Libertarian ping! Click here to get added or here to be removed or post a message here!
Posted on 08/14/2014 12:00:52 PM PDT by Valpal1
The shooting of 18-year-old Michael Brown is an awful tragedy that continues to send shockwaves through the community of Ferguson, Missouri and across the nation.
If I had been told to get out of the street as a teenager, there would have been a distinct possibility that I might have smarted off. But, I wouldn’t have expected to be shot.
The outrage in Ferguson is understandable—though there is never an excuse for rioting or looting. There is a legitimate role for the police to keep the peace, but there should be a difference between a police response and a military response.
(Excerpt) Read more at time.com ...
BS. He didn't write one word about the feds limiting state power. It's the feds who are giving small town PDs military equipment that they never could or would buy on their own. They are setting up, as one poster here put it, "a turnkey police state".
Hey moron, try reading all of what I said in that post. It had nothing to do with the militarization of police. It had to do with Paul’s pandering on voting rights.
So because he lost you on one issue he can’t be right on this one? Why not comment on the subject at hand instead of taking any opportunity to attack Paul about something else?
I have seen photos of police with face masks as they did not want to be identified. Dress all in black or camo gear. Add in attitude.
$4.2 million dollar mistake. Luck only played a part that these 2 ladies or the guy were not killed. Imagine full auto.
Police opened fire on this blue Toyota Tacoma pickup truck and another pickup in Torrance, California
http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/02/07/16888732-women-shot-by-cops-were-just-delivering-papers?lite
Another view.
http://www.hispanicallyspeakingnews.com/uploads/images/amigo-o-enemigo/tacoma.jpeg
Here is a comparison of Adam-12 vs today. It has been posted here before.
http://foodforthethinkers.files.wordpress.com/2014/01/police-adam-12.jpg
Now that it’s been 5 days with no dirt dug up on the victim and verified that he had no criminal record, I find it increasingly difficult to believe that a young man who successfully avoided trouble his entire life and with plans to start college the following Monday suddenly became an aggressor and attacked the officer when told to get off the street.
Maybe he’s thinking along the same lines I am, that something is fishy in Ferguson.
Agree with this. I’m not sure I’d agree with his implementation.
“Maybe he’s thinking along the same lines I am, that something is fishy in Ferguson.”
That’s fine, I suspect something might be fishy too. However, I am not a U.S. Senator, nor do I get a forum in Time magazine to air my unsubstantiated opinions on the subject. It’s unseemly to me that Paul is doing that, as it’s something you’d expect from a lib more than a conservative politician.
So you’re good with militarized police if they are black?
You seem to be conflating two completely unrelated issues. So is Rand Paul.
I thought he was talking about the overwhelming "military" style response last night, rather than the merits of the shooting. Sorry if I misunderstood you.
IMHO, Rand's weakness is that he tries to be all things to all people. You're right, he does pander. And he's not very good at it. Maybe he thinks he can thread a way into the Presidency in 2016, but I think it's a pipe dream (no pun intended). I think he'd be better off being titular head of the rapidly expanding libertarian wing of the GOP and exerting influence that way.
Thank you.
“I think Senator Paul has a point.”
I don’t.
Then don't complain when one of a dozen or more federal, state, or local SWAT teams who have jurisdiction over you, your family, and your property come calling.
Yes
Is Sen Paul pandering?
Yes
But, more importantly: Are Sen Paul's current positions on police militarization, non-violent offenders, and mandatory minimums consistent with his past positions?
Yes.
One may disagree with Sen Paul on the issues. But I for one have more respect a consistent politician I disagree with, than someone who changes with the political winds.
Great comments. I totally agree. This was what happened to a town here in CA. All the people in the city were crooks and the people of the town finally forced a change. However, they did not do it quite so violently.
“Then don’t complain when one of a dozen or more federal, state, or local SWAT teams who have jurisdiction over you, your family, and your property come calling.”
Do you have reason to be worried about that? I’m not.
You are naive.
Three Felonies A Day: How the Feds Target the Innocent
The average professional in this country wakes up in the morning, goes to work, comes home, eats dinner, and then goes to sleep, unaware that he or she has likely committed several federal crimes that day. Why? The answer lies in the very nature of modern federal criminal laws, which have exploded in number but also become impossibly broad and vague. In Three Felonies a Day, Harvey A. Silverglate reveals how federal criminal laws have become dangerously disconnected from the English common law tradition and how prosecutors can pin arguable federal crimes on any one of us, for even the most seemingly innocuous behavior.
Meanwhile, in Ferguson:
This SWAT team (which is doing beat patrol in this picture) is wearing MultiCam. MultiCam camouflage was developed specifically for the Afghan Theater, not the Missouri Theater.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
