Dallas Shooting and Gun Control

It was inevitable that someone would use the recent Dallas shooting as an excuse to push for more gun control.

From Fox News:

President Obama renewed his push for gun control measures Friday as he condemned the “senseless murders” of five Dallas police officers in a coordinated sniper attack overnight. . . “We also know that when people are armed with powerful weapons, unfortunately it makes attacks like these more deadly and more tragic, and in the days ahead we’re going to have to consider those realities as well,” Obama said.

One doesn’t have to be a gun enthusiast to detect the flaw in President Obama’s argument.

The rifle used in the Dallas shooting is an SKS, the prototype of which was used by the Russian army during World War II. This author has found no evidence that the SKS is any more powerful than an ordinary modern-day hunting rifle. Indeed, the Russians replaced the SKS with the AK-47, leaving the SKS to be used primarily as a ceremonial rifle.

Unlike the Sig Saur MCX and the AR-15, the SKS doesn’t have a pistol grip and doesn’t have a stock that can be adjusted or folded away. The SKS was originally designed to be loaded one cartridge at a time or loaded with the use of a stripper clip, although the weapon can be altered so that a detachable magazine can be used.

Would more stringent background checks have stopped Johnson? Answer: No. Johnson was an honorably-discharged Army reservist, and he had no connection to terrorism. He could have acquired any legal firearm even if so-called “loopholes” had been closed.

Being that Johnson was a sniper firing from a distant location, it didn’t matter what capacity of detachable magazines that he used. The way that Johnson set up his crime made the details about his weapons irrelevant.

If anything, the Dallas shooting has provided ammunition to people who say that further restrictions on guns would not stop mass shootings either by terrorists or by lunatics.

So, perhaps it wouldn’t do any good to prevent further retail sales of the AR-15 or 30-round magazines. Even if one thought the opposite before, one can change one’s mind when additional data is presented, and Johnson has presented it.

To learn more about the features and operation of the SKS, watch the following video.

[This post originally published @ The Moderate Voice.]

Weekend Caption Contest™ Winners July 8, 2016
"When we tribalize conflict, we create a tribalized society. It’s that simple."
  • “armed with powerful weapons”? Does he mean bombs? The Dallas shooter had bomb making material at his home. The CO theater shooter -made bombs. The San Bernadino shooters – made bombs. How about we start with some good old fashioned bomb control laws…that won’t eliminate violent crime either?

  • Scalia

    Mostly good post, David, but more than a few hunting rifles are more powerful than either the MCX or the AR-15. And don’t forget, any semi-auto will fire rounds as fast as you can pull a trigger. We’ve got a racial divide in this country. As usual, liberals are trying to create a problem while ignoring the solution.

    • Commander_Chico

      What is the solution?

      • Crazy Liberal Control.

      • Scalia

        I thought I had answered that. The solution in this context is to address the racial divide, not to ban guns.

        • LiberalNightmare

          The racial divide is a pretty good voter registration tool for the left. I dont think we could get them to give it up

        • Commander_Chico

          “Address the racial divide.” Ok that is clear.

          • Brucehenry

            I’ve seen how conservatives address the racial divide. Talking about “plantations” and “bootstraps” and “color-blindness.”

          • jim_m

            And you talk about dogwhistles and other bullshit.

            As for color blindness, I guess you must therefore find Martin Luther King Jr a repugnant racist. He believed in a color blind world as a goal.

            Nice to know that you want a perpetually racist society that is focused on the color of people’s skin rather than the content of their character. Thanks for playing.

          • Brucehenry

            Nothing wrong with color-blindness as a goal, To pretend it is something which is happening now is a fantasy, and a self-serving fantasy at that.

          • jim_m

            That’s not what you said above

          • Brucehenry

            Yeah it’s called a conversation. Thought bubble: “Oh, I guess I wasn’t completely clear. Guess I need to clarify.”

          • jim_m

            Bruce thinks that MLK Jr is a racist:

            I quite agree that there is a great deal that the Negro can do to lift himself by his own bootstraps. –Martin Luther King Jr.

          • Brucehenry

            Yes the fact that MLK once used the word bootstraps completely invalidates all my points. I stand corrected lol.

          • jim_m

            Yes, you just said that the whole concept of self reliance and personal responsibility was racist. MLK gave an interview on exactly that subject.

            You believe that what MLK Jr stood for, taught and died for is racism. You have a twisted view of the world where you believe that blacks are inferior to whites and have to receive special treatment because they cannot compete by the same standards and live by the same rules and expectations of behavior as the rest of society.

            You claimed that color blind society and self reliance are racist ideas. Your opposition to the idea that they can exist today (which they do to some extent), is effectively an opposition to them ever becoming true.

            You oppose those concepts because you do not believe that blacks can reach the same levels of success as whites. That is the only reason for discarding such ideas and declaring them as symbols of racism.

            The very goals of a society free from racism are what you have just claimed are the hallmarks of a society built on racism.

          • Brucehenry

            No, I did NOT say that “the whole concept of self reliance and personal responsibility was racist.” I said (or actually just implied) that that seems to be the only thing conservatives ever talk about when they “address the racial divide.”

            Nor did I claim that “color blind society and self reliance are racist ideas.” Why oh why does Moderator Scalia allow you to post these lies, which make you a “low life scum” who is “beneath contempt?”

            I actually SAID “Nothing wrong with color blindness as a goal.” I do realize, though, that you have trouble with actual quotes. You can’t find anything Obama said that supports your claims and see words on the page I didn’t write, as well as NOT seeing words on the page that I actually DID write.

          • jim_m

            Well excuse my confusion when you listed “Bootstraps” and “color Blindness” as concepts from the racist right.

            The natural assumption was that you thought that these were racist ideas and beneath contempt.

            That was your intent. Don’t go on lying that it was not. You only change that now that you are caught with the truth of what MLK believed in.

          • Brucehenry

            Conservatives of today want to talk about bootstraps and self reliance and color blindness because they don’t want to talk about police brutality and systemic inequality. They don’t want to talk about a lot of things, but many use this bootstrap business as a way to shame and blame victims of historic oppression and discrimination, consciously or not.

          • jim_m

            Most claims of systemic inequality are bullshit and you know it, except for in certain places that tend to be run by die hard democrats (unions, government) I will allow that rampant discrimination still exists in those cases..

            Maybe it is just the people and family that you grew up with that failed to teach you to treat people as individuals and not as members of a group. I can’t help the failures of your family in that regard.

          • Brucehenry

            More flailing attempts at personal insult. Trying to drag family into a political argument. Desperate and pathetic. I don’t think you wanna go there, Jim. I won’t unless you persist.

          • jim_m

            Just making the point that we view the world through the lens of where we grew up. Yours is one very different than mine.

          • jim_m

            I grew up in conservative suburbs with a large Asian minority population and a much smaller Black and Hispanic community. We were taught to treat people as individuals and measure each person as an individual not as a member of a group. Clearly you were taught otherwise as that is how you see everyone else behaving.

          • Brucehenry

            I agree that one’s experiences and education (or the lack of it) color our worldview. WHEN one was born and come of age has a lot to do with it also, as well as socioeconomic circumstance of one’s upbringing. One is not better than another’s. It takes all kinds, loony liberals like me and nutty wingnuts like you, to make a world.

            Calm down. Quit lying. Take a breath.

          • jim_m

            I also grew up post civil rights act, so I see the world that came after. It is better than the world you grew up in. People are better than you think. Better than you.

