the shock and outrage that one person did the same thing as another person is what I'm trying to underline here.. it's like we are deifying authority figures when they are just people, and just as flawed (or more, due to traumatic job situations) as you and I.


Objectively observed ("current times" context removed).. this situation is much different, and I think we should be aware of how our brains can do this.. how we can see the police as right and the two individuals as stupid / wrong when in essence, the police were the clear aggressors in this situation acting from a sense of entitlement (only WE can walk around like that) that is not legally supported (nor should it be civically).



Humans are very good at ignoring minor inconveniences even as they stack up to, and beyond, a level that would have been intolerable before.


I think the stack is getting quite high now.

[Sean]

Who, in this situation, was in the wrong?

Man walks into police station in mask with AK47
cr6zQLvPMpw

Lemme tell you something.

those dudes should be dead, and I would COMPLETELY support the police for whacking them.

Yes, it's legal to open carry there..but, that was needlessly provocative. those cops have no idea what these guys are up to when they walk in like that, armed to the teeth.

real talk. If I were one of those cops, you'd need to use advanced calculus to count the holes I would've put in their bodies..

[Matthew]

... when in essence, the police were the clear aggressors in this situation acting from a sense of entitlement (only WE can walk around like that) that is not legally supported (nor should it be civically).

...

Speaking from my different culture no way is this clear to me. The guys in balaclavas with assault rifles knew and expected the result they got. Top marks for audacity but antics like this more likely to be taken as an excuse against American liberties not for. If this is within law I'd put money on stuff like this being the catalyst that causes that law to 'be corrected' if anything. Not disagreeing with you here on your point about sovereignty, or how important acts of legal protest are.

[TargeT]

real talk. If I were one of those cops, you'd need to use advanced calculus to count the holes I would've put in their bodies..

And you would very rightly go to jail for murder.

This is an astounding attitude to me.

Dressing provocatively = deserve to be shot (advanced calculus to count the holes I would've put in their bodies)?

you seriously stand behind that?


They walked into the police station, they had firearms but to anyone familiar with fire arms they were not holding them provocatively or acting in any type of aggressive way.


I'd put money on stuff like this being the catalyst that causes that law to 'be corrected' if anything.

ok, but the police are the "enforcers" of the law... shouldn't they NOT violate the law? A clear case of police intimidation and misuse of power can be brought against the police by this video.


I don't feel comfortable when police walk into a place I am in, I don't get to yell at them and tell them to put down their firearms.


I also totally understand everyone sentiments here, but objectively I think it's wrong & hypocritical and a good example of why we will always fail when we select certain individuals to be "more equal" than others.

[Matthew]

Emphasis mine


...
ok, but the police are the "enforcers" of the law... shouldn't they NOT violate the law? A clear case of police intimidation and misuse of power can be brought against the police by this video.


We have very different perspectives on this. To me it was a clear case of protest by life threatening trolling brought on by 'bro culture'. Is this an example to the establishment of why we deserve not just sovereignty but enough sovereignty to go into a police station tooled up to complain about their aggression? How does an arguably threatening act sway our sovereignty in the eyes of establishment?




I don't feel comfortable when police walk into a place I am in, I don't get to yell at them and tell them to put down their firearms.
...

When the police walk into a place you are in do they wear balaclavas and tote assault rifles? On the other point and a lighter note I have an image of you yelling at them telling them to put down their weapons ... totally love this image!!! I would wish but wouldn't like you getting into trouble. Lets move on. I'm with you in your point about hypocrisy. I'm not persuaded the video is a good example.

[TargeT]

I'm not persuaded the video is a good example.

I only think it's a good example because it's a terrible example... if that makes any sense.. haha


Integrity is doing the right thing, even when no one is looking (or they are dressed up in a ridiculous way).



So everyone pretty unanimously thinks the police did the right thing, because these guys looked like "bad guys" (even though they took no " bad guy" actions, they were "white" and thus statistically less likely to be a problem).





Why is there an issue with Trumps immigration ban again? (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?95705-Trump-s-Executive-Order-Entry-Suspension--aka-by-MSM-as-the-Muslim-Ban--)



I mean, the two situations are pretty similar right?

[Desire]

I'm happy with Trump's 'BAN" but still think the ISIS dressed guy was just looking for publicity Glad he is alive: :

[DebJoy]

These guys were incredibly stupid and deserved worse.
The police were very professional, insistent, and well within their rights to do what it took to stay alive.

To stay alive?? there was absolutely no threat there, they were litterally carrying tools, that are legally allowed to be carried openly.


They exercised incredible restraint, IMHO.
Who would NOT have perceived a threat from these guys? Really?

probably 1 in 8 people in the middle east walk around with AK47's slung just like that... I never lost my **** and acted like that.


The AK47 toting guy and companion are idiots and they did a disservice to their cause about the right to bear arms.

So, the law doesn't matter. your feelings do?

This is exactly the problem, laws are either followed or changed. there's no gray ground... when there is corruption sneaks its way in.



If they had entered my home / office that way, I would have felt threatened and would have done whatever was needed to protect myself.
Idiots!

Why?

Should women dressed provocatively be treated the same?


Its winter, and open carry is allowed, my training dictates I keep that in mind when I exercise ROE. (Rules of engagement) these officers violated ROE.


This was a very good way to illustrate the issue with officers today, if they see anyone with a weapon other than police they react like this. This is why cops shoot children with toy guns.

This is a serious problem, and your attitude can be seen as supportive of it.

A person in a costume with a gun should be a very scrutinized position.

TargeT - this is USA not Middle East - so I would expect a different reaction.
I agree with what many are saying, including Ernie Nemeth - he was also concealing his identity...
How did the officers violate ROE - they had the person disarm in their workplace. They did NOT shoot him.
My concern is that there may be some real dangerous people who copy cat this guy and actually do harm because the police don't take appropriate action.

When people disrespect laws that are good laws (I like that 2nd Amendment), there is often a backlash among reasonable people and more regulations could get put in place to compensate for that immaturity/stupidity. I believe this guy who concealed his identity, dressed like a typical terrorist might, and carried into a police station an AK47 went over the line, and doesn't respect current laws in place, but is flouting those laws. He might even be a false flag operator :) But a stupid one.

[Ernie Nemeth]

Unless I'm wrong, the second amendment had nothing to do with protecting oneself from home break-ins - everyone had a gun back then.

Guns were entrenched in the constitution to protect the people against tyrannical government and infringements on sovereign rights.

But for guns to be used for their intended purpose the citizenry has to be intelligent and capable of critical thought. Both of those criteria are absent in all the world's people's. Without a firm understanding of a diverse assortment of topics there can be no critical thinking. Without critical thinking intelligence is moot.

My point: the people of the USA have no right to bear arms because they have lost sight of what gun carrying citizens should be concerned with. Open carry permits are a responsibility, that should be understood to include the occasional inconvenience of setting aside their personal and vested interests for a time and making their full-time work the work of righting government. That is what their guns are for. Not for defending themselves against intruders and thieves - most of those would not exist if the citizenry set government straight again. This is not an excuse of criminal behavior that hurts another but it does illustrate the fact that we keep accepting symptoms as the cause. Criminal activity is often merely the necessity of violating laws that are unfair and that is the job of the citizenry - to make sure such laws do not happen.

A criminal who breaks into another's home is disrespecting basic human morality and needs to be dealt with. But a government that violates the very notion of a free and sovereign citizenry also needs to be dealt with and is far more a threat than one person could ever be.

In most nations the citizens are in no position to force change on their governments because there is no threat that can be brought to bear on them. In the US the people could march - with guns in their hands and insist on change and change would have to come, just as laws are enforced today, under threat of violence (whether economic, physical, or emotional).

When I see all the yahoos on the streets and in their homes I wonder about the massive impossibility of ever reaching them on any level other than the very basics of fear, money or sex (or beer). Nothing interests them. They have no understanding of anything, except in the most simplistic of ways, like a child. No topic is too important to be ignored and derided - mostly because they have no clue of their import. And also because if it does not impact their immediate reality, it is of no concern - until it is. This is a reactionary society, that reacts only when it is too late, then sidle back into their holes again, silent and defeated.

Guns in the hands of such is only a recipe for disaster and has the upstanding citizens arming themselves in fear, not of the government but of fellow gun-toting barbaric citizens.