General Discussion

randome

(34,845 posts)

158. Drones or guns, there is no difference. None.

Reply to PoliticalMalcontent (Reply #143)

Sun Jul 10, 2016, 04:41 PM

Jul 2016

The call to stop this madman is made by the officers on the ground. No one else.

Jesus, everyone thinks the word 'drone' means some sort of Robocop. A drone is just a machine, nothing more. So is a gun.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]A ton of bricks, a ton of feathers, it's still gonna hurt.[/center][/font][hr]

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

308 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

MEDIA A Drone Was Used to Blow up a US Citizen Without Trial On Thursday. Let That Sink In [View all] Gman Jul 2016 OP

I support the creative tactic to end the assault. FarPoint Jul 2016 #1

Who decided they failed and why? Gman Jul 2016 #2

Time, and dead officers, the sniper himself... FarPoint Jul 2016 #5

I agree with you, farpoint SCantiGOP Jul 2016 #154

What, does self-defense and defense of others require a trial? No, silly. X_Digger Jul 2016 #46

Wtf greiner3 Jul 2016 #109

Apparently no deadly force until AFTER the crook is read his rights. nt 7962 Jul 2016 #223

Guilty beyond a shadow of a doubt!? So the fact he was shooting at LEO and trying to kill Rex Jul 2016 #133

Can you believe this shit? nt 7962 Jul 2016 #166

No, not really. We've been doing the 'due process by bullet' for a long time. Rex Jul 2016 #180

here Skittles Jul 2016 #242

Ah... when arguments fail, try stupid questions. Act_of_Reparation Jul 2016 #293

You wait the guy out. He's trapped. No food or water Gman Jul 2016 #294

Perfect plan. Act_of_Reparation Jul 2016 #296

That would be the guy who said he'd planted bombs in downtown Dallas? brooklynite Jul 2016 #305

I'm with you 100%. 840high Jul 2016 #101

What was the hurry? Spitfire of ATJ Jul 2016 #141

He claimed to have planted bombs all over the place. Fucking duh. X_Digger Jul 2016 #147

Obviously the cops were uninterested in asking him WHERE they were. Spitfire of ATJ Jul 2016 #248

Oh, so you were there? Tell me what else the cops were thinking. Please, enlighten me. X_Digger Jul 2016 #250

I do. Here. All the time. Works real good at detecting snark. Spitfire of ATJ Jul 2016 #253

So.. you have no actual clue what they were thinking, then? X_Digger Jul 2016 #257

You seem to believe it's okay for the cops to decide punishment. Spitfire of ATJ Jul 2016 #260

I believe that a cop, or you, or me- can defend themselves or others.. X_Digger Jul 2016 #261

That isn't what happened here. Spitfire of ATJ Jul 2016 #263

Do you agree with my statement? Let's get that out of the way first. n/t X_Digger Jul 2016 #264

I agree that there are some people freaking out here.... Spitfire of ATJ Jul 2016 #269

That's not an answer. Try again. X_Digger Jul 2016 #272

How does that apply to sending in a killer robot? Spitfire of ATJ Jul 2016 #275

Answer the question. X_Digger Jul 2016 #277

Not like this. Spitfire of ATJ Jul 2016 #279

Does that mean that the answer to my question is yes.. X_Digger Jul 2016 #280

Are you REALLY going to play the role of Bush senior? Spitfire of ATJ Jul 2016 #282

It's not a difficult question, or morally ambiguous one. Why are you refusing to answer? X_Digger Jul 2016 #283

I don't condone killing. Spitfire of ATJ Jul 2016 #284

That's nice. That's also not an answer to my question. Try again. X_Digger Jul 2016 #287

Wanna set that to a tune? Spitfire of ATJ Jul 2016 #291

Why are you so averse to answering a simple question? Your evasion tells more than you intend. n/t X_Digger Jul 2016 #292

Because it's never "simple" like on TV. Spitfire of ATJ Jul 2016 #297

Can you legally and morally defend yourself or others with force, even deadly force.. X_Digger Jul 2016 #298

And what is to say that the bombs would not go off RoccoR5955 Jul 2016 #255

Did he say that? No? Then you're pulling that out of your backside. X_Digger Jul 2016 #259