          • Brucehenry

            Well despite your gratuitous insult there may be something in what you say. Not necessarily a good thing, though, since you may not appreciate how things like the SC ruling that gutted the VRA bring back memories/fears of Jim Crow in people of my generation and older.

          • jim_m

            Memories and fears are not a measure of reality today and not an excuse to invalidate a law.

            If you want a society run by fear, hate and misunderstanding, then by all means keep protesting the new law.

          • Brucehenry

            Really? This from a guy who supports Trump’s “ban on Muslims”?? This from a guy who views protests against police brutality as hate speech?

          • jim_m

            Who’s lying now. I have never defended any ban on muslims. And I do not view protests against police brutality as hate speech. I have a college friend that runs a website on police malfeasance.

            But if you want to call the chants from BLM to murder cops a “Protest against police brutality” go right ahead. We now know where you stand. You support the murder of police as a protest against what you perceive as police brutality.

            That last part follows directly as I have previously complained about the calls to kill police and not ever said that police are stainless. So if my complaints against the calls for murdering police are wrong to you then clearly you must support those calls.

          • Brucehenry

            You know I remember those chants that happened that one time in New York at that one protest march right after the Eric Garner thing. Shame that happened but do you have any evidence that such chanting is an ongoing thing at subsequent BLM events?

            Certainly there have been no reports of anything like that in Dallas. The demonstration there was not about their own PD but about the situation nationally. The Dallas PD has a pretty good rep and has been innovative in community policing.

            You gotta quit that lying strawman stuff. Ask Moderator Scalia — he’ll tell you comments like that make you a low life scum who is beneath contempt.

          • jim_m

            I posted a link earlier.

            The internet has been alight with BLM people applauding the shooter.

            I explained my conclusion. You made an unsupported allegation.

          • Brucehenry

            The internet is also “alight” with guys like Kaiser Derden (on Wizbang’s other thread, Rick’s) making comments about shooting all the “savages.” Nutty internet commenters prove nothing.

            And I see the answer is “No there has not been that kind of chanting at later BLM events.”

            If you have never voiced support for Trump’s ban on Muslims I apologize and retract that.

          • jim_m

            There was chanting like that in Ferguson. In NYC. And elsewhere where we were fortunate enough that they didn’t kill any police.

            But you cannot deny that in the last couple of years attacks on police have been unprecedented.

          • Brucehenry

            Where exactly was “elsewhere?”

            Ferguson was where BLM was conceived. It is actually fortunate that a structure was formed to give voice to the anger, otherwise anarchy and mayhem might have prevailed.

          • jim_m

            Or the media could have broadcast the truth showing the whole “hands up, don’t shoot” meme to be a lie rather than falsely promoting it to support their bankrupt narrative of racial hatred. that could have ended this at the beginning. But the left got what it wanted: Dead police and more racial animus.

          • Brucehenry

            Refresh and see my edited last comment

          • jim_m

            26 police have been killed already this year up 44% from last year.

          • Brucehenry

            Yes but up to this latest attack the number was 21 as opposed to 18.

            How does the fact that, in the next-to-last year of the Bush administration, nearly twice as many cops were shot and killed than in the next-to-last year of the Obama administration, fit in with your “This is because Obama is teaching hate” hypothesis?

          • jim_m

            How many police were the victims of targeted assassinations in 2007?
            How many during 0bama’s presidency vs Bush’s?

            i would wager that the increase is several thousand percent at minimum.

          • Brucehenry

            And you would assert that based on unsupported assumption but feel free to use your google fu to substantiate it.

          • jim_m

            Can you even name one incident from the Bush years where municipal P were targeted for assassination as they were in NYC and Dallas?

            I suspect you already would have if you could.

          • Brucehenry

            You were complaining of “attacks on police” but when shown that your claim that the number was unprecedented was false moved the goalposts so that only “targeted assassinations” count. OK.

            EDIT: I deleted my own comment to add this edit to this one. Turns out you’re wrong again:

            http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/9/15/1421420/-Fewer-police-killed-during-the-Obama-administration-than-any-two-term-President-in-our-lifetime

          • jim_m

            Gun crime has decline for over 2 decades, it stands to reason that police deaths have declined too.

            So you are dismissing the deliberate targeting of police for death in reaction to the BLM movement as insignificant. We are back to my statement that this is something you support. Your constant excuses for murdering police is sick.

          • Brucehenry

            Never used or implied the term “insignificant.” There you go again with your low life scum beneath contempt strawman comments that are likely to upset Moderator Scalia when he notices them, as I’m sure he will.

            You say the number of police murdered by gunfire has increased under Obama, because he “teaches hate.” But the number HASN’T increased, it has DECREASED, since the Reagan, Bush41, Clinton, and Bush 43 administrations. When shown that you have made an incorrect claim, instead of saying “I stand corrected” like an honest man would, first you move the goalposts and then attempt to deflect with a strawman lie, which makes you a low life scum beneath contempt, according to the Moderators here.

            Plus you can’t supply ANY quotes of Obama “teaching hate” even though you insist his “words and deeds” do just that.

          • jim_m

            Fine. The total number of police killed in the line of duty has declined. The total number of police targeted for assassination because they wear the uniform has skyrocketed because YOU and 0bama support a movement calling for their murder.

          • Brucehenry

            Well now who’s making unsupported assertions? “Skyrocketed?” LInk?

            EDIT: Also, the fact that some sick grisly chanting occurred at one march in NYC and not since is not evidence that BLM is “calling for their murder.”

          • jim_m

            You have yet to demonstrate that ANY police were being targeted like they have been the past year. Thus the increase is infinite as it is above zero.

            As an aside the last notable assault on police was conducted by 0bama’s best buddy, self admitted terrorist Bill Ayers. His group murdered police officers too. It seems to be something of a past time for 0bama and his friends, egging on people to kill cops.

          • Brucehenry

            “Obama’s best buddy.” More Talk Radio boilerplate. Thanks for admitting that that’s. all. you. got.

          • jim_m

            He shared an office with the man and launched his political career from the man;s living room. Ayers ghost wrote 0bama’s first book.

            And now you claim that any relationship between them is “Talk Radio boilerplate”. You are pathetic in your attempts to hide from the fact that you like seeing cops murdered for your agenda.

          • Brucehenry

            Some folks believe every word Jerome Corsi writes on WND but I myself am skeptical. Call me a cynic.

          • jim_m

            I’ll call you an idiot. Ayers has admitted all these things publicly.

            You are blinkered by ideology. The deaths of these police is another example of how you will deny the actions of your side right until they fill the mass graves. Already they are filling graves and you’re denying it. Exactly as I predicted.

          • Brucehenry

            Ayers has done no such thing. Especially not “ghost wrote” Obama’s book. Nor has he claimed to have “launched Obama’s career,” They did share office space at a foundation but I’m not aware of Ayers addressing that fact.

            It’s funny that you have internalized every Zombie Lie and every Zombie Insinuation of the last 8 years about Obama and regurgitate them as if they are Gospel facts, from Michelle not being “proud of her country” to Ayers being Obama’s ghostwriter to Frank whoever being Obama’s commie mentor to conciliatory and bland speeches characterized as “teaching hate.” And that you are surprised that I find you buffoonish.

          • Brucehenry

            It’s getting late, and Wizbang is slowing up my computer again, so I’m retiring. Get some sleep, wingnut.

          • Brucehenry
          • Well despite your gratuitous insult well earned and apt description…

            FIFY.

          • That:

            People are better than you think. Better than you.

            is a low bar when the referent is brucehemorrhoid.

          • Hgg61688

            Whys is this guy allowed to say this stuff? The majority of his posts contain personal insults and invective. I commented here for the first time Friday and that’s pretty much all I got from you. You sound like one angry dude who need some help.

          • jim_m

            Bruce and I have a many year history of trading insults. He gives as good as he gets. Have something intelligent to say and I won’t mock you.

          • Commander_Chico

            Just think of Bruce and Jim as Tom and Jerry. Jim does try to make points based on fact in between the insults.

            Rodney on.the other hand is pure 6th grade invective. Unfortunately he never got a fist in his face in 6th grade, must have grown up in a faggy suburb.

          • That invective is mostly reserved for chica puta and the hemorrhoid that depends from chica puta.

            You are most welcome to come try me at your convenience, puta.

          • So you have a problem with the First Amendment as well as the second?

          • Scalia

            First, since you are asking the question, the question mark goes outside the quotation mark. Second, your wars with Jim antedate by far my tenure here as a moderator. I let you guys go at it, and unless libel is involved, I’ll leave it alone. Third, I react to my interlocutors, so if Jim maligns my arguments, I’ll treat him accordingly. He hasn’t, so I don’t.

            You’ve lied about what I’ve written, so I’ve called you out on it. You think Jim has lied about what you’ve written, and you’ve called him on it. No difference excepting my ability to delete posts and ban users (done against you but few times with the former and never with the latter).

            I suspect you keep bringing me up because you question my commitment to honesty when I ignore Jim’s “transgressions.” Again, if he treats me like you have, and I leave him alone, you’ll have an argument. He hasn’t, so you don’t.

            Again, leave me out of your squabbles with Jim—or anybody else for that matter.

          • Brucehenry

            OK I will but before I saw this I snarked about it one last time. I’ll quit now.

          • jim_m

            Sorry if I believe that we cannot have a discussion on race with someone who calls the teachings of MLK Jr. racist.

          • Brucehenry

            Yes because the “content of their character” quote is the only thing King ever said, ever.

            Ignoramus Jim strikes again, and thinks he has a Gotcha!!!

          • Scalia

            Sigh. If the racial divide is ameliorated, there is less incentive to kill. Does that really need to be explained? How one achieves that can be debated, but banning guns won’t do anything to solve the real problem. Why in the world does that need to be explained?

          • Commander_Chico

            Ok but I am sure that Obama thought he was trying to do that when he talked about police actions and the shooting of Trayvon.

  • Commander_Chico

    Another police shooting like this, and “conservatives” will be baying for strict gun control laws.

    Gov. Ronald Reagan supported them in the 1967 Mulford Act, and that was after this peaceful open carry demonstration.

    http://0.polizeros.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/black-panthers_1968.jpg

    • Nope.

      • Commander_Chico

        “Conservatives” will always back the cops over individual rights when the going gets rough. PATRIOT Act.

        • Having seen what the dhimmocrats have done with it, nevermore.

  • pennywit

    Honestly … the only way to stop another Micah X. Johnson from getting this kind of rifle would be to outlaw this kind of rifle. And I don’t know we can outlaw this kind of rifle without overreaching on this kind of weapon.

    And quite frankly, Johnson getting this rifle doesn’t disturb me. I’m far more disturbed that police apparently shot and killed a man who was legally carrying a concealed weapon when that man had not made any attempt to threaten the officer.

    • Retired military

      “the only way to stop another Micah X. Johnson from getting this kind of rifle would be to outlaw this kind of rifle”
      I and others have said many times. If someone is going to commit mass murder than breaking the law about obtaining a rifle isnt going to stop them.
      Please read this article about weapons found in Germany (And these weapons are ILLEGAL to own there)
      http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/684623/Islamist-extremists-hide-huge-stockpile-of-weapons-near-German-mosque

      David could have named this thread
      THUGS GONNA BE THUGS
      A little thing like the law aint going to stop them. Look at Hillary.

      • Retired military

        And the media have their own narrative

  • jim_m

    David lurches uncontrollably into the truth here and realizes that it isn’t access to guns that is the problem, but it is the mindset of the shooter. The tragedy in Dallas could have been avoided had left wing politicians not pandered to the lies of the BLM movement. Had they not stoked the fires of racial animosity, Micah Johnson may not have felt compelled to go out and murder police.

    People do not commit murder because guns are available. They commit murder because hatred is in their hearts. In this case that hatred was bred by left wing ideologues seeking political advantage by separating people along racial lines.

    If you want to reduce gun crime stop teaching people to hate. Unfortunately, the left exists on teaching people hatred and resentment. Identity politics is exclusively about hatred and resentment. We will not resolve this issue because the left is dependent upon it, which is why the left focuses on gun control, because they have no solutions for the problem they created, a problem they require in order to maintain power.

    • Hgg61688

      According to you the BLM doesn’t have the right to exercise the First Amendment.
      Second Amendment OK, the First not so much.

      • jim_m

        Typical lefty. You think that the first amendment means that you get to spout off your bullshit and no one ever gets to point out that you are wrong. For you disagreement means your rights are infringed upon. F off.

    • Brucehenry

      The strangest thing happened today. Posted on two of the more moderately nutty wingnut websites were two articles, each thoughtful and insightful, that were free of the laughably kooky nonsense you have posted here about how “left wing ideologues” are allegedly to blame for this violence.

      Here they are, you should read them and then feel ashamed of yourself for rushing to spout the same old boilerplate you always spout.

      http://www.redstate.com/leon_h_wolf/2016/07/08/uncomfortable-reason-came-dallas-yesterday/

      http://dailycaller.com/2016/07/08/a-confession/

      • Vagabond661

        “moderately nutty wingnut websites”

        So you either are talking about liberal websites or are trying to insult us then tell us we should feel ashamed.

        • Brucehenry

          Something for your hurt fee-fees

          http://www.buttpaste.com/products

          • Vagabond661

            Wow you knew right where to find some.

          • Brucehenry

            I’ve raised children, this stuff really works. Plus…COUPONS!

      • jim_m

        It had been so long since you had posted I was kind of hoping you were dead. Oh well, maybe next time.

        Instead you post a bland article that really says nothing.

        And you post the link twice because your dimwitted self can’t tell that you read the same article twice. Perhaps your memory is so short now that you really thought they were two different articles.

        • Brucehenry

          Yeah I clicked “paste” when I was supposed to click “copy” and accidentally posted the same link twice. Caught and corrected within a minute or two, though.

          I haven’t been posting because sometimes I need a break from the same tired bs. But sometimes I’m NOT tired of pointing out how tired it is, lol.

        • I’m quite sure no one would notice were he in a zombie state…

      • jim_m

        Question Bruce: What do you have against my statement that we should stop teaching people to hate each other?

        I suppose that goes against the core of your being.

        • Brucehenry

          I can agree with the statement “We ought not teach people to hate each other.” What’s laughable is what YOU consider “teaching people to hate each other.”

          Posting videos of police outrages against citizens is not “teaching hate,” nor is being outraged by such videos “teaching hate.” Marching in the street to protest police shootings is one of the most PRO-American things we can do. Unless one considers ALL police shootings justified, as many (you?) seem to do. You always seem to find an excuse for them.

          Any second now you’ll unload on me about Alton being a “thug” who probably deserved what he got — being shot in the chest while being pinned to the ground by two cops. And you’ll have nothing to say about the guy in Minnesota, shot dead for no reason at all. (By the way he wasn’t pulled over because of a tail light, that was a pretext, but because he “had a wide nose” according to the cop who pulled him over and then murdered him.)

          • jim_m

            The President telling the nation that the police “acted stupidly” when they did their job professionally and without violence or malice is teaching the nation to hate the police.

            The President’s support of the BLM movement teaches hate.

            The President’s support of people like Al Sharpton teaches hate.

          • Brucehenry

            Aside from the “acted stupidly” comment, which was quite arguably true, what specific comments, what actual words, were used to “teach hate?”

          • jim_m

            Are you f*cking serious? The police are called by a neighbor and told that a man is breaking into the house. They arrive on the scene and fin the man there and ask him for identification. He refuses because he is a self righteous bigot. They arrest him for his obstruction.

            They were stupid? Only jackasses like you would think so. What kind of dumbass refuses to identify himself to the police when they ask?

          • Brucehenry

            Saturday, July 9, 2016 at 11:11
            “@Jack: What exactly did Obama say that was so offensive and divisive? He said the Cambridge cops acted stupidly for arresting Gates in his own home after he had shown I’D and proved he lived there. That’s hardly a cop hating statement and one I would guess you agree with, given that you do seem to be a civil libertarian.

            He said Trayvon Martin looked like he could have been his son. As far as I recall, he didn’t say anything about the police officers in the situation.

            I don’t recall him saying anything about the Michael Brown case, other than general calls for peace, since he had been burned so badly by the conservative overreaction to his fairly innocuous statements about Gates and Martin. Is there a specific quote you can point to that Obama said about the Brown situation that you feel was divisive?”

            The above is a comment from OTB, in response to a resident RWNJ commenter’s characterization of Obama as “divider-in-chief.” This person seems pretty thoughtful to me, and as I said, ASIDE from the Gates kerfuffle, what else has Obama said that can be characterized by a fair-minded person as “teaching hate?”

          • jim_m

            Let’s quote him then:

            From Dreams of My Father:

            ‘I ceased to advertise my mother’s race at the age of 12 or 13, when I began to suspect that by doing so I was ingratiating myself to whites.’

            ‘I found a solace in nursing a pervasive sense of grievance and animosity against my mother’s race.’

            ‘There was something about him that made me wary, a little too sure of himself, maybe. And white.’

            ‘It remained necessary to prove which side you were on, to show your loyalty to the black masses, to strike out and name names.’

            ‘I never emulate white men and brown men whose fates didn’t speak to my own. It was into my father’s image, the black man, son of Africa , that I’d packed all the attributes I sought in myself , the attributes of Martin and Malcolm, DuBois and Mandela.’

            When it came to Ferguson 0bama mae a big point of how racially unfair the policing of the nation was and how racially unfair the justice system was. (really unfair with his bigoted OJ letting blacks off the hook every opportunity they could)

            Freddie Grey “was not an isolated incident” REALLY?? WTF? He just told the country that police murdering blacks is an every day occurrence. Yet I have already posted the study that shows they are less likely to shoot a black suspect because of racism charges from bigots like obama.

            And yeah, claiing that the drug abusing gang banger Trayvon Martin was his son was another over the top, it doesn’t matter how much of a criminal the black person is he will take their side, moment. Just like the New Black Panthers.

            Racial tensions have gone up in this country since he was elected and he won based on a WHITE vote that was wanting to show how non-racist they were by voting for him.

            Everything that people stood for before he was even in the Senate was all of a sudden a racist viewpoint because they disagree with the bigot in chief. You know this. You have called me a racist for positions I held back in 2002. But you sit here and say that obama is pure and hasn’t made racial tension increase.

            You’re full of shit.

          • Brucehenry

            * You’re* LOL

            So you have a few sentences taken out of context from a book written before he was elected to the Senate much less the presidency, which don’t even in a generous interpretation establish anything about “teaching hate,” and then you follow that up with Talk Radio boilerplate, NOT actual quotes which is what I asked for.

            The excerpted sentences from “Dreams” are if I’m not mistaken talking about things he used to feel as a teen and a young man. And his examples of role models Malcolm, Martin Luther King, DuBois and Mandela are hardly names associated with “hate” (which you’ll disagree as per Malcolm because you know nothing about him).

            Meanwhile here’s some actual quotes from him, since becoming president, about BLM. Tell me about the hate you find taught in this interview:

            http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/obama-defends-black-lives-matter-movement/

          • jim_m

            It’s not just him Bruce an you know it. He makes waffling statements while his supporters make the most divisive statements.

            He is a bigot. Have you forgotten how he sat in front of Rev Wright for 20 years listening to non stop bigotry for over an hour every Sunday?

            Or how Michelle stated quite clearly how she had never been proud of America?

            Yeah. He is married to a racist with a history of making racial complaints to employers and anti-American statements.

            He is friends with a pastor who preached racist hate from the pulpit for decades while 0bama applauded.

            But he isn’t racist.

          • Brucehenry
          • jim_m

            So you believe that 0bama listened to 20 years of racist hate and it never penetrated his consciousness.

            So you are really saying that 0bama is morally stunted because he could not recognize the racism or if he did he simply didn’t care. Got it.

            Or I rather suspect you are one of these fools that says that only white people can be racist.

          • Brucehenry

            Still no quotes of Obama “teaching hate.” Just more Talk Radio nonsense almost a decade old.

          • jim_m

            OK. SO you are now denying that Rev Wright EVER said anything racist. Do I have that correct?

            And yes, 0bama has fueled the anti police sentiment in this country. To say otherwise is to deny reality.

          • Brucehenry

            I didn’t say that, as you know, so no, you don’t have it correct, but that’s beside the point.

            The point being your claim that Obama says things that “teach hate” but can’t supply a single quote of him doing so.

          • jim_m

            0bama teaches hate and promotes racism

            Obama and confidante Valerie Jarrett earlier met with the radicals leading the Black Lives Matter movement and encouraged them to keep going, the group has said.

          • jim_m

            Truth is Bruce that you will deny the fact that 0bama has lead the country and during his leadership the attitude toward police has declined and blacks are taking to the streets and murdering police officers. Those blacks are spurred on by a movement that 0bama supports.

            But you will deny the truth of these facts. You don’t care. Police being murdered in the streets advances your agenda. You want them dead. You probably applauded Thursday night.

          • Brucehenry

            Obama has led the country during a time when cell phone cameras have become ubiquitous, almost universal, and therefore outrageous police abuses have been documented and have gone viral. He had to say something about them. The fact that he has said some things that suggest an empathy with a disaffected poor black community is what has your gut twisted.

            I’ll take this opportunity to call to the attention of Moderator Scalia your second paragraph, which is a huge lie, a strawman, for the likes of which other commenters are called “low-life scum” and “beneath contempt” and yada yada.

          • jim_m

            An police body cameras are showing that at least half of the allegations are bullshit.

          • Brucehenry

            Certainly some accused are not guilty, good thing we live in America, good thing these cops are wearing the cameras. I know there are concerns about storage and privacy and access with these cameras but all in all they seem an excellent idea.

          • Brucehenry

            Even in this OPINION PIECE, which is not ummm, you know, proof of anything, the quotes from Obama do NOT “teach hate.”

            “…everybody understands that all lives matter. Everybody wants strong, effective law enforcement. Everybody wants their kids to be safe when they are walking across the street. Nobody wants to see police officers who are doing their jobs fairly hurt. Everybody understands it’s a dangerous job.”

            The only quote from Obama in the piece does not show what you claim. The piece itself, in a Murdoch rag, is a hit piece. Do you mistake it for a news article?

          • jim_m

            But the question remains; why can’t we discuss Obama’s close relationship with a man who believes that all whites are evil and promotes a separatist philosophy for African Americans? Doesn’t the fact that he spent 20 years listening to this toxic waste say something vitally important about his judgment? And can you imagine if Mitt Romney had attended a church for 20 years that spewed race hatred and then hired the preacher for his presidential campaign?

            Bruce’s answer is that it says nothing about 0bama and there is nothing to discuss. Bruce will claim that holding a white man to a higher standard is perfectly fine because black people are incapable of attaining the same standards of ethics and behavior.

          • Brucehenry

            Still no Obama quotes “teaching hate.” Jim won’t admit he has nothing.

          • jim_m

            Do you honestly think that his behavior and his acceptance of racism do not teach people something?

            Are you so ignorant that you think only words teach things? You claim to be a parent. Have you never heard the phrase “More is caught than taught”?

            I suppose not. You must have been a crappy father.

          • Brucehenry

            Well maybe but my kids are doing great and lived with me until they reached adulthood. You?

          • jim_m

            But they never learned anything form you because you left all the teaching to someone else so you can’t claim any responsibility. If you din’t tell them verbally, according to you, they weren’t taught and didn’t learn anything form you.

          • Brucehenry

            Your flailing personal snark is noted. Another sign you got nothin’.

          • jim_m

            No. I have made my point. Everyone else except for the complete 0bama sycophant understands that he has through his words and deeds expressed contempt for the police in this country. He has met with those who promote the assassination of the police and told them to keep up the work.

            But you don’t see that as material. You don’t see anything ever being material. 0bama is your lord and savior. He is without sin.

            You clearly fully support the BLM movement and its effects. I affirm what I said previously and fully believe that you were pleased with the recent events. How many of these events that 0bama told his followers to keep on doing were you at?

          • Brucehenry

            Everyone except wingnuts recognize that wingnuts try to boogeyman one group after another. If it ain’t ACORN it’s Planned Parenthood. If it ain’t PP it’s BLM. Next it’ll be the League of Women Voters I guess.

            So you go ahead, you crazy guy you, and pretend I’m a big supporter of cop-killing. You look ridiculous but that’s nothing new.

            Oh and “through his words and deeds expressed contempt…” — except gee you can’t think of any actual WORDS.

        • Commander_Chico

          You were just wishing Bruce were dead, now you’re the Dalai Lama.

          • Brucehenry

            LOL

          • jim_m

            I’m multifaceted. At least I am not as predictable as either you or your boot licker.

          • Commander_Chico

            Multifaceted = two faced.

          • jim_m

            No. I really don’t give a damn about Bruce.

      • Commander_Chico

        The “just-us” system in the USA is fucked up, the cops are brutal assholes in a lot of places, and it’s worse if you’re a shade darker.

        • Jwb10001

          Stated with out a single shred of credible evidence. Individuals may indeed be unsuited for police work but you just indicted the system, I hardly think you could actually back that up. But as with most things you say it probably comes from some paranoid conspiracy web site filled with stupid ideas, like your favorite involving a VP of the US.

          • Commander_Chico

            It’s well known the USA has the.most prisoners per capita by far. Many for non violent offenses. They terrorized Aaron Swartz to suicide. Even old ladies like Leona Helmsley and Martha Stewart go to.jail.for technical offenses when they just could pay a fine do probation.

            Racial disparities have also been the subject of numerous studies.

        • Ha, ha!

      • jim_m
        • Brucehenry

          Yes you poor persecuted upper middle class white people, helpless victims of the teaching of hate that you can’t supply quotes for.

          • jim_m

            It supplies actual actions dumbass. Read it.

          • Brucehenry

            I read it and all of the actions decried by the writer are presented in the most slanted terms possible.

          • jim_m

            Then post something that disputes that.

            THe fact is that 0bama has made all crime and all justice about race first. According to 0bama blacks should only be committing 12% of all crimes. The truth is that they do not, but he wants to racialize the justice system an has largely been successful in doing so.

          • Brucehenry

            Yet this is the state of the justice system today, while you claim Obama is rigging it to make it all about race:

            http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/crime/2015/08/racial_disparities_in_the_criminal_justice_system_eight_charts_illustrating.html

          • jim_m

            Sigh. What a load of crap.

            1. Black Americans are more likely to have their cars searched.
            Yes, Because Black Americans live disproportionately in high crime areas. (not high crime because police are out there arresting people, but because people are reporting high rates of crime). So it stands to reason that more police activity will take place in these neighborhoods. It also stands to reason that since Blacks are actually committing these crimes that the police would focus their activities on catching them. The idiot says that even though the victim claims that a black person robber her that the police should search by racial quota and only 12% of all people investigate can be Black, but that is what you are after.

            2. Black Americans are more likely to be arrested for drug use.
            And drug abuse is far higher in Black communities. So again what you are demanding is that Black criminal behavior be overlooked. Black community activists are constantly complaining about the scourge of drug addiction and drug crime in their communities. This is just a lefty argument to not do anything and leave Black people trapped in crime ridden neighborhoods.

            3. Black Americans are more likely to be jailed while awaiting trial.
            This is related to the crimes committed. Since Blacks commit proportionately more murders than whites it stands to reason that a proportionate number would be bound over for trial. Again what you argue for is absurd leniency for minorities based on the color of their skin and without regard for the crimes they are charged with.

            4. Black Americans are more likely to be offered a plea deal that includes prison time.
            Did I mention that they commit more murders and violent crime?

          • Brucehenry

            Regarding your number 4, do you not know that black (and other poor) suspects often cop a plea and plead guilty to crimes they didn’t commit because they fear a longer sentence if they do not?

            Regarding your number 2, (and it really is number two, get it?) :

            http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/drugs/buyers/whoare.html

            http://www.narconon.org/blog/drug-use/does-race-gender-or-ethnicity-determine-drug-use/

            http://healthland.time.com/2011/11/07/study-whites-more-likely-to-abuse-drugs-than-blacks/

            EDIT: After copping a plea and pleading guilty to a felony, whether actually guilty or not, one is forever branded as a felon, making the likelihood of “re-offending” greater and beginning the spiral of hopelessness that breeds poverty and violence. This is what has happened in Ferguson and many other places. It is estimated that a majority of the citizens of Ferguson, most of whom are black, have outstanding warrants. Failure to appear is a felony, and so the cycle begins.

          • jim_m

            Link for your claim that Blacks make guilty pleas when they are innocent?

            SO you admit that Black drug use is at least 15% higher than White drug use. A lot of white people will go into black neighborhoods to get drugs. Most of drug trafficking is controlled by street gangs, which are minority dominated.

            So the point is that you have made no point. And you clearly pass on #s 1 and 3.

          • Brucehenry

            My sister is a career public defender who has spent a 40 year career defending people who can not afford to hire fancy lawyers. Do you really think that DAs don’t threaten long sentences to poor defendants in order to induce them to plead guilty to lesser charges and thereby increase their own conviction rates?

            http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/08/17/95-of-prosecutors-are-white-and-they-treat-blacks-worse.html

            http://hiphopwired.com/2014/07/10/study-finds-whites-asians-cop-better-plea-deals-blacks-latinos/

          • jim_m

            I am questioning that innocent people plead guilty in the numbers that you are claiming.

          • Brucehenry

            I’m not claiming any specific number, just that it often happens. That it happens at all is unfortunate, and the fact that it happens at all breeds an attitude among the poor and black that there are two systems of justice, one for them and one for the more fortunate — which leads to understandable anger, which MAY lead to unjustifiable behavior. Get it?

          • jim_m

            Yeah, I get it. Some unquantifiable injustice that you can’t even prove happens is a justification for murdering white people.

            Sounds like another bogus explanation from you as to why it is that you believe that blacks are incapable of living to the same moral standard as everyone else.

            Why do you think so poorly of Black people?

          • Brucehenry

            So let’s recap. You start this “discussion” yesterday by claiming that the President has been “teaching hate” the past 8 years but can’t supply any quotes of him doing so.

            Then you claim that the entire BLM movement “promotes the assassination” of police because of chanting that has occurred at ONE event — now two, after the Castile shooting.

            Then you claim that the rate at which police are murdered with guns has exploded under Obama, but have to back down when shown that police murders under Obama are at their lowest rate of any administration since 1980. But of course you move the goalposts then and claim without evidence that “targeted assassinations” are up “an infinite amount” or some shit.

            In every instance in which your “arguments” are shown to be so much Talk Radio nonsense, you revert to Palin-worthy boilerplate and personal insult and wild strawman accusations.

            In other words a typical Wizbang weekend. I’m off to get brunch, Jim, if you want to foam at the mouth some more I’ll be checking in later probably.

          • jim_m

            *Mouth

            Um. no. If anything The argument that has been taken down has been yours as I gave you a point by point rebuttal of your Salon link. You apparently refuse to address 3/4 of those points. I”ll take that as a concession since you are unwilling to stand up and defend the bullshit you posted.

            My points are all related. 0bama has fomented racial division. I have posted links that show how his admin has done that. He has supported the BLM Movement, it too has promoted racial division and more to the point, the assassination of police.

            You want to claim that police deaths are down. Yes, they are, but the deliberate targeting of police is up. People are following the lead of 0bama (and you) who say that their anger is justified, and they are acting out and murdering police.

          • jim_m

            When you come back consider this:

            So the percentage of blacks fatally shot by police officers (26%) is almost exactly equal to the percentage of blacks committing violent crimes (24%). Indeed, given that the black homicide rate is around eight times the white rate, it is surprising that the portion of blacks fatally shot by policemen is not higher.

            So really, the number of blacks being shot by police is arguably disproportionately low. Perhaps we should be killing more of them. It might reduce the overcrowding in our prisons.

            Or are you going to argue that innocent blacks are being sent to jail and that white people are committing all those murders?

          • jim_m

            5. Black Americans may be excluded from juries because of their race.
            So may whites and racially based jury selection cuts both ways. Also, the graphic demonstrates that race may be a surrogate for other issues such as unemployment as unemployment rates in the black community are far higher than in the white community.

            6. Black Americans are more likely to serve longer sentences than white Americans for the same offense.
            OK. It would be interesting to see how many of these were for first offenses. Also, not all crimes are equal. For example: It is one thing to murder some one, but it is another to torture them first. Categorizing all crimes together an not taking this into account can skew the way things really are.

            7. Black Americans are more likely to be disenfranchised because of a felony conviction.
            Not true. Everyone who commits a felony is equally at risk. You must prove that whites are committing the same number and kind of felonies. This is just another plea to not enforce the law because someone is black.

            8. Black Americans are more likely to have their probation revoked.
            This goes back to the fact that blacks actually commit more crimes than whites. Therefore, they are more likely to reoffend.

            What this boils own to is Bruce and the left claiming that blacks are incapable of living by the same moral standards as white people and therefore should be given a pass on criminal activity.

          • fustian24

            “What I like about the Obama administration is all the racial healing.”

      • jim_m

        Oh, and I think you were looking for more BLM chants promoting killing cops (well, no you weren’t, because I wasn’t even looking and found this, so you are deliberately going out of your way to not see this): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9xNxoeqf0Ws

        • Brucehenry

          Yes I see it’s happened again. Very unfortunate and shameful. Still it’s a mob and not the organization as a whole. And it’s happening in the aftermath of an apparently unjustified shooting of an entirely blameless black motorist.

          • jim_m

            I see. It was justified according to Bruce.

          • Brucehenry

            Not justified but one can understand the anger.

          • jim_m

            OK, then you position clearly is that since it is understandable, it has no influence on other people leading them to murder police. Despite it being under the BLM banner and condoned by BLM leaders, it has no influence on the thoughts and actions of BLM followers.

            I get it. Only things that white people and conservatives say actually cause people to do things. We have mind control powers apparently.

          • Brucehenry

            It is understandable in the same sense that white people who lose a job offer to an affirmative action candidate, for example, have understandable anger and may lash out. It is understandable in the same sense that a white victim of a mugging by a black teen may henceforth fear and be angry at all black teens.

            You’re always talking about “human nature.” What don’t you understand about understandable anger?

          • jim_m

            I get it . You feel that it is a justification to go out an murder people.

          • Brucehenry

            Understandable anger sometimes leads to unjustified action, or do you think that statement isn’t ever true?

  • Hgg61688

    I’ve noticed that the Pew Research Center is cited here frequently. Their latest data is that 50% want some form of gun control. In other polls the number is higher. The problem is that the right won’t participate in discussions on how that might be done. The GOP is owned by he NRA so those do-nothings won’t deal with it either.

    • jim_m

      The problem is that most of these surveys ask if people would accept “common sense gun control”. That means different things to different people. Often (as it is here) these pols are used to cite public support for the gun control position, but often the position being supported is not the one that the survey respondents would agree with.

      What the gun control left wants is confiscation. They are pretty pointed about that these days. Any additional gun control measures are really aimed at incrementalism toward confiscation, so there is no point in discussion.

      Currently, the places with the most strict gun control laws are the ones with the most severe gun crime. There is a lesson in that which the left refuses to listen to. For them ideology is what guides them to the truth. Facts are not relevant to understanding the truth.

      • jim_m

        Oh, and while crime has declined pretty constantly since the early 90’s, gun ownership and legal carry laws have expanded. So while the left says that both of those should lead to increased crime they have lead to the opposite. That pretty much guts the argument for gun control. But again: Facts are not relevant when you believe that truth is determined by ideology.

      • Vagabond661

        Common sense gun control means to most felons crazies terrorists shouldnt have them.

      • Hgg61688

        Exactly why there should be a dialogue about it.

        • jim_m

          Wait. You have no facts. You have ideology. You are saying that because gun crime is going down, and legal gun ownership is going up and legal carry is more common that we need to end legal gun ownership and legal carry.

          You make no sense. There is nothing to discuss. We have decent gun laws. The government needs to enforce them, honestly and fairly.

          • Hgg61688

            Did I say that? You really love to distort when people offer thoughts you don’t agree with.

          • jim_m

            Then address the facts I have posted. You say you want a dialogue. I have posted facts that demonstrate that your call for gun control is unnecessary, based not on the anecdotal and emotional argument that you want to make, but rather on a rational statistical measure of what is going on with violent crime.

            So go ahead, make your rational statistically backed up argument that gun ownership is related to an increase in crime and therefore should be curtailed.

          • Looks like Hgg’s a one-site wonder. 25 posts, all on Wizbang.

          • jim_m

            Looks like a hit and run. Once you start actually engaging him with facts he disappears.

          • They do that, don’t they?

          • Hgg61688

            No. I just don’t sit in front of my computer waiting to make a comment.

        • jim_m

          Yes, we need gun control because it has no relationship to the frequency of crime. But it has a great relationship to the frequency of dictatorship.

          What was it again that you wanted?

          http://static.prisonplanet.com/p/images/january2013/070113graph2.gif

        • Exactly why the proponents should start the amendment process. That they have not is a clear indication of their level of industry and their perceived odds of success.

        • LiberalNightmare

          A dialogue? What a great idea! How come nobody has ever mentioned a dialogue before?

          • Hgg61688

            Yeah, I forgot. The current state of the right in this country is there won’t ever be any.

          • When the dialog basically starts “Shut the hell up and let me tell you what to think…”, it’s kind of hard to have a conversation.

          • Hgg61688

            Like the commentor jim_m?

          • jim_m

            I have invite you to comment and rebut the data I have presented. Don’t go complaining that you have no opportunity for discussion.

            I have also shown that when Bruce presented a serious argument that I am willing to discuss that point by point.

            You have presented nothing. No data. No arguments. Just a psotion that we need more gun control and how lamentable it is that no one will discuss it.

            Well, big boy, pony up some talk. I have presented an argument that violent crime is declining while gun ownership an concealed carry have increased. The argument is that statistically, there is no relationship between legal gun ownership and crime. Therefore, there is no need for additional gun control measures as they are not relevant to the issue of crime.

            But you have posted several comments since I have posted those an you have yet to address them. You have your opportunity but you are avoiding it. The implication is because you have no cogent argument to present.

          • jim_m

            I posted the graph of crime vs gun ownership 18 hours ago. You have made 4 comments since then and you have refused to address that graph despite my making several invitations for you to do so.

            Don’t complain that you cannot have a discussion of the issue when you are studiously avoiding that discussion when it is offered.

          • That’s because they don’t want a dialog. They’re not interested in learning anything that doesn’t match their preconceptions.

            I was dubious about John Lott’s claim that more guns equals less crime… but the stats do bear it out. You can argue facts, but it’s real hard to argue emotional convictions, and that’s all the anti-gun folks care about.

          • Hgg61688

            I’m not claiming that guns should be banned. Ane your “serious” argument involves making stuff up and hurling insults when your arguments are refuted.

          • then what are you proposing to fix this largely non-extant “problem?”

          • jim_m

            OK then. You aren’t saying guns should be banned but you are saying that the solution to the problem of what you believe is escalating gun crime is that we institute further restrictions on gun ownership, AKA gun control.

            So please explain why it is that we need more gun control when gun crime has been declining for 23 years and what you believe will be the benefits. Remember: We already have proof that the assault weapons ban an the high cap magazine ban had zero effect on gn crime, so you will have to show some sort of argument that takes those failures into account.

          • No. See my reply to Jim.

            Arguing about emotional convictions is a waste of time, so is starting out by saying ‘let me tell you why you’re wrong on firearms’ when you’ve shown no indication you’ve got any knowledge or any willingness to learn about the subject simply indicates you’re looking to boost your ego.

          • jim_m

            Emotional convictions is correct.

            The perceived rate of violent crime is far higher than the actual rate. Left wing activists and the media have created what amounts to a panic with people believing that crime is ever increasing while the exact opposite is true.

            So ignorant leftists like Hgg demand that we “do something” to address this crisis, when no such crisis actually exists. It is little more than a pretense to remove people’s civil rights.

          • jim_m

            Try this one then. Please explain why as gun ownership has gone up there has been a halving of the gun homicide rate? Should not the rate have increase if gun control was a potential resolution to the problem of gun homicide?

            Access to guns has actually increased over the period in the chart. The Assault Weapons ban was not renewed, concealed carry laws were passed in all 50 states. The last bastions of total gun bans, Chicago and DC, had those bans overturned. Yet gun crime continues to decline.

            So the need for further gun control laws is????

          • It almost looks like we’re at a pretty much irreducible minimum. There’s always going to be idiots who use guns for crime, but there’s a rather interesting inverse correlation there. It’d be really interesting to see the same chart w/gang- and drug-related firearm homicides removed.

            (Or hell, just take out Chicago and DC. Come to think of it, now that Detroit’s police chief has encouraged people to buy guns, what’s the crime rate there done? Might take a year or more to get decent stats – he just did that a few months ago…)

  • Vagabond661

    What’s missing is the shooter WAS part of a terrorist group who wanted to kill white cops/people.

  • Retired military

    Ref your honorably discharged comment

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3682129/Dallas-sniper-sent-home-Afghanistan-sexual-harassment.html

    States that he was recommended for other than Honorable. But same thing applies. Nothing he did prior to this would have apparantly prevented him from getting a weapon legally.

    Thugs gonna be thugs.

  • jim_m

    Never let facts get in the way of the left promoting the murder of police officers:

    In 2015, 990 people in the United States were killed by police officers. Of those 990 shootings, 730 of them happened while an attack was in progress. The majority of them were black, right? Wrong. 494 were white and 254 were black. Just to put those numbers in perspective, there were 468 murders in CHICAGO alone in 2015.

    Put another way, not only are black men far more likely to be shot by other black men than police officers, there’s a better chance that a black American who obeys a cop’s instructions will be struck by lightning than there is that he will be shot by a police officer.

    • Brucehenry

      So what? The fact that one may be murdered by others somehow justifies the killing of Philando Castile at the hands of officers sworn to defend public safety?

      • jim_m

        No. It points out the lies of the BLM movement and the false justification you have in claiming that blacks are unfairly discriminated against.

        Do you have tape now of the incident before Castile was shot? Nothing in the incident afterward suggests racism was involved, My understanding was that the police officer was Asian. Are you claiming that Asians are all raging bigots now? Or like other leftists do you claim that Asians are actually white?

        • Brucehenry

          The point is that the POLICE are killing people unjustifiably, and not about the race of the officers who are doing the shooting. And it’s being caught on video, as it was not in the past, and therefore people get angrier, and sooner, than in the past.

          • jim_m

            Yeah, but apparently, they only kill black people unjustifiably, according to you. But wait, blacks are involved in more violent crime and yet are less likely to be shot and when they are they are more likely to be shot by a black officer.

            Proof that it’s RAAAAACISM!!!!!!

          • Brucehenry

            Actually this happened about 30 miles from my house, to a white guy, and the ACLU and BLM and NAACP all issued statements of concern. Of course the cops were not held accountable for invading this guy’s home without a warrant, the action which started the fight and culminated in the man’s death (murder).

            http://abc11.com/news/harnett-co-deputy-wont-be-indicted-in-fatal-shooting/1286419/

  • jim_m

    Is the complaint that police shoot people or that they shoot blacks disproportionately? Because they almost never shoot Asians. If fairness is the point of all this complaining, shouldn’t we put a bounty out on Asians so more of them get shot?

  • Commander_Chico

    Images like this are how you start, and start losing, an insurgency:

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CnBNZzeW8AA_pKD.jpg

    • Commander_Chico
      • jim_m

        Images like that mean something to fools like you.

        • Commander_Chico

          Does it make any difference? I will grant your point. Most Americans are “fools.” Swayed by emotional content. The picture has emotional power.

          • jim_m

            Yes, because peacefully arresting someone is going to start an insurgency. Idiot. Insurgency is started by murdering people. Go read your history. So your claim that this is how an insurgency starts is demonstrably false.

          • Commander_Chico

            The cops already have murdered people, or at least manslaughtered them. For examples, the Castile, Laquan McDonald and Walter Scott cases are pretty clear.

          • jim_m

            Not as part of a protest dumbass.

          • Commander_Chico

            That is a non sequitur.

          • jim_m

            She was arrested for breaking the law. She was arrested in a respectful and peaceful manner.

            It isn’t going to provoke the civil war you thirst for.

            But even if it did your side would lose dramatically. I welcome that loss.

            And for every picture of some shapely black woman being arrested for trying to block a US interstate, we have pictures of scores of thuggish black people throwing rocks at police, of them murdering police in the streets of Dallas, NYC and elsewhere.

            Yeah, go an start an insurrection. Make my day.

          • Commander_Chico

            Hmmm “shapely black woman” yeahhh.

            I am not fighting any civil war. I will be spending your tax dollars in Europe and Asia.

          • jim_m

            Well, since you’ve never fought any war I wouldn’t expect you to fight in any one in the future, civil or not.

          • Commander_Chico

            I did get some lame ribbons for Grenada, Gulf of Sidra, and Beirut

          • jim_m

            I’m sure you can buy them online.

          • Show proof. A DD-214 will do nicely.

  • Paul Hooson

    High profile crime stories create a public discussion and debate, but the bottom-line news is that the Constitution and Bill Of Rights seem to survive every public reaction wave created after these high profile stories. That says a lot about the commitment by many to preserve the Constitution and the Bill Of Rights, despite current events which come and go on a daily basis.

  • Brucehenry
    • jim_m

      Yes it is.

      But then there’s this:

      Black Lives Matter is a social movement launched by the left, which uses
      allegedly racist police killings as the excuse and justification for a
      pre-existing anti-capitalist narrative. If those justifications don’t
      actually exist, it will not change the narrative, because facts never
      mattered.

      • Brucehenry

        I’ve discovered this “jim_m” guy’s secret identity! No more hiding behind a screen name for you, dude.

        http://www.clickhole.com/article/devastating-guy-knows-exactly-how-black-people-sho-4607

        • jim_m

          You know what is really funny? That is actually the very advice that black people give other black people.

          I guess you think it’s funny because you believe that Blacks are incapable of behaving to a civilize standard so the suggestion that they act like decent people seems like a joke to you.

          • jim_m

            You want to give blacks really good advice? Get pulled over by a white cop. They are significantly less likely to shoot a black man than a black cop because they don’t want to be called a racist by douchebags like you.

          • Brucehenry

            It helped Philando Castile a lot, which is why he’s alive and unharmed today, I guess.

          • jim_m

            Tell you what, Next time you are pulled over treat the cop like an asshole, tell him you have a gun and refuse to show him your hands. That should settle things happily for everyone.

      • Brucehenry

        Another angle on the study cited in this LI article, which predicted how it would be misused by dishonest “conservatives”

        http://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/news/a46608/study-on-race-police-shootings/

        • jim_m

          There have been several studies. I have posted a link to the Harvard study an to the U of Wisconsin study. Both show that blacks are less likely to be killed by cops than whites.

          However, they are honest studies. But Since you have said that they are bullshit we can assume that the conclusion of the Harvard study that Blacks face more physical violence in custody was a bunch of crap.

          Thanks for giving us the liberty to say that you say the claims of police brutality against blacks are crap

          • Brucehenry

            I didn’t say or imply that the study was bullshit, nor did the link I posted. Your spin on it above was bullshit, though, and a misuse of an honest study.

            So here again we find you using strawmen, which is a “lie,” according to the Moderators here, which makes you a “low life scum” who is “beneath contempt.” I’m sure you’ll be admonished to cut the crap any minute now.

          • Hgg61688

            I admire your tenacity Bruce. Having a discussion with jim_m reminds me of the “discussions” I had with my truculent 3yo daughter.

          • WHO’S THE BUSTER

            Truculent, ah reminds me of Cosell and Ali.

          • jim_m

            My so–called spin was simply to restate the facts of the study, which are the police are less inclined to shoot a black suspect than they are a white one.

            Your comments create the impression that these are not the findings. You are the one being a liar.

          • WHO’S THE BUSTER

            Well that is doubtful. I have been warned about snark, but the moderator’s (Rodney Graves) entire shtick is nothing but snark, but not a word.

            Of course the “moderator” also thinks anyone with a contrary opinion is a troll.

    • jim_m

      So according to Bruce, blacks can define that a white person is racist and using racist “dog whistles” and this is the de facto truth regardless of what the white person was actually thinking. White people are unconsciously racist according to Bruce.

      But blacks and BLM are not racist, despite the fact that millions of white people find them to be so.

      Why are they not racist? Oh, because there isn’t racist intent on the part of the black people.

      Yep. Nice double standard you’ve got going there. Seems that your double standards only ever work in one direction though.

      • Brucehenry

        Millions of white people, pretend, like you pretend, that BLM is a racist organization.

        I do admit to being inclined to root for the underdog.

        Hilarious that you find it necessary to argue with a clearly satirical article. What a putz.

        • jim_m

          What a freaking hypocrite you are. Millions of blacks see racism in their fevered fantasies.

          Question Bruce: Is it racism because the “victim” feels it is racist? Or is it racism because the person being racist meant it in a prejudiced way?

          Seems to me that your answer is that when it’s racism against blacks it is because the black people claim it. When it is racism against whites it is what you say was meant.

          You’re full off shit. And I never read your dumbass article.

          • Brucehenry

            No wonder you sound so foolish reacting to it, then.

            I have not addressed your “what is racism” bs or your claim of a double standard. You have been having a conversation with yourself and pretending that I have said this or that, or that I mean this or that, but perhaps not intentionally, as that is what you do. Maybe you can’t help yourself.

          • WHO’S THE BUSTER

            Remember, more than half of Republicans think that reverse racism is a bigger problem than, you know, real racism.

          • Brucehenry

            That’s because many people who call themselves “conservative” are unable to empathize with anyone whose lives are not similar to their own. Unable (or unwilling) to relate to anything outside their experience. That’s why, for example, there are very few advocates for same-sex marriage among Republicans — except those whose children have “come out” as gay.

            Many if not most are like JIm — not “conservative” at all, just assholes.

          • jim_m

            The double standard in your thinking an your accepting of the validity of charges of racism still exists.

            That is what I was addressing. I responded far earlier to your post directly. I was just seeking a place to ask you to address the double standard.

            Your feeble ass deflection that this is about your link is more of your race baiting bullshit. I have accurately describe how you deal with charges of racism from blacks an from whites. Now either explain yourself or STFU.

          • Brucehenry

            I’ll let Wonkette and your dreamgirl Sarah explain:

            http://wonkette.com/603970/sarah-palin-martin-luther-king

          • jim_m

            In other words you are so ashamed at being correctly called out for your bullshit you won’t respond

          • Brucehenry

            I have been demonstrating that you are an idiot on this thread since Saturday. Now I’m just fucking with you.

            Now comes the part where you post three or four unanswered hissyfit comments in a row claiming that my lack of a substantive response means this or that. I bet there’ll be at least one “fuck you” and a couple of “anti-American”s in there too.

          • jim_m

            No you haven’t. You have been making claims, but you have done nothing to defend your position.

            You are now defending racism. You make claims of white people being racist when they are not, claiming that it isn’t what the intent of the white person is, that it is the way the black person feels that makes it racist.

            You then turn around and say that BLM is not racist, that they are justified an their intent is not racist, an then say that it doesn’t matter how white people feel because it is the intent of BLM that matters.

            You’re an ass and a self deluded ass at that.

        • Vagabond661
        • As always, the projection remains very strong with you.

        • jim_m

          I wasn’t addressing your dumbass article. I did that yesterday when you posted it. I was seeking a place to address your bullshit response to the racism in BLM.

          Care to answer to the charges? Or you just going to admit that you are a vile race baiting hypocrite and a fucking bigot?

  • jim_m

    Just for you Bruce

    • Brucehenry

      Forget the link?

      • jim_m

        It’s a photo. Either reload or figure out how to use the internet you dumbass

    • Some are more worthless than others…