General Discussion

Moostache

(11,204 posts)

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

Sun Jul 10, 2016, 04:51 PM

Jul 2016

Its easy to be flippant and non-serious about issues when its comedic or convenient, but your "rights" are the same as the dead shooter. If it is OK to kill him in contravening the rule of law, then the same is permissible for you or anyone else.

Civil society is contingent on an agreement - people live under the rule of law not because it is the only option, but because it is the BEST option for a peaceful and just society. Saying that because a bad guy got what was coming to him makes it OK is the true fallacious argument being trotted out.

And there was no need to "go get him" either...a man holed up and armed but contained from escape and unable to kill without exposing himself to counter fire is NOT the same as a man actively charging out of that position. He was hiding and trapped and killed by remote.

Pray that they never come for you...

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