Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
25 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

3 counts of reckless endangerment.

 


 

I think the charges originally confused the people in Kentucky.

 

Many were left thinking, “No one’s wantin’ any endangerment.”

  • Haha (+1) 1
Posted

I haven't followed this case very closely at all. I do seem to recall always hearing about it being a "no knock" warrant though.

Yet, I am completely unsurprised to now learn this:

 

 

 

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Thank you (+1) 3
Posted
Just now, Hedge said:

I haven't followed this case very closely at all. I do seem to recall always hearing about it being a "no knock" warrant though.

Yet, I am completely unsurprised to now learn this:

 

 

 

 

What?  Everyone everywhere was screaming that it was a no-knock warrant.

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
1 minute ago, GG said:

 

What?  Everyone everywhere was screaming that it was a no-knock warrant.

 

Don't worry, the NYTs immediately questioned this finding saying that one witness isn't enough to make that claim.

 

  • Thank you (+1) 2
Posted
3 minutes ago, GG said:

 

What?  Everyone everywhere was screaming that it was a no-knock warrant.


My understanding is that it was a no-knock warrant that they served with knocking...? 


 

 

2 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

Don't worry, the NYTs immediately questioned this finding saying that one witness isn't enough to make that claim.

 


 

But she was sleeping in her bed with her halo firmly in place when she was brutally executed- don’t ya know?

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Posted
20 hours ago, Buffalo_Gal said:

:blink:
 



 

 

If you get your political views from ESPN you have a problem.   When I watched sports I didn't even rely on ESPN for my views on SPORTS!! 

  • Like (+1) 4
  • Haha (+1) 1
Posted
31 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

Don't worry, the NYTs immediately questioned this finding saying that one witness isn't enough to make that claim.

 


With the above info and the fact the AG called her shooting a tragedy makes me lean towards human shield by the boyfriend.

  • Thank you (+1) 2
Posted
9 minutes ago, Joe Miner said:


With the above info and the fact the AG called her shooting a tragedy makes me lean towards human shield by the boyfriend.

 

I haven't followed this case close enough (at all) to have an opinion, but that wouldn't shock me if it turned out to be how it went:beer: 

Posted
1 hour ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

I haven't followed this case close enough (at all) to have an opinion, but that wouldn't shock me if it turned out to be how it went:beer: 

 

Facts don't keep the lunatics from getting their pound of flesh.

 

 

  • Thank you (+1) 1
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, whatdrought said:


 

Haley Cameron 2024

 

...I'd have to say AG Cameron is pretty impressive in his decision......could have been intimidated easily by mob rule......sadly he'll probably be a target now.........make no mistake, the MSM is coming with venom......first KY AG Republican since 1944.....and a 34 year old black man no less....hope this young man fights the fight....

Edited by OldTimeAFLGuy
  • Like (+1) 1
Posted

 

 

I remember about a year and a half ago, one of our more simplistic posters chided me for making the title of this thread "Liberal Protests"

 

I should change the word liberal, he wrote.

 

Well, now in 2020, I am starting to (slightly) agree with him.

 

I should change the title of this thread to "LIBERAL PROTESTS  RIOTS"

 

😎

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Like (+1) 6
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Posted
2 hours ago, IDBillzFan said:

 

Facts don't keep the lunatics from getting their pound of flesh.

 

 

 

I know it was a loooooooooooooong time ago but when I was a child and threw a temper tantrum I NEVER got what I wanted.  And usually when I finally gave up I had forgotten what the tantrum was all about.  I'm seeing similarities.  

Posted
2 minutes ago, Buffalo_Gal said:

 

 

 

I just can't get behind any of this.  I don't see the reason for this particular "take down".  There are very few reasons to go through someone's door when they're sleeping that make sense to the libertarian in me.

 

If you don't see the government overreach here, you need to take a step back.  If they didn't know he had a gun, they're fools.  If they knew he had a gun and went through his door in the middle of the night when they thought he'd be sleeping, they're even bigger fools.

Posted
1 minute ago, Alaska Darin said:

I just can't get behind any of this.  I don't see the reason for this particular "take down".  There are very few reasons to go through someone's door when they're sleeping that make sense to the libertarian in me.

 

If you don't see the government overreach here, you need to take a step back.  If they didn't know he had a gun, they're fools.  If they knew he had a gun and went through his door in the middle of the night when they thought he'd be sleeping, they're even bigger fools.


I am not an LEO or attorney, and do not play one on the internet.  With that caveat... apparently no-knocks are so the drug deals do not start shooting at the cops coming with a warrant. That was pretty common before no-knocks. In this case, it was a no-knock that they knocked for (do not ask me why). She was probably her sainted boyfriend's human shield, and why she is dead, and he is alive.

 

×
×
  • Create New...