mirkwood

Senior Moderator
  • Content Count

    3875
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    9

Reputation Activity

  1. Thanks
    mirkwood reacted to NeuroTypical in Tucker Carlson, Rayshard Brooks, Garrett Rolfe and Mike Braun   
    FWIW, Classifying a taser as a deadly weapon makes about as much sense as classifying pepper spray or handcuffs as deadly weapons. 
    Also FWIW, I've been tased by cops before.  It was a demonstration of the nonlethal stuff they have, and I jumped at the chance to be on the business end of a live demonstration.  The cop asked me how many seconds of juice I wanted.  I asked him how many seconds he went through in his training - he said three seconds.  In one of my not-most-mature moments, I proudly asked for four seconds.  
    I had someone take a video of the thing - yep, there I am, managing to yell "NoMore NoMore NoMore" three times in that last second.  
    It was a singular experience.  I didn't know what I thought of such things before the demonstration.  It made me a huge fan of tasers in the hands of law enforcement.  I'd much rather be tazed and cuffed, than wrestled or beaten and cuffed, or even pepper sprayed and cuffed.  
  2. Haha
    mirkwood reacted to MormonGator in Church has issued a statement on Covid-19   
    Look, that's really mean. Don't say that about @mirkwood. 
    😉
     
  3. Like
    mirkwood reacted to MormonGator in Utahns! With COVID numbers rising, would you cancel a reunion?   
    I wish we had the Covid crisis when my mom was dragging me to family reunions back in 1994. It would give me a good excuse to stay home and play video games. 
  4. Like
    mirkwood reacted to NeuroTypical in LDS Church donates to Utah Pride Center   
    Dude tracks the rise of the concept of Mao's "political correctness", with the rise of it in the western world.  He's not comparing Mao at his height (or depth) with US today, he's comparing Mao's early developing years with the US today.
  5. Like
    mirkwood got a reaction from anatess2 in So It Begins   
    I prophesy in the name of the Lord God of Israel, unless the United States redress the wrongs committed upon the Saints in the state of Missouri and punish the crimes committed by her officers that in a few years the government will be utterly overthrown and wasted, and there will not be so much as a potsherd left, for their wickedness in permitting the murder of men, women and children, and the wholesale plunder and extermination of thousands of her citizens to go unpunished, thereby perpetrating a foul and corroding blot upon the fair fame of this great republic, the very thought of which would have caused the high-minded and patriotic framers of the Constitution of the United States to hide their faces with shame.
    ( Source: Joseph Smith, Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith 302-03)
  6. Like
    mirkwood got a reaction from anatess2 in So It Begins   
    I prophesy in the name of the Lord God of Israel, unless the United States redress the wrongs committed upon the Saints in the state of Missouri and punish the crimes committed by her officers that in a few years the government will be utterly overthrown and wasted, and there will not be so much as a potsherd left, for their wickedness in permitting the murder of men, women and children, and the wholesale plunder and extermination of thousands of her citizens to go unpunished, thereby perpetrating a foul and corroding blot upon the fair fame of this great republic, the very thought of which would have caused the high-minded and patriotic framers of the Constitution of the United States to hide their faces with shame.
    ( Source: Joseph Smith, Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith 302-03)
  7. Like
    mirkwood reacted to Just_A_Guy in So It Begins   
    Erm . . . Not quite.
    Yes, the Brits accepted runaway US slaves.  American southerners lived in fear of the Brits fomenting a slave rebellion—an early draft of the Declaration of Independence simultaneously blamed George III for continuing the slave trade in the colonies, and also for stirring up those same slaves to rebel against their masters.  During the Chesapeake Campaign the British Admiral Cockburn was able to muster a couple of regiments of ex-slaves, units of which had taken part in the sack of Washington, DC the month before the assault on Fort McHenry.  And virtually all Americans scorned the British soldiers as either recently-emancipated slaves (who, as throughout all ancient history, were despised as an uneducated and undisciplined rabble irrespective of race) or paid mercenaries (“hirelings”), whereas the Americans characterized themselves as “freemen . . . stand[ing] between their loved homes and the war’s desolation”.
    Yes, the verse contains snobbery (I wouldn’t say “racism” per se, though Key himself was undoubtedly a racist).  No, it does not glorify war crimes.  It is a jingoistic paean to American soldiers who considered themselves to be both better soldiers and motivated by a better cause.