This message was self-deleted by its author Th1onein Jul 2016 #246

It was a way to end an already established volatile situation. How many more ways did you want to Seeinghope Jul 2016 #289

This message was self-deleted by its author Th1onein Jul 2016 #290

Meanwhile, he picks off a few more people. No thank you. WillowTree Jul 2016 #295

This message was self-deleted by its author Th1onein Jul 2016 #299

If they were going to be "creative" Stryst Jul 2016 #151

I agree SheriffBob Jul 2016 #232

The drone accomplished exactly the same thing a cop would have. CaliforniaPeggy Jul 2016 #3

He was never even read his rights Gman Jul 2016 #4

Like that would have made any difference. CaliforniaPeggy Jul 2016 #6

And how do you read somebody their rights when they are shooting at you? Travis_0004 Jul 2016 #8

He would have been read his rights SickOfTheOnePct Jul 2016 #10

He had no food. He had no water Gman Jul 2016 #21

The urgency was that he had already killed SickOfTheOnePct Jul 2016 #23

He also said he'd planted bombs all around the area. Fucking duh. n/t X_Digger Jul 2016 #38

Or so they told us. Urchin Jul 2016 #244

One cellphone, many remote-detonated bombs. nt Dreamer Tatum Jul 2016 #50

an entire downtown area of a major city was paralyzed and largely shut down rollin74 Jul 2016 #59

true!, I hope they baited it with water and a pizza Demonaut Jul 2016 #237

if he'd been shot by a sniper or during a gunbattle he wouldn't have been read his rights either Schema Thing Jul 2016 #11

Sniper could conceivably shoot to wound and possibly incapacitate... Moostache Jul 2016 #135

'Shoot to wound' is hollywood bullshit. n/t X_Digger Jul 2016 #136

They could have shot the gun out of his hand! randome Jul 2016 #157

Remember that stance and sarcasm if you are ever innocent and charged with a crime. Moostache Jul 2016 #163

Sorry, if I was killing people there'd be something seriously wrong with me. randome Jul 2016 #167

How many cops did he kill in the first 20 minutes versus the last 4 hours? Moostache Jul 2016 #171

What do you not get about an emergency situation like this? randome Jul 2016 #230

Sorry but that charge stuff is bullshit. Kentonio Jul 2016 #302

A man claiming to have planted explosives around the area where civilians are sheltered in place??? X_Digger Jul 2016 #175

So if a criminal lies in addition to committing his or her crime, they should be executed on sight? Moostache Jul 2016 #186

Oh for fuck's sake. An active shooter, using military tactics, X_Digger Jul 2016 #195

I will only counter that the truly naive thinking here is not my own. Moostache Jul 2016 #210

It's not vengeance to stop an active threat, even to the point of using deadly force. Derp. n/t X_Digger Jul 2016 #211

Odd that you make so many logical fallacies yourself, yet indict others for the same. LanternWaste Jul 2016 #256

They found bomb making materials at his home Matrosov Jul 2016 #198

Again, what if those bombs HAD been real and had been on timers? Moostache Jul 2016 #212

This isn't Dungeons & Dragons. He shot real bullets at real people who are really dead. LuvLoogie Jul 2016 #176

The same kind of real bullets used to kill real people by real life TRIED AND CONVICTED murderers. Moostache Jul 2016 #184

Self-defense and defense of others is legal and law-abiding. X_Digger Jul 2016 #199

Wow, you actually BELIEVE that? Too many movies, man. 7962 Jul 2016 #165

Yeah, and they are all always 100% accurate too, right? Moostache Jul 2016 #216

So your answer is to risk MORE lives to bring in the bad guy? BRILLIANT. 7962 Jul 2016 #221

I don't think you know what rule of law is... TipTok Jul 2016 #267

Exactly. It is just an advancement in tools available for horrendous situations that come about. Seeinghope Jul 2016 #288

Although I don't justify this (coming from the city known for the MOVE bombing) BumRushDaShow Jul 2016 #20

I remember this Gman Jul 2016 #24

The counterpoint might be BumRushDaShow Jul 2016 #63

You forfeit your rights when you're shooting at innocent people. JaneyVee Jul 2016 #27

So without a trial by jury Gman Jul 2016 #33

they attempted giving him his rights, and opportunity for a judge and jury Evergreen Emerald Jul 2016 #42

Pretty much. JaneyVee Jul 2016 #43

You do not need to be licensed Duckhunter935 Jul 2016 #67

It's called self-defense / defense of third parties. X_Digger Jul 2016 #54

Just assume it was a redneck waving a confederate flag who'd just murdered 5 black people Dreamer Tatum Jul 2016 #56

But the problem is, that they have NOT done such BumRushDaShow Jul 2016 #75

graph is plenty self explainatory nt DustyJoe Jul 2016 #85

Are you serious? sulphurdunn Jul 2016 #145

I cant believe these are real DU members. We gotta be getting punked. 7962 Jul 2016 #222

He would not have if a cop Duckhunter935 Jul 2016 #64

Actually suspects aren't required to be read their rights under the Miranda decision ripcord Jul 2016 #69

That's ridiculous. puffy socks Jul 2016 #76

That's EXACTLY the time we need to be pedantic about rules. Kentonio Jul 2016 #304

Of course he wasn't, nor was there any imperative to do so. nt msanthrope Jul 2016 #78

That's called 'form over substance'. COLGATE4 Jul 2016 #89

How do you know that? annavictorious Jul 2016 #106

How do you read someone their rights, when they are trying to kill you? Rex Jul 2016 #134

Neither were the 12 people he shot Renew Deal Jul 2016 #203

Maybe the robot read him his rights before the bomb exploded n/t MichMan Jul 2016 #209

Ah, poor baby SheriffBob Jul 2016 #233

Zero problems with zero judicial process? guillaumeb Jul 2016 #34

How many more people SickOfTheOnePct Jul 2016 #40

He was contained and barricaded. There are many non-lethal approaches, guillaumeb Jul 2016 #51

Do you consider the shooter to be a victim? SickOfTheOnePct Jul 2016 #55

A victimizer can also be a victim. guillaumeb Jul 2016 #120

My thought SickOfTheOnePct Jul 2016 #131

A mind reader? guillaumeb Jul 2016 #137

I did address your response SickOfTheOnePct Jul 2016 #150

Avoid and evade? guillaumeb Jul 2016 #153

Except those non-lethal options you mention wouldn't have made certain the guy mythology Jul 2016 #265

He was offered the judicial process Evergreen Emerald Jul 2016 #44

Boo hoo. Killer gets killed. JaneyVee Jul 2016 #45

Thoughtful and nuanced. guillaumeb Jul 2016 #124

He refused the judicial process. nt msanthrope Jul 2016 #80

FFS, he was an active shooter! Adrahil Jul 2016 #94

Police forces practice for these types of situations. guillaumeb Jul 2016 #126

Maybe some people think this guy should have had a fair chance ripcord Jul 2016 #62

Would he be any less dead shot with a gun. WHEN CRABS ROAR Jul 2016 #170

It was a shootout. The cops had a better weapon. He was given the chance redstateblues Jul 2016 #7

Recommended. guillaumeb Jul 2016 #9

You win the thread malaise Jul 2016 #18

Exactly. guillaumeb Jul 2016 #28

Except only if you ignore that fact that the use of drones is not extrajudicial. nt msanthrope Jul 2016 #82

US use of drones to kill people IS extrajudicial. guillaumeb Jul 2016 #121

Do you think that a court process is required for a cop to defend him/herself or others? n/t X_Digger Jul 2016 #127

This was a barricade situation. guillaumeb Jul 2016 #140

Answer my question. Are court proceedings required before a cop can defend self or others? X_Digger Jul 2016 #146

Of course. guillaumeb Jul 2016 #152

Where the fuck do you get that??? Self-defense requires a court proceeding??? X_Digger Jul 2016 #173

My response of "of course" was an affirmative answer to your question. guillaumeb Jul 2016 #182

Now, having established that no court proceeding is required for self-defense or defense of others.. X_Digger Jul 2016 #192

I responded to your initial question. guillaumeb Jul 2016 #201

Would a reasonable person believe that imminent grave bodily injury or death was about to occur? X_Digger Jul 2016 #202

Refer back to my previous response. guillaumeb Jul 2016 #204

Answer the question. It's not a trick question. X_Digger Jul 2016 #208

Avoid and evade on your part? guillaumeb Jul 2016 #214

I'll keep asking.. X_Digger Jul 2016 #215

Um, no. Sheer ignorance of the law doesn't mean you get to claim use of a drone msanthrope Jul 2016 #132

Extrajudicial means: guillaumeb Jul 2016 #149

Law degrees conferred by Google are generally not recognized outside the confines of the Internet. msanthrope Jul 2016 #164

What is your area of legal specialty? eom guillaumeb Jul 2016 #177

Criminal defense. You have noticed my user name, Yes? nt msanthrope Jul 2016 #189

Que est ce que c'est un misanthrope? guillaumeb Jul 2016 #200

Sigh... you'd not have done well in crim pro. msanthrope Jul 2016 #205

So even suspected murders have rights? guillaumeb Jul 2016 #213

Oh....lordy......the fact that Garner was fleeing msanthrope Jul 2016 #217

It was alleged by the Obama Administration guillaumeb Jul 2016 #220

Yeah.....thing is, you think Awlaki had a due process right to an Article 3 court. He didn't. msanthrope Jul 2016 #226

Yes, this random execution of random persons has to stop. Dreamer Tatum Jul 2016 #60

Given the beating the 5th Amendment has taken around here, it surprises me as well. Eleanors38 Jul 2016 #108

Why should there be a trial? Matrosov Jul 2016 #12

Maybe because the constitution says he gets one Gman Jul 2016 #15

The Constitution doesn't require trials SickOfTheOnePct Jul 2016 #22

So who ordained the police as general executioner Gman Jul 2016 #29

In this case SickOfTheOnePct Jul 2016 #35

The shooter did. When he refused to surrender and threatened to kill more. nt MH1 Jul 2016 #39

The murderer Duckhunter935 Jul 2016 #71

The man who shot 5 policeman and 840high Jul 2016 #103

The shooter did. You seem to forget he was trying to kill them. Rex Jul 2016 #138

He chose not to get one Matrosov Jul 2016 #25

Actually, no. You only get an Article Three court with certain conditions. msanthrope Jul 2016 #83

he claimed to have explosives, he indicated it was "the end". Schema Thing Jul 2016 #13

Of all things to be outraged about eissa Jul 2016 #14

It is beyond frightening malaise Jul 2016 #16

He could have elected judgment by trial; he chose otherwise. Dreamer Tatum Jul 2016 #17

They never should have done that when they could've just called in... Mister Ed Jul 2016 #19

Or at least point out everyone has the right to a trial by jury Gman Jul 2016 #26

Only once they're arrested SickOfTheOnePct Jul 2016 #31

So as long as they don't arrest you Gman Jul 2016 #47

If I've just killed five people SickOfTheOnePct Jul 2016 #52

It was the choice of the murderer Duckhunter935 Jul 2016 #72

I think even the devil would tell you that your advocacy is making him look bad. Dreamer Tatum Jul 2016 #84

What about the people he might kill in the meantime? treestar Jul 2016 #239

He chose to not have a jury. JaneyVee Jul 2016 #32

And if they keep shooting at the people trying to take them to trial? Mister Ed Jul 2016 #68

No, actually....they don't. nt msanthrope Jul 2016 #88

what were the circumstances when they blew him up? Takket Jul 2016 #30

Couldn't they have used a gas to knock him unconscious? Generic Brad Jul 2016 #36

Knockout gases are mostly a hollywood invention. (Especially in an open air place.) X_Digger Jul 2016 #61

Yep, russians tried that in 2002 with terrible results ansible Jul 2016 #142

Every cop, as part of his/her Utility Belt, has knockout gas. Dreamer Tatum Jul 2016 #90

lol AntiBank Jul 2016 #119

I will NEVER understand why they had to kill the shooter.... chillfactor Jul 2016 #37

Yes, let's let the guy shooting at us, who says he has bombs planted everywhere-- X_Digger Jul 2016 #66

There was no time to wait him out Matrosov Jul 2016 #112

Because he was a shooter TeddyR Jul 2016 #225

I share your reservations, Gman. This is the ultimate slippery slope. Even if it pnwmom Jul 2016 #41

I'm playing the devil's advocate here Gman Jul 2016 #53

For once, I agree with you. bvar22 Jul 2016 #99

"Rambo Wannabees?" Actually, using an automated device takes most of the juice outta that metaphor.. Eleanors38 Jul 2016 #118

I will let my post stand as is. bvar22 Jul 2016 #129

The only way to ensure Due Process for all is to make sure the BAD guys have theirs HereSince1628 Jul 2016 #48

Bad is a kid who steals a six pack from a 711. Lance Bass esquire Jul 2016 #86

If I were a conservative, I'd be dead wrong. I am not. HereSince1628 Jul 2016 #93

Not during a fire fight my friend. Lance Bass esquire Jul 2016 #102

Please don't include me among your friends. I want none of that HereSince1628 Jul 2016 #114

He was offered due process; he refused it LongtimeAZDem Jul 2016 #98

Police descending to his level doesn't make a difference to my position at all HereSince1628 Jul 2016 #111

And I can't be live how low you'll sink to demonize police officers in a life-threatening situation LongtimeAZDem Jul 2016 #116

I support the police action to take this killer out rollin74 Jul 2016 #49

How about the next person he would have executed? MH1 Jul 2016 #57

5 people were killed. A decision was made not to risk anymore lives still_one Jul 2016 #58

Drone, robot or sniper fire..you don't read these psychos their rights. Lance Bass esquire Jul 2016 #65

I agree. deathrind Jul 2016 #70

Sure, they could've used gas or stun devices... egduj Jul 2016 #73

How would they have done that, without exposing themselve to fire? LongtimeAZDem Jul 2016 #87

Here's a tip - don't want to be shot in the head by a police sniper, or blown up by a police robot, jmg257 Jul 2016 #74

Zero problems with the way they chose to end the standoff SuperDutyTX Jul 2016 #77

Your last paragraph is the perfect example of a "slippery slope." egduj Jul 2016 #81

Perhaps SuperDutyTX Jul 2016 #92

I would not want a bomb used too early, but I don't think it was here. Hoyt Jul 2016 #79

How many more cops would make it OK in your view? lunatica Jul 2016 #91

He was contained. lastone Jul 2016 #95

This is similar to using sniper when negotiations go nowhere and lives are at stake.--well done! dmosh42 Jul 2016 #96

In other news, a US Citizen executed multiple law enforcement officers without trial. mwooldri Jul 2016 #97

Monumentally stupid comment from one monumentally stupid source... 63splitwindow Jul 2016 #100

Is it only non-whites? Urchin Jul 2016 #104

The Dallas shooter was engaged in actively trying to kill police officers, laughing and singing, LongtimeAZDem Jul 2016 #110

But what about Hiroshima? Urchin Jul 2016 #191

Technically they have SuperDutyTX Jul 2016 #113

you know it was authorized by Chief Brown, right? Skittles Jul 2016 #241

He might have Urchin Jul 2016 #243

do yourself a favor Skittles Jul 2016 #245

We need a shorter word for "sanctimonious bullshit". (nt) LongtimeAZDem Jul 2016 #105

This message was self-deleted by its author Freelancer Jul 2016 #107

Too bad the Dallas Police didn't have you to go in and read the shooter his rights! FSogol Jul 2016 #115

I fully support what the Dallas PD did. eom MohRokTah Jul 2016 #117

why liberalism has problems captainarizona Jul 2016 #121

We counter such convictions with the fact that Lance Bass esquire Jul 2016 #159

Precisely. eom MohRokTah Jul 2016 #160

Who cares. He was an active threat and as someone said downthread, ericson00 Jul 2016 #123

I'm happy with what they did. Ended the situtation without additional loss of life. Waldorf Jul 2016 #125

Pretty sure I remember being assured years ago... malthaussen Jul 2016 #128

We use drones to kill people all over the planet at all times of the day and night. Rex Jul 2016 #130

Poor drone. Nt B2G Jul 2016 #139

need a gofundme to help rebuild and rehab the robot nt DustyJoe Jul 2016 #155

Thought provoking article and discussion thread. PoliticalMalcontent Jul 2016 #143

Drones or guns, there is no difference. None. randome Jul 2016 #158

I'll be honest, I don't know much about the specifics of this case. PoliticalMalcontent Jul 2016 #234

Sure. But there are already rules about using excessive force. randome Jul 2016 #236

An active shooter was killed by the safest means available rjsquirrel Jul 2016 #144

As heinous as gunning down 10 innocent people was... liberalmuse Jul 2016 #148

What due process right was violated here? TeddyR Jul 2016 #218

FIRST DemocratSinceBirth Jul 2016 #156

The concept of the slippery slope seems to have been lost here. Moostache Jul 2016 #161

Good Post SuperDutyTX Jul 2016 #178

So then you would have taken full responsiblity for any actual bombs going off all over the city? Rex Jul 2016 #187

How do you know those "bombs" were no on timers? Moostache Jul 2016 #190

How do we know they were on timers? You mentioned slippery slope. Rex Jul 2016 #193

The way and the fact bother me, as do all other police killings. Moostache Jul 2016 #228

Okay I understand that, thanks for the reply. Rex Jul 2016 #231

+1 PoliticalMalcontent Jul 2016 #235

No concern for the "execution" of the five people he killed or the 7 or 8 he injured? George II Jul 2016 #162

Wait him out, make him thirsty, tired and exhausted...then let him surrender or kill himself. Moostache Jul 2016 #169

He wasn't deprived of the opportunity Matrosov Jul 2016 #174

It was not a "non-tried criminal execution". Period. You should read up on what transpired there. George II Jul 2016 #179

You don't seem to understand self-defense and defense of others... X_Digger Jul 2016 #185

LOL, wow, are you missing the point. So we disagree with the police response means we like.... Logical Jul 2016 #194

It's not a simple "black/white" (not racial) or "yes/no" situation. Seems those outraged.... George II Jul 2016 #206

Just imagine the outrage if they had one at the Bundy standoff. randr Jul 2016 #168

Next Time I suggest Lance Bass esquire Jul 2016 #172

a citizen that was IN COMBAT DonCoquixote Jul 2016 #181

This was a very difficult situation caraher Jul 2016 #183

Wonder if the people... Lancero Jul 2016 #188

Exactly. Rex Jul 2016 #197

For those who thinks this guy was denied due process of law, yes it is true. Thinkingabout Jul 2016 #196

Let's not be reactionary DemocratSinceBirth Jul 2016 #207

They were using guns to try to kill him without a trial as well. What is the difference? RB TexLa Jul 2016 #219

I'll wait for a careful review and report of everything that happened before passing judgment aikoaiko Jul 2016 #224

I have thought about it. "technological imperative" is in play when there is some riversedge Jul 2016 #227

He had his chance to give up. NaturalHigh Jul 2016 #229

he was still an active threat treestar Jul 2016 #238

I for one welcome the evolution of weaponized robots. GOLGO 13 Jul 2016 #240

^^ nashville_brook Jul 2016 #249

be careful what you wish for Skittles Jul 2016 #270

^^ nashville_brook Jul 2016 #273

He was an active shooter. Why is this any different from a police sniper taking him out? Warren DeMontague Jul 2016 #247

Welcome to the Police States of America RoccoR5955 Jul 2016 #251

Question: Do you think a court proceeding is required.. X_Digger Jul 2016 #252

They do not have to RoccoR5955 Jul 2016 #254

Wait, so a person is supposed to what.. ask their attacker to stop.. X_Digger Jul 2016 #258

New scare word: "Drone!" Adrahil Jul 2016 #262

I'd say Poe's law but I am nearly certain this isn't satire... TipTok Jul 2016 #266

No, unfortunately, I belive they are serious (nt) LongtimeAZDem Jul 2016 #276

Totally agree hardluck Jul 2016 #268

Mr. Johnson was committed to ending up dead quaker bill Jul 2016 #271

Good. n/t Lil Missy Jul 2016 #274

US Drones kill thousands, including children and families: Media: no comment Doodley Jul 2016 #278

Now CNN is.. coco77 Jul 2016 #281

A quick Google search will give you detailed plans for an A-bomb Gman Jul 2016 #286

Would they have felt better if the police just charged in and shot him? Blue_Tires Jul 2016 #285

EVERYONE KNOWS that the COPS ALWAYS do the right thing! John Poet Jul 2016 #300

He already killed 5 cops and promised to kill more. RandySF Jul 2016 #301

Let me tighten up that headline... brooklynite Jul 2016 #303

I once used Raid on some ants nolabels Jul 2016 #306

He was absolutely given the opportunity to have a trial...he choose not to. cbdo2007 Jul 2016 #307

Yep, you can only get a trial christx30 Jul 2016 #308