So... disappearings happening in Portland.

It's been sealed in its bag.

 

It should be good for another 10-11 years then, at least.

 

I also kept my "riot helmet."

It was two decades old when I got it. It's basically a motorcycle helmet with an acrylic face shield that snaps on and off.

 

That, but I never had the visor. I had the face shield. Oh, and it has the agency logo on the front.

Come to think of it, I have a lot of crap I was probably supposed to turn in.

 

Back in 1988 when I got canned by new owners I did make one fairly intelligent move. They called me into the station and asked me to turn in my equipment. I gave the business manager (a terrific woman) a list to notarize. Somehow an Electro Voice 635 microphone (which ShootER will tell you is damn near indestructible and has been an industry workhorse since the early 60s) wasn't on the list. If I ever need an emergency mic or an emergency hammer, I'm all set.

 

Man those are shitty mics. And I've only ever known radio people to use them.

EV RE50Bs are pretty much industry standard for teevee (B for black, which actually sucks because that finish shows scratches and wear much more than the original bronze finish that early RE50s had, like your mic does). Much better sound than a 635, though I only use one maybe a half dozen times a year, if that.

When I left my last job, I ended up with far more than a mic when I left and will likely do the same if I leave the one I have now.

 

Well, someone once said the best ability is availability and those things will always answer the bell.

 

I guess I have to ask the question.

How is this police action wrong? This is how the law is supposed to work. It may not be perfect, but this has charges being presented within the limits of law enforcement detainment. This has an opportunity for the person to be released awaiting trial without bail. If the person chooses to challenge the requirement for release before trial I assume they have the ability to contact a lawyer or apply for a public defender to argue for them at an arraignment in front of the magistrate for monetary bail and less restrictions. They should also have the ability to appeal for bias and have theit request for a reduction in bail requirements before trial reduced. I understand that does mean they might be held in jail longer for due process, but they should also be able to sign the current release and apply for reduced conditions after the initial arraignment.

This is how the law works for people charged with a crime. You get a defense in court. There are records of your arrest, and you can hire a lawyer for defense purposes and for a civil case against the state in regards to your treatment. The lack of charges and record of detainment by federal authorities allowed them to harass people without recourse for the people against improper procedure was the problem. This is the right way to do things where the arresting officers have a time limit to charge and arraign the defendant, and there is a paper trail of their location and treatment, alog with an ability to challenge their imprisonment within a court of law.

Maybe our process can be refined and be better, but this is within the process and it does allow for a defense for the defendant which is what everyone gets. I see no reason why the protestors should get special treatment and be allowed to break the laws of the land simply for protesting. If we do not like the laws of the land then we do need to change them. If the police are not applying the laws properly we need to make complaints and lawsuits to punish the state and penalize wrongdoings.

 

Cant remember if I posted the Legal Eagle vid, but no, the Feds can't, not without permission from the state.

 

I am pretty sure federal law enforcement can act within the states. I would have to see some actual legal arguments that they cannot. I would imagine they might be restricted to crimes crossing state lines.

Yes, I know it sucks, but these people will be able to hire a defense attorney to represent them in regards to these charges, and they will also have a recorded charge so that they might lodge complaints, have investigations done, and do civil suits against the federal government if they are acting improperly. I want the federal forces to be held to the same standards that local law enforcement would be in regards to the rights of people vs the state. Let the defense lawyers and shark lawsuit lawyers have a field day going after federal troops acting on US soil.

This should be a lesson to the taxpayer that youi cannot elect a dumbshit to violate the laws because we are all going to have to pay. Next time you see a trumpster feel free to thank them for opening us all up to wasted money for their racism. Perhaps we might also want to grab Trumpy joe biden and tell him to make sure to end these policies when he is president because he helped make and maintain them for trump to abuse.

 

Assuming they can afford a lawyer, of course. Though one would hope the ACLU is looking at class actions.

 

You want gun rights advocates to stand with people who fought them for years for the right to arm themselves against an oppressive government? Please. Their attitude is going to be " Reap what you sow."

 

I didn't say I wanted them to do anything.

It does make them look like hypocrites, though.

But we live in a time when too many people are concerned about the treatment of their tribe rather than equal protection and decent treatment for everybody.

 

Want? No.

Gonna use this to point out that the years of gun nuts claiming their hobby was all about liberty and being able to fight a tyrannical government was a load of horseshit? Yes.

There are currently more pressing matters but I don’t think the gun nuts are gonna like the results when the country comes back to gun control. The suburbs were already starting to embrace common sense gun legislation. Gun nuts showing their true colors will only increase the shift.

 

I have several facebook friends - people with whom I went to elementary and junior high school (my family moved my freshman high school year) that are hard core libertarians, not supporters of the NRA, and are adamantly against the jack-booted thugs. They have also been calling out the hypocrisy of the NRA as well.

 

When push came to shove they cared more about their itsy bitsy feelings being hurt than standing on their principles. Personally, I never expected anything else. They're cowards without their fucking guns. I prefer to be able to defend myself barehanded.

 

What are they doing about the thugs, and what are they doing about the NRA?

 

Ranting on FB like everyone else. One did post some pics in which he and his family were out at one protest - think he's in Cleveland. The other has health and financial issues of his own, so I doubt he's been to any protests.

At my work, we have a .... well several actually ... employee resource group (ERG), but the one specifically is for veterans. So, I posed the question that as our CEO has come out against police brutality and in support of the protests - he even specifically referenced "the murder of George Floyd" - and that we know trump has sent forces to Chicago, are there any plans for any veterans groups to stand between the protesters and the ... feds? Haven't received an answer yet. But, I would imagine it would not be something sponsored by my company - which is too bad. But, at least the CEO is on the side of the protesters in this.

 

Cue Donnie-boy holding a press conference taking credit for his "success" at stopping those violent graffiti artists.

 

Then you would be wrong. They said they wanted the right to have guns to protect themselves and their families from an oppressive government and they have them. They aren't out looting so no government agencies are beating down their door.

You think after months of watching cities being burned and people being beaten that voters will be FOR more gun control? You think that the black gun organizations that have sprouted up since Trump took office are going to want you to take away their guns? You're living in fantasy land there buddy. Nobody gives a shit about what gun owners do except gun grabbing liberals.

 

and guns and gun nuts providing not one tiny iota of help against either - yes, you were saying?

 

You're wrong

 

Can you cite 1 counterexample?

 

Oh, you mean the yob who showed up at a protest in Austin carrying? Great example.

 

I just had a flashback.
There was a financial expert on a panel show on Fox who saw the '09 crash coming, and Ben Stein screamed him down with "you're wrong! You're just wrong! You're just wrong!", every time he tried to speak.

Conservative debate.
It's not about who's actually right, it's who's the loudest gorilla in the room.

 

The American police sure seem to think that one of the reasons they need so much weaponry and need to be ready for a shootout at a moments notice is the prevalence of firearms in your society.

 

You want a counter example for a future hypothetical? Going to need to just wait and see on that one bud.

 

Back when O’Reilly was still on Fox (early 2000s), a buddy of mine was a big fan of his. “I don’t always agree with him, I just like the way he shouts down people he disagrees with him.”