    Sure, it’s a little obnoxious—most good patriotic displays are.  But the real problem with “The Star Spangled Banner” is that it enthusiastically endorses the ideas that we are objectively better because we are free and that defensive violence is a natural prerogative of a free people.  It’s easy to miss that point, because we’ve had two generations of generally progressive schoolteachers indoctrinating their pupils with the idea that the song is just about a flag.
  8. Like
    mirkwood got a reaction from anatess2 in So It Begins   
    I prophesy in the name of the Lord God of Israel, unless the United States redress the wrongs committed upon the Saints in the state of Missouri and punish the crimes committed by her officers that in a few years the government will be utterly overthrown and wasted, and there will not be so much as a potsherd left, for their wickedness in permitting the murder of men, women and children, and the wholesale plunder and extermination of thousands of her citizens to go unpunished, thereby perpetrating a foul and corroding blot upon the fair fame of this great republic, the very thought of which would have caused the high-minded and patriotic framers of the Constitution of the United States to hide their faces with shame.
    ( Source: Joseph Smith, Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith 302-03)
  9. Like
    mirkwood reacted to Vort in David Bednar voices what the US socialists and communists are thinking   
    "No freedom is more important than religious freedom."
    A prophet has proclaimed this truth. Sadly, those who worship the idea of No Freedom also agree, with the wording if not with the underlying truth.
  10. Haha
    mirkwood reacted to Vort in BREAKING NEWS: Brigham Young University Cougars to change name   
    PROVO, UT (UPI)—Due to outrage from many quarters, the Brigham Young University President Kevin J. Worthen, along with the university's Board of Trustees, has announced an official change in the name of the school's representative bodies. To avoid giving offense to vulnerable populations, starting immediately, the school's sports teams are to be known as the Brigham Young University Predatory Older Women.
    (Thanks to @pam for bringing this to my attention.)
  11. Like
    mirkwood reacted to anatess2 in Lori Vallow Daybell arrested!   
    Hope you stay safe, mirk.
  12. Haha
    mirkwood reacted to MormonGator in Brigham Young statue vandalized   
    Can you ask the gods if we can sacrifice @mirkwood instead? 
  13. Like
    mirkwood got a reaction from Vort in Lori Vallow Daybell arrested!   
    I think that frequently at work.
  14. Like
    mirkwood got a reaction from Vort in Lori Vallow Daybell arrested!   
    I think that frequently at work.
  15. Thanks
    mirkwood got a reaction from Colirio in LAPD Budget   
    Mike Petchenik-WSB-TV     YetmStsteSugarpsditodayn nmats he1m0ils:u4mr1 aAorMedn  ·  JUST IN: Statement from former APD Officer, Garrett Rolfe's new criminal defense team: "I’ve been prosecuting or defending Georgians in the criminal justice system for 25 years. But never in my career have I seen a District Attorney act so unethically without regard for his professional obligations in pursuit of reelection. Twice in the past few weeks Paul Howard has put his own ambitions ahead of the good of his constituents as he seeks to capitalize on a series of national tragedies. Under Georgia’s Rule of Professional Conduct 3.8, Paul Howard is prohibited from making “extrajudicial comments that have a substantial likelihood of heightening public condemnation of the accused.” In fact, he is only permitted to inform the “pubic of the nature and extent” of his actions “that serve a legitimate law enforcement purpose.” He has violated that rule today and also made blatant false statements. He has also acted rashly, before the official investigation has been completed by the Georgia Bureau of Investigation (GBI). Had Paul Howard waited for the GBI to complete its investigation he would have learned that while Rayshard Brooks’ death was tragic, Officer Garrett Rolfe’s actions were justified under Georgia law and that there is no legal basis to charge him with 11 felonies. On June 12, 2020, Officer Brosnan responded to a call that a person was passed out in a car at a Wendy’s. Suspecting that the driver, Rayshard Brooks, was drunk, Officer Brosnan requested the assistance of an officer with specialized training in conducting DUI investigations: Officer Rolfe. The DUI investigation that followed was routine, and at the end of it, Officer Rolfe determined that he had probable cause arrest Mr. Brooks. No one is disputing that probable cause existed for Mr. Brooks’ arrest. And there is no argument that Officer Rolfe was anything other than courteous to Mr. Brooks over the course of their encounter. There is also no dispute that, up until the