Results 1 to 20 of 20

Thread: Video: Looters spreading to neighboring towns, looters using guns to enter stores

  1. #1

    Video: Looters spreading to neighboring towns, looters using guns to enter stores

    Looters spreading to neighboring towns, compelling video of looters using guns to enter stores:

    It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds. -Samuel Adams



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2
    Well...I'd have to consider Rand Paul's position on this kind of thing. What he said was that "If someone comes out of a liquor store with a weapon and fifty dollars in cash, I don’t care if a drone kills him or a policeman kills him…"

    Anyone disagree?

  4. #3
    Quote Originally Posted by Natural Citizen View Post
    Well...I'd have to consider Rand Paul's position on this kind of thing. What he said was that "If someone comes out of a liquor store with a weapon and fifty dollars in cash, I don’t care if a drone kills him or a policeman kills him…"

    Anyone disagree?
    I'm not going to kill someone over 50 bucks...

    But I wouldn't hesitate over trespassing.

  5. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by Natural Citizen View Post
    Well...I'd have to consider Rand Paul's position on this kind of thing. What he said was that "If someone comes out of a liquor store with a weapon and fifty dollars in cash, I don’t care if a drone kills him or a policeman kills him…"

    Anyone disagree?
    You make yourself look uniformed when you keep repeating that quote as if it means something. You do realize Randal clarified what he meant by it yes? Although it was already obvious to those of us not constantly looking at every little statement in order to nitpick and turn into some meme.
    Here you go incase you missed it:
    http://www.paul.senate.gov/?p=press_release&id=779
    "My comments last night left the mistaken impression that my position on drones had changed.

    "Let me be clear: it has not. Armed drones should not be used in normal crime situations. They may only be considered in extraordinary, lethal situations where there is an ongoing, imminent threat. I described that scenario previously during my Senate filibuster.

    "Additionally, surveillance drones should only be used with warrants and specific targets.

    "Fighting terrorism and capturing terrorists must be done while preserving our constitutional protections. This was demonstrated last week in Boston. As we all seek to prevent future tragedies, we must continue to bear this in mind."
    He didn't mean that somebody shouldn't be allowed to surrender, he didn't mean that $50 is reason to kill somebody the amount is irrelevant. His point was the difference between an active threat and a potential threat. Yes a person that just robbed a store and is holding a gun is an active threat, if they proceed and fail to surrender then the police or whomever is in the right to kill them. I imagine he meant something like coming out of the liquor store and getting involved in a firefight. Somebody that might be planning to rob a liquor store in the future should not be killed just for the possibility.

  6. #5
    Thus is the true nature of man.

    "Man must be disciplined, for he is by nature raw and wild."
    Immanuel Kant
    I am more and more convinced that man is a dangerous creature and that power, whether vested in many or a few, is ever grasping, and like the grave, cries, 'Give, give.'

    Abigail Adams

  7. #6
    This is the true purpose of the law summed up. It is meant to protect innocent men from the wild nature of man.
    I am more and more convinced that man is a dangerous creature and that power, whether vested in many or a few, is ever grasping, and like the grave, cries, 'Give, give.'

    Abigail Adams

  8. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by Natural Citizen View Post
    Well...I'd have to consider Rand Paul's position on this kind of thing. What he said was that "If someone comes out of a liquor store with a weapon and fifty dollars in cash, I don’t care if a drone kills him or a policeman kills him…"

    Anyone disagree?
    Breaking: Little league coach shot dead by police officer after cashing check at liquor store. The "perp" was walking back home from a ball game and had a bat in his possession... More at 11.

    -t

  9. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by specsaregood View Post
    You make yourself look uniformed when you keep repeating that quote as if it means something. You do realize Randal clarified what he meant by it yes? Although it was already obvious to those of us not constantly looking at every little statement in order to nitpick and turn into some meme.
    Here you go incase you missed it:
    http://www.paul.senate.gov/?p=press_release&id=779

    He didn't mean that somebody shouldn't be allowed to surrender, he didn't mean that $50 is reason to kill somebody the amount is irrelevant. His point was the difference between an active threat and a potential threat. Yes a person that just robbed a store and is holding a gun is an active threat, if they proceed and fail to surrender then the police or whomever is in the right to kill them. I imagine he meant something like coming out of the liquor store and getting involved in a firefight. Somebody that might be planning to rob a liquor store in the future should not be killed just for the possibility.
    Well...hm. Firstly, specsaregood, I don't do memes. In fact, I've explained my disdain for them and why I feel the way that I do about them many, many times in my history of participation in discussion here. And if I wanted to nitpick I'd choose something along the lines of his foreign policy.

    But anyhow. Would you consider what is happening there in Ferguson (and now in neighboring communities) a "normal crime situation"? I wouldn't. In fact, I'd surmise that it certainly is an extraordinary situation. Do you not agree with this? We have the national guard there now as well as video and ground reports of people breaking into property by way of gun fire as well as citizens being shot by random gun fire. So can it not be assumed to be both an active threat as well as a potential threat?
    Last edited by Natural Citizen; 08-18-2014 at 06:30 PM.



  10. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  11. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by Natural Citizen View Post
    Well...I'd have to consider Rand Paul's position on this kind of thing. What he said was that "If someone comes out of a liquor store with a weapon and fifty dollars in cash, I don’t care if a drone kills him or a policeman kills him…"

    Anyone disagree?
    I'd have to believe that someone coming out of a store with a weapon and $50 in cash is a well prepared business owner on his way to make a bank deposit. So I wouldn't want either a drone or a cop to shoot him.

  12. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by Legend1104 View Post
    This is the true purpose of the law summed up. It is meant to protect innocent men from the wild nature of man.
    Except when you're talking about laws that are more about order and have nothing to do with law. Code is much more about order than law.
    Quote Originally Posted by TheCount View Post
    ...I believe that when the government is capable of doing a thing, it will.
    Quote Originally Posted by Influenza View Post
    which one of yall fuckers wrote the "ron paul" racist news letters
    Quote Originally Posted by Dforkus View Post
    Zippy's posts are a great contribution.




    Disrupt, Deny, Deflate. Read the RPF trolls' playbook here (post #3): http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...eptive-members

  13. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by tangent4ronpaul View Post
    Breaking: Little league coach shot dead by police officer after cashing check at liquor store. The "perp" was walking back home from a ball game and had a bat in his possession... More at 11.

    -t
    He was probably smoking pot and charged the police. This isn't a hill we should stand on......../s

  14. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by phill4paul View Post
    I'd have to believe that someone coming out of a store with a weapon and $50 in cash is a well prepared business owner on his way to make a bank deposit. So I wouldn't want either a drone or a cop to shoot him.

    My thought was more along the lines of the police themselves with regard to their established and accepted model for judgment when met with these kinds of situations. After all, the entire globe is a so called "battle field" now. Right? I hear our elected ones remind us of this all of the time. Although ground reports have actually mentioned the use of drones there, this wasn't the premise for my thought on it. Of course, I couldn't just censor that part out of junior's quote because I'd be "nitpicking" as some in the hurry up and just try to get elected and the changing of the course of history be damned like to say.
    Last edited by Natural Citizen; 08-18-2014 at 06:55 PM.

  15. #13
    Business owners should just publicly flog them if they catch them.

  16. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by Natural Citizen View Post
    Well...I'd have to consider Rand Paul's position on this kind of thing. What he said was that "If someone comes out of a liquor store with a weapon and fifty dollars in cash, I don’t care if a drone kills him or a policeman kills him…"

    Anyone disagree?
    First off, having a Gun is not a crime. It isnt even evidence of a crime, or is it intent to commit a crime. Having $50 bucks in cash is also not a crime. It depends on the circumstances as opposed to percieved threats. A guy Open Carrying can walk in and buy something and might get $50 in change. A guy running out of a liquor store waving a gun around and some cash wadded up in his hand is a better indication of a robbery.

    In either case, unless the person with the gun is an immediate threat, like pointing a gun at someone showing intent and willingness to pull the trigger, minimum necessary force should be used, and death can be avoided in both situations. The Criminal still has a Right to a Fair Trial so that people in the first situation are not convicted of actual actions percieved in the second situation.

    John Adams once said:

    It is more important that innocence be protected than it is that guilt be punished, for guilt and crimes are so frequent in this world that they cannot all be punished.

    But if innocence itself is brought to the bar and condemned, perhaps to die, then the citizen will say, ‘whether I do good or whether I do evil is immaterial, for innocence itself is no protection,’ and if such an idea as that were to take hold in the mind of the citizen that would be the end of security whatsoever.


    What is on trial here (Trial by Media) is the Right to Bear Arms. The 2nd Amendment was not passed so thugs could hold up liquor stores. It was passed so the people could resist an oppressive government. The 4th Amendment was not added to protect all criminals from any form of prosecution, it was added because if you dig deep enough, someone will find some evidence of some act that can be used to condemn the average man to life in prison. Three felonies per day. The 4th also covers seizure of property without due process of Law. And a persons life, even if they have commited a crime, is still their property, thus, it is not to be taken from them without that due process. Accusations of Guilt are now treated as if they are Convictions by a Court, not that the Courts have a shred of decency in them what so ever. Innocent until proven Guilty has been replaced with any who want Rights are now Criminals. Everyone else should gladly give up every Right they have for only Criminals are the ones that need Rights as a means of excusing and justifying their intolerable behaviors.
    1776 > 1984

    The FAILURE of the United States Government to operate and maintain an
    Honest Money System , which frees the ordinary man from the clutches of the money manipulators, is the single largest contributing factor to the World's current Economic Crisis.

    The Elimination of Privacy is the Architecture of Genocide

    Belief, Money, and Violence are the three ways all people are controlled

    Quote Originally Posted by Zippyjuan View Post
    Our central bank is not privately owned.

  17. #15
    And none of these police departments can provide security or catch some of the armed looters.
    I have seen several in the looting photos.

    but they can stop any peaceful protesters.

    I have to wonder who is running these gangs,, and if it is not police themselves. (or folks within the dept/government)
    Liberty is lost through complacency and a subservient mindset. When we accept or even welcome automobile checkpoints, random searches, mandatory identification cards, and paramilitary police in our streets, we have lost a vital part of our American heritage. America was born of protest, revolution, and mistrust of government. Subservient societies neither maintain nor deserve freedom for long.
    Ron Paul 2004

    Registered Ron Paul supporter # 2202
    It's all about Freedom

  18. #16
    if i were a store owner, and that scenario happened, i'd give him some food stamps and a belt, and tell him to pull up his boots and get a job, then i would shoot him in the head and say allah akbar...go Packers, while i snorted another line of coke.



  19. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  20. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by DamianTV View Post
    First off, having a Gun is not a crime. It isnt even evidence of a crime, or is it intent to commit a crime. Having $50 bucks in cash is also not a crime. It depends on the circumstances as opposed to percieved threats. A guy Open Carrying can walk in and buy something and might get $50 in change. A guy running out of a liquor store waving a gun around and some cash wadded up in his hand is a better indication of a robbery.

    In either case, unless the person with the gun is an immediate threat, like pointing a gun at someone showing intent and willingness to pull the trigger, minimum necessary force should be used, and death can be avoided in both situations. The Criminal still has a Right to a Fair Trial so that people in the first situation are not convicted of actual actions percieved in the second situation.

    John Adams once said:

    It is more important that innocence be protected than it is that guilt be punished, for guilt and crimes are so frequent in this world that they cannot all be punished.

    But if innocence itself is brought to the bar and condemned, perhaps to die, then the citizen will say, ‘whether I do good or whether I do evil is immaterial, for innocence itself is no protection,’ and if such an idea as that were to take hold in the mind of the citizen that would be the end of security whatsoever.


    What is on trial here (Trial by Media) is the Right to Bear Arms. The 2nd Amendment was not passed so thugs could hold up liquor stores. It was passed so the people could resist an oppressive government. The 4th Amendment was not added to protect all criminals from any form of prosecution, it was added because if you dig deep enough, someone will find some evidence of some act that can be used to condemn the average man to life in prison. Three felonies per day. The 4th also covers seizure of property without due process of Law. And a persons life, even if they have commited a crime, is still their property, thus, it is not to be taken from them without that due process. Accusations of Guilt are now treated as if they are Convictions by a Court, not that the Courts have a shred of decency in them what so ever. Innocent until proven Guilty has been replaced with any who want Rights are now Criminals. Everyone else should gladly give up every Right they have for only Criminals are the ones that need Rights as a means of excusing and justifying their intolerable behaviors.
    Well, sure. I understand and agree with all of that. But we have the national guard there now. Military occupation. How soon do you think we'll be hearing msm refer to these people (both protestors and looters) as terrorists in order to justify occupation? And then you get what we've got going on over there in Ukraine.
    Last edited by Natural Citizen; 08-18-2014 at 07:12 PM.

  21. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by orenbus View Post
    Looters spreading to neighboring towns, compelling video of looters using guns to enter stores:

    The amount of helplessness displayed by these people is astounding. Who will help them? Who will defend them? Big Brother, Big Mommy and Big Daddy have been compassionately extorting protection money from them for so long they are helpless.
    "Foreign aid is taking money from the poor people of a rich country, and giving it to the rich people of a poor country." - Ron Paul
    "Beware the Military-Industrial-Financial-Pharma-Corporate-Internet-Media-Government Complex." - B4L update of General Dwight D. Eisenhower
    "Debt is the drug, Wall St. Banksters are the dealers, and politicians are the addicts." - B4L
    "Totally free immigration? I've never taken that position. I believe in national sovereignty." - Ron Paul

    Proponent of real science.
    The views and opinions expressed here are solely my own, and do not represent this forum or any other entities or persons.

  22. #19
    Someone told me that handgun ownership is the equivalent of taking a step back on the evolutionary social ladder.

    I wonder what he considers armed looting? What rung does that fall on?

    I also wonder if he's willing to offer his reasoning and logic abilities to the shop owners, who are the targets of these looters.

    Dont get me wrong, everyone's entitled to their opinion, but why does the sh!t have to be going on in their own yard before people realize it can happen to them?

    Gulag Chief:
    "Article 58-1a, twenty five years... What did you get it for?"
    Gulag Prisoner: "For nothing at all."
    Gulag Chief: "You're lying... The sentence for nothing at all is 10 years"



  23. #20
    Quote Originally Posted by TaftFan View Post
    Business owners should just publicly flog them if they catch them.
    Stocks with a basket of rotting veggies in front of them are more effective...

    -t



Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 11-26-2014, 10:41 PM
  2. Looters and Moochers v Workers and Producers
    By Thaddeus Kosciuszko in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-30-2012, 06:48 PM
  3. Keiser Report: Banking Looters
    By PeacePlan in forum Economy & Markets
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-16-2011, 12:22 PM
  4. Egypt, Looters are Government Thugs
    By pcosmar in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 02-01-2011, 07:39 PM
  5. The looters are making me sick
    By Kraig in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 03-30-2009, 06:54 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •