LeviF Posted July 20, 2011 Author Posted July 20, 2011 And how do you feel about Waco? This will be interesting. I assume from your posts [and I am open to correction] you would aprove a Clinton/Reno action. When you hear reports of a cult stockpiling illegal weaponry, yeah, you roll up in an some sort of protective vehicle. Aside from the really ****ty surveillance that the ATF did, I approve of the government's actions in that scenario. With a cult like that, you know that they are very much a danger. My post was about the fear of the unknown, and the use of such force in that kind of scenario.
Sig1Hunter Posted July 20, 2011 Posted July 20, 2011 I just don't get some of the peoples reactions to police using an armored vehicle to approach an armed subject. I also don't get how they could possibly refer to it as a tank (original article did this as well). A tank has a turret, and a really big gun that is designed to destroy other tanks...... If it didn't say "tank" in the title, how many hits would it get?
Jim in Anchorage Posted July 20, 2011 Posted July 20, 2011 When you hear reports of a cult stockpiling illegal weaponry, yeah, you roll up in an some sort of protective vehicle. Aside from the really ****ty surveillance that the ATF did, I approve of the government's actions in that scenario. With a cult like that, you know that they are very much a danger. My post was about the fear of the unknown, and the use of such force in that kind of scenario. yes sir kill 76 men women and children on a vague weapons charge[no evidence they ever used them, or intended to] but BATF ships guns to Mexico to prove America is the cause of Mexico's drug violence? And forgets to track them? Pick a new champion.
LeviF Posted July 20, 2011 Author Posted July 20, 2011 yes sir kill 76 men women and children on a vague weapons charge[no evidence they ever used them, or intended to] but BATF ships guns to Mexico to prove America is the cause of Mexico's drug violence? And forgets to track them? Pick a new champion. Yep, my champion is ATF. You sure have me pegged
Booster4324 Posted July 20, 2011 Posted July 20, 2011 Yep, my champion is ATF. You sure have me pegged I think it is more he thinks you are a liberal. Been known to be wrong though. For the record: I think these armored vehicles are a good thing for the police. I think the government went overboard when subsidizing them and allowed too many to be purchased. Surely they are not needed often and there is a way to share these things. Levi does not strike me as a liberal.
Jim in Anchorage Posted July 20, 2011 Posted July 20, 2011 When you hear reports of a cult stockpiling illegal weaponry, yeah, you roll up in an some sort of protective vehicle. Aside from the really ****ty surveillance that the ATF did, I approve of the government's actions in that scenario. With a cult like that, you know that they are very much a danger. My post was about the fear of the unknown, and the use of such force in that kind of scenario. Yep, my champion is ATF. You sure have me pegged So you agree they had no real idea what was going on but you are OK with burning the building to the ground?
Pete Posted July 20, 2011 Posted July 20, 2011 (edited) So you agree they had no real idea what was going on but you are OK with burning the building to the ground? Waco was most defintely !@#$ed up. It is something I expect in Burma, but not in the "land of the free". Ruby Ridge was another assault on our civil liberties and "freedom" as was Sacco and Vinzetti. I could go on and on... Edited July 20, 2011 by Pete
LeviF Posted July 20, 2011 Author Posted July 20, 2011 So you agree they had no real idea what was going on but you are OK with burning the building to the ground? Source? I'm not aware that they ever figured out for sure what started the fire, whether Davidians or FBI and the assault.
Booster4324 Posted July 20, 2011 Posted July 20, 2011 So you agree they had no real idea what was going on but you are OK with burning the building to the ground? Waco was most defintely !@#$ed up. It is something I expect in Burma, but not in the "land of the free". Ruby Ridge was another assault on our civil liberties and "freedom" as was Sacco and Vinzetti. I could go on and on... Human sacrifice, dogs and cats living together... mass hysteria!
Jim in Anchorage Posted July 20, 2011 Posted July 20, 2011 (edited) Source? I'm not aware that they ever figured out for sure what started the fire, whether Davidians or FBI and the assault. Driving a tank firing tear gas cannisters though the wall of a wooden building would be a hell of a place to begain the fire investigation agree? You brought this up with your objection to cops having armored vehicles, yet you defend Waco? Of course it was never figured out. With the full weight of the President backing his Attorney General, did you really expect a honest analysis? Edited July 20, 2011 by Jim in Anchorage
DC Tom Posted July 20, 2011 Posted July 20, 2011 yes sir kill 76 men women and children on a vague weapons charge[no evidence they ever used them, or intended to] Except for the whole "shootout that killed four agents when ATF tried to serve a warrant"... The initial warrant may have been ill-advised. The month-long siege and assault that followed...generally, when you get into a gun battle with law enforcement, and don't surrender afterwards, a siege and assault will follow in any country. Never understood why anyone had THAT much of a problem with that part...
Jim in Anchorage Posted July 20, 2011 Posted July 20, 2011 Except for the whole "shootout that killed four agents when ATF tried to serve a warrant"... The initial warrant may have been ill-advised. The month-long siege and assault that followed...generally, when you get into a gun battle with law enforcement, and don't surrender afterwards, a siege and assault will follow in any country. Never understood why anyone had THAT much of a problem with that part... MAY have been? There was ZERO proof of any illegal guns. The whole foundation of the warrant was that they bought LEGAL GUNS and they MIGHT have converted them to full auto. You could raid half the homes in the country on those grounds.
DC Tom Posted July 20, 2011 Posted July 20, 2011 MAY have been? There was ZERO proof of any illegal guns. The whole foundation of the warrant was that they bought LEGAL GUNS and they MIGHT have converted them to full auto. You could raid half the homes in the country on those grounds. Yes, MAY have been...because I don't know anything about the warrant they tried to serve.
LeviF Posted July 20, 2011 Author Posted July 20, 2011 With the full weight of the President backing his Attorney General, did you really expect a honest analysis? Of course not, your thorough analysis is probably much fairer. Could you post all of it?
BB27 Posted July 21, 2011 Posted July 21, 2011 In defense to my friends at BATF, they were not involved in the raid that killed all the Branch Davidians. At that point, it was a 100% FBI operation. The initial warrant was definately ill advised, but two of the agents were shot by fully automatic weapons, so even though you might not agree with the operation or the probable cause that the warrant was issued on, they were spot on with thier belief that the Davidians were converting weapons to full auto. I know several of the agents who were there that day (both FBI and BATF) and have talked extensively with the Agent who was on the roof and shot several times.
Jim in Anchorage Posted July 21, 2011 Posted July 21, 2011 In defense to my friends at BATF, they were not involved in the raid that killed all the Branch Davidians. At that point, it was a 100% FBI operation. The initial warrant was definately ill advised, but two of the agents were shot by fully automatic weapons, so even though you might not agree with the operation or the probable cause that the warrant was issued on, they were spot on with thier belief that the Davidians were converting weapons to full auto. I know several of the agents who were there that day (both FBI and BATF) and have talked extensively with the Agent who was on the roof and shot several times. If you can tell the difference between a hell fire [legal] and a full auto your ears are better then mine. The point is the rabidly anti gun Clinton justice department was looking for any gun crime, even if they had to make them up. And frankly if they where converting to full auto so what? Where they threating anyone? It was a BS call from a attention seeking agency.
DC Tom Posted July 21, 2011 Posted July 21, 2011 If you can tell the difference between a hell fire [legal] and a full auto your ears are better then mine. The point is the rabidly anti gun Clinton justice department was looking for any gun crime, even if they had to make them up. And frankly if they where converting to full auto so what? Where they threating anyone? It was a BS call from a attention seeking agency. As I understand it, even owning a full-auto gun not grandfathered in is a violation of the law. So "so what" doesn't really cover it. If that's your beef, it's with the law (which I entirely agree with - stupidly written law), not the raid.
Jim in Anchorage Posted July 21, 2011 Posted July 21, 2011 As I understand it, even owning a full-auto gun not grandfathered in is a violation of the law. So "so what" doesn't really cover it. If that's your beef, it's with the law (which I entirely agree with - stupidly written law), not the raid. My point is it was a cooked up charge that was not backed in fact[ ohh they bought AR-15's- they surly must be converting to full auto" ] It was all a politically fired monster from Clinton-he thought by going after "machine gun owners" and "weird religion's groups" he would appease his backer's. So 76 dead to advance his cause. Good show, mr president.
Rob's House Posted July 21, 2011 Posted July 21, 2011 My point is it was a cooked up charge that was not backed in fact[ ohh they bought AR-15's- they surly must be converting to full auto" ] It was all a politically fired monster from Clinton-he thought by going after "machine gun owners" and "weird religion's groups" he would appease his backer's. So 76 dead to advance his cause. Good show, mr president. i'm curious how this story would be perceived if the Davidians were Muslims and Clinton was a Republican.
Pete Posted July 21, 2011 Posted July 21, 2011 In defense to my friends at BATF, they were not involved in the raid that killed all the Branch Davidians. At that point, it was a 100% FBI operation. The initial warrant was definately ill advised, but two of the agents were shot by fully automatic weapons, so even though you might not agree with the operation or the probable cause that the warrant was issued on, they were spot on with thier belief that the Davidians were converting weapons to full auto. I know several of the agents who were there that day (both FBI and BATF) and have talked extensively with the Agent who was on the roof and shot several times. Can you justify Ruby Ridge?
Recommended Posts