moment of his arrest, Mr. Brooks, too, was polite and cooperative. Suddenly, something changed. Mr. Brooks began to struggle with, and attack, both Officer Brosnan and Officer Rolfe. Under Georgia law, Mr. Brooks’ forceful resistance to arrest, and his attack on the officers, constituted felony obstruction. All Georgia citizens, including police officers, are entitled to use force to defend themselves from forcible felonies. Over the course of the encounter, Officers Brosnan and Rolfe attempted to use the least amount of force necessary to end the encounter and ensure their safety, while Mr. Brooks continued to escalate, until he at last he punched Officer Rolfe in the face, a second felony. Then, Mr. Brooks took Officer Brosnan’s TASER, a third felony. A TASER is an offensive weapon under Georgia law and has been declared to be a deadly weapon by Paul Howard; in fact, one of his investigators swore that a TASER is a deadly weapon before the Honorable Belinda Edwards on June 2, 2020. - 2 - One video shows Mr. Brooks pointing the TASER at Officer Brosnan’s head, and Officer Brosnan’s lawyer stated that Mr. Brooks shot Officer Brosnan with the TASER, a fourth felony. At that point, Officer Rolfe deployed his TASER, but it had no effect. Mr. Brooks began running through the parking lot armed with Officer Brosnan’s TASER. But he wanted to deter pursuit. So instead of continuing to run, he paused, reached back, pointed, and fired what we now know was Officer Brosnan’s TASER at Officer Rolfe; this was an additional aggravated assault, a fifth felony. Officer Rolfe heard a sound like a gunshot and saw a flash in front of him, and so he did what any officer in that situation would do: he dropped his TASER, pulled his gun, and fired it at Mr. Brooks. Mr. Brooks fell to the ground, Officer Rolfe gathered himself, and then he immediately called for EMS and began life-saving measures. That Officer Rolfe was justified is clear under Georgia law. A police officer may use deadly force to apprehend a suspected felon when the officer reasonably believes that the suspect possesses a deadly weapon or any object, device, or instrument which, when used offensively against a person, is likely to or actually does result in serious bodily injury; when the officer reasonably believes that the suspect poses an immediate threat of physical violence to the officer or others; or when there is probable cause to believe that the suspect has committed a crime involving the infliction or threatened infliction of serious physical harm. When Mr. Brooks chose to attack two officers, to disarm one of them, and to point and fire a deadly weapon at Officer Rolfe, he took their lives, and his own, into his hands. He took the risk that their justified response might be a deadly one. Nobody is here to applaud the death of Mr. Brooks. He was a father, he was a member of his community, and his death was a tragedy. But not every tragedy is a crime. Time and again in this country, we have used tragic deaths to push for new and harsher prosecutions and for less empathy for the accused. But following every sad event with yet another prosecution isn’t an end to this cycle— it is simply another aspect of its continuation. Although we can all understand the grief of Mr. Brooks’ family, Officer Rolfe’s actions were justified by the law. But Paul Howard’s choice to charge him is justified only by his hopes to improve his performance against Fani Willis in the upcoming runoff election. I will be joined by Bill Thomas of the W.H. Thomas Firm in defending Garrett Rolfe in reference to the criminal charges and we will announce the rest of our team at a later date." Noah H. Pines Ross & Pines, LLC
  16. Thanks
    mirkwood got a reaction from Colirio in LAPD Budget   
    Mike Petchenik-WSB-TV     YetmStsteSugarpsditodayn nmats he1m0ils:u4mr1 aAorMedn  ·  JUST IN: Statement from former APD Officer, Garrett Rolfe's new criminal defense team: "I’ve been prosecuting or defending Georgians in the criminal justice system for 25 years. But never in my career have I seen a District Attorney act so unethically without regard for his professional obligations in pursuit of reelection. Twice in the past few weeks Paul Howard has put his own ambitions ahead of the good of his constituents as he seeks to capitalize on a series of national tragedies. Under Georgia’s Rule of Professional Conduct 3.8, Paul Howard is prohibited from making “extrajudicial comments that have a substantial likelihood of heightening public condemnation of the accused.” In fact, he is only permitted to inform the “pubic of the nature and extent” of his actions “that serve a legitimate law enforcement purpose.” He has violated that rule today and also made blatant false statements. He has also acted rashly, before the official investigation has been completed by the Georgia Bureau of Investigation (GBI). Had Paul Howard waited for the GBI to complete its investigation he would have learned that while Rayