Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

El Paso Shooter Identified Online As Trump Supporter Who Didn’t Like ‘Race Mixing’

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • drbrumley
    replied
    In theory, all of this was known by President Donald Trump when he addressed the nation last Monday and attributed the weekend slaughters to mental illness, the freedom to express hateful ideas on the internet and violent video games. He should have consulted his lawyers before he spoke.

    Leave a comment:


  • drbrumley
    replied
    The government? Yes, the government. That’s so because the Second Amendment was not written to protect the right to shoot deer. It was written to protect the right to shoot at tyrants and their agents when they have stolen liberty or property from the people. If you don’t believe me on this, then read the Declaration of Independence. It justifies violence against the British government because of such thefts.

    Governments are the greatest mass killers on the planet. Who can take without alarm any of their threats to emasculate our right to defend our personal liberties?

    Leave a comment:


  • drbrumley
    replied
    Can the government constitutionally outlaw the types of rifles used by the El Paso and Dayton killers? In a word: No. We know that because in the first Supreme Court opinion upholding the individual right to keep and bear arms, the court addressed what kind of arms the Second Amendment protects. The court ruled that the Second Amendment protects individual ownership of weapons one can carry that are of the same degree of sophistication as the bad guys have — or the government has.

    Leave a comment:


  • drbrumley
    replied
    With all of this as background, and the country anguishing over the mass deaths of innocents, the feds and the states face a choice between a knee-jerk but popular restriction of some form of gun ownership and the rational and sound realization that more guns in the hands of those properly trained means less crime and more safety.

    Leave a comment:


  • drbrumley
    replied
    It would be exquisitely unfair, profoundly unconstitutional and historically un-American for the rights of law-abiding folks — “surrender that rifle you own legally and use safely because some other folks have used that same type of weapon criminally” — to be impaired in the name of public safety.

    It would also be irrational. A person willing to kill innocents and be killed by the police while doing so surely would have no qualms about violating a state or federal law that prohibited the general ownership of the weapon he was about to use.

    Leave a comment:


  • drbrumley
    replied
    A Few Words About Guns and Personal Liberty
    By Andrew P. Napolitano
    August 8, 2019

    Last weekend’s mass murders in El Paso, Texas, and Dayton, Ohio, have produced a flood of words about everything from gun control to mental illness to white nationalism. Most of those words have addressed the right to keep and bear arms as if it were a gift from the government. It isn’t.

    The Supreme Court has twice ruled in the past 11 years that the right to keep and bear arms is an individual pre-political liberty. That is the highest category of liberty recognized in the law. It is akin to the freedoms of thought, speech and personality. That means that the court has recognized that the framers did not bestow this right upon us. Rather, they recognized its preexistence as an extension of our natural human right to self-defense and they forbade government — state and federal — from infringing upon it.

    Leave a comment:


  • annabenedetti
    replied
    Trump's DOJ suppressed a report showing that suspected white supremacists were responsible for all race-based domestic terror incidents last year.

    The report by New Jersey’s Office of Homeland Security Preparedness was distributed throughout DHS and to federal agencies like the FBI earlier this year before it was obtained by Yahoo News. The document includes data Congress has sought from the Trump administration but the Justice Department has been “unable or unwilling” to provide.

    The report shows that 25 of 46 suspects in 32 domestic terrorism incidents were identified as white supremacists. The 25 suspected white supremacist suspects were responsible for all “race-based” incidents while others were deemed “anti-government extremists” and “single-issue extremists.”

    “This map reflects 32 domestic terrorist attacks, disrupted plots, threats of violence, and weapons stockpiling by individuals with a radical political or social agenda who lack direction or influence from foreign terrorist organizations in 2018,” the report said.

    Leave a comment:


  • ok doser
    replied
    Originally posted by The Barbarian View Post
    Because the Constitution is the basis for America, no one is forced to stand, remove a hat, or place a hand over one's heart.

    It's a basic freedom. So when Trump forgets to put his hand over his heart when the anthem is played, he's just an oaf, not a criminal in doing so.

    The guy who assaulted a minor for not removing his hat was like so many of the people who committed crimes, thinking they had Trump's support, has a history of violence. He may have some mental illness problems.

    Again, like so many of the people committing acts of violence, including the minority who are not Trump supporters.
    A labored troll is a sad thing to watch

    Leave a comment:


  • The Barbarian
    replied
    Because the Constitution is the basis for America, no one is forced to stand, remove a hat, or place a hand over one's heart.

    It's a basic freedom. So when Trump forgets to put his hand over his heart when the anthem is played, he's just an oaf, not a criminal in doing so.

    The guy who assaulted a minor for not removing his hat was like so many of the people who committed crimes, thinking they had Trump's support, has a history of violence. He may have some mental illness problems.

    Again, like so many of the people committing acts of violence, including the minority who are not Trump supporters.

    Leave a comment:


  • Stripe
    replied
    Originally posted by annabenedetti View Post
    The guy's lawyer is telling us...
    That's all we need to know.

    Leave a comment:


  • The Barbarian
    replied
    Originally posted by annabenedetti View Post
    It's right there in front of you in black and white, the guy's lawyer is telling us what his client told him.

    "An attorney for a man who attacked a minor for wearing a hat during the national anthem so aggressively that he cracked the child’s skull said that his client thought he was acting on President Donald Trump’s orders."
    This is the problem in a nutshell (pun intended) Trump likes stirring up these morons, and every now and then, one takes him seriously enough to act on it.

    Leave a comment:


  • annabenedetti
    replied
    Originally posted by drbrumley View Post
    So the teen told the guy to [redacted} and the guy reacted to that. Everything else is opinion and conjecture.

    Once again, it's Trumps fault....

    It's right there in front of you in black and white, the guy's lawyer is telling us what his client told him.

    "An attorney for a man who attacked a minor for wearing a hat during the national anthem so aggressively that he cracked the child’s skull said that his client thought he was acting on President Donald Trump’s orders."

    Leave a comment:


  • ok doser
    replied
    Originally posted by annabenedetti View Post
    Lawyer: Man Who Attacked Boy During Anthem Thought It Was Trump’s Orders


    An attorney for a man who attacked a minor for wearing a hat during the national anthem so aggressively that he cracked the child’s skull said that his client thought he was acting on President Donald Trump’s orders.

    Attorney Lance Jasper said that his client, Curt Brockway, has significant brain damage and took Trump’s rhetoric as guidance to slam a 13-year-old to the floor at a fairgrounds in Superior, Montana, according to the Missoulian.

    “His commander in chief is telling people that if they kneel, they should be fired, or if they burn a flag, they should be punished,” Jasper said. “He certainly didn’t understand it was a crime.”

    Brockway allegedly told the teen to remove the hat while the anthem played, to which the boy responded: “[redacted]” sparking Brockway’s attack.

    Brockway was allegedly severely injured in a car accident and has impaired judgment as a result.

    “Trump never necessarily says go hurt somebody, but the message is absolutely clear,” Jasper said. “I am certain of the fact that [Brockway] was doing what he believed he was told to do, essentially, by the president.”



    So why isn't this guy locked up?

    Leave a comment:


  • The Barbarian
    replied
    Originally posted by drbrumley View Post
    So the teen told the guy to [redacted} and the guy reacted to that. Everything else is opinion and conjecture.
    He told his lawyer:
    “His commander in chief is telling people that if they kneel, they should be fired, or if they burn a flag, they should be punished,” Jasper said. “He certainly didn’t understand it was a crime.”

    When Trump is telling his followers that if they beat up hecklers, he'll pay their legal fees, that's understandable.

    Once again, it's Trumps fault....
    Words do matter, yes. This guy is only one of many who have taken Trump seriously.

    Leave a comment:


  • drbrumley
    replied
    Originally posted by annabenedetti View Post
    Lawyer: Man Who Attacked Boy During Anthem Thought It Was Trump’s Orders


    An attorney for a man who attacked a minor for wearing a hat during the national anthem so aggressively that he cracked the child’s skull said that his client thought he was acting on President Donald Trump’s orders.

    Attorney Lance Jasper said that his client, Curt Brockway, has significant brain damage and took Trump’s rhetoric as guidance to slam a 13-year-old to the floor at a fairgrounds in Superior, Montana, according to the Missoulian.

    “His commander in chief is telling people that if they kneel, they should be fired, or if they burn a flag, they should be punished,” Jasper said. “He certainly didn’t understand it was a crime.”

    Brockway allegedly told the teen to remove the hat while the anthem played, to which the boy responded: “[redacted]” sparking Brockway’s attack.

    Brockway was allegedly severely injured in a car accident and has impaired judgment as a result.

    “Trump never necessarily says go hurt somebody, but the message is absolutely clear,” Jasper said. “I am certain of the fact that [Brockway] was doing what he believed he was told to do, essentially, by the president.”



    So the teen told the guy to [redacted} and the guy reacted to that. Everything else is opinion and conjecture.

    Once again, it's Trumps fault....

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X