Threaten to kill shopkeeper and burn down his business, get a vacation.

[davidmcbeth]

Went to google that for my personal info....there were many to be found....

This one in Texas made my blood boil though....http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-po...reat-after-making-sarcastic-comments-facebook

A terrorist is one that does something for political gain .. a person who just blows up a bus for kicks is not a terrorist.

So even if he was serious, its still not a terrorist threat. IMO

That's why when a cop comes to your door the 1st question from you should be: am I under arrest? When they say no, slam the door in their face. Then they'll say "if you don't talk to us, we'll arrest you" and I laugh and laugh and laugh

 

[papa bear]

the point is if a person not hired by the government did the same thing they would have been put under the jail. there would have been no furlough, they would have been busted. probably would have lost their job too.

hey EYE


moving on

 

[color of law]

Yawn.

Nothing to get worked up about. It was an irate an frustrated father, going too far, but not criminally so. Were this a civilian, he would likely have been given a stern warning by the police or the legal system. Instead, he is a cop, pretty high up, so official action was taken. IMO, an appropriate level of action was taken.

Oh, and it was a suspension, not a vacation. The title of this thread is deceptive and, IMO, dishonest.

http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/s...riffs-Beat-Father-To-Death-then-Steal-Cameras

Hey, the title got you to read the thread. Who cares if it is accurate?

Talk about dishonest. The Height of Hypocrisy.

 

[Citizen]

http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/s...riffs-Beat-Father-To-Death-then-Steal-Cameras

Talk about dishonest. The Height of Hypocrisy.

You gotta be a little more careful, COL. Its pretty obvious that was sarcasm, not hypocrisy.

 

[color of law]

You gotta be a little more careful, COL. Its pretty obvious that was sarcasm, not hypocrisy.

Dishonest sarcasm????? I can work with that.

 

[MAC702]

...2. Get over yourself. When I read the title, I knew instantly what he was saying. I didn't even have to read the story to know. His use of the word vacation in that context is meant to editorialize that an official received time off for something that would be prosecuted if a mere citizen had done it. Don't blame others for your inability to distinguish factual or accurate titles from editorializing titles...

Yeah, but did you have to quote him? I've been quite happy in not knowing what's he saying for the last several months.

 

[eye95]

the point is if a person not hired by the government did the same thing they would have been put under the jail. there would have been no furlough, they would have been busted. probably would have lost their job too.

hey EYE


moving on

Actually, probably not.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>

 

[OC for ME]

The 27-year police veteran said he twice went to a Peoria smoke shop and threatened to kill the clerk and burn the place down if they didn't stop selling the synthetic marijuana product known as "spice" to his son.

How did he know that "the clerk" was the individual selling to his son? If he knew conclusively then the cop likely conducted a informal investigation to be sure that he threatened, with death, the correct individual. Or, he just barged into the shop and threatened, with death, the first employee he saw. Once is a "crime of passion" twice is verbalizing a intent. Terroristic threat could /should be used as a piling on charge.

Either way, this cop should not have been reinstated let alone retained in that LEA. His behavior is clearly criminal behavior and only his position in that LEA precluded criminal prosecution. At a minimum he should be subject to a permanent termination from any LE employment opportunity.

 

[sudden valley gunner]

How did he know that "the clerk" was the individual selling to his son? If he knew conclusively then the cop likely conducted a informal investigation to be sure that he threatened, with death, the correct individual. Or, he just barged into the shop and threatened, with death, the first employee he saw. Once is a "crime of passion" twice is verbalizing a intent. Terroristic threat could /should be used as a piling on charge.

Either way, this cop should not have been reinstated let alone retained in that LEA. His behavior is clearly criminal behavior and only his position in that LEA precluded criminal prosecution. At a minimum he should be subject to a permanent termination from any LE employment opportunity.

And if done in uniform could be abuse of authority under color of law.

 

[papa bear]

Actually, probably not.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>

sorry EYE that is a little ambiguous. could you elaborate please

 

[Citizen]

Yeah, but did you have to quote him? I've been quite happy in not knowing what's he saying for the last several months.

Sorry. I don't ignore him. He comes up with good stuff. He's one of those with who I do not always agree, but he does contribute insight.His personality and so forth are a different matter; but, that doesn't mean his posts are devoid of good stuff. At least, that's my thinking at this point.

 

[eye95]

sorry EYE that is a little ambiguous. could you elaborate please

Why should I? You moved on.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>

 

[Citizen]

Dishonest sarcasm????? I can work with that.

LOL! OK, that was pretty good.

 

[PistolPackingMomma]

God, I love the smell of roasted gorilla in the morning! :lol:

 

[papa bear]

Why should I? You moved on.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>

come on, do it for all the little people out here.


moving on

 

[eye95]

come on, do it for all the little people out here.


moving on

Nope. You moved on. Again.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>

 

[papa bear]

but , but i am only doing what you taught me.


moving on

 

[eye95]

No. You came up with this particular bit of silliness on your own, the fact that you are choosing to end your posts with two word I have used notwithstanding.

If you wish to continue to trash the OP's thread with this childishness, that is your choice. I will simply keep pointing out what you are doing, so go ahead.

Not moving on.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>

 

[papa bear]

So sorry EYE, did i hurt your widdle feelings

and as EYE said in many post, Moving on

 

[eye95]

I see you choose to continue to trash the OP's thread. As you wish.

Not moving on.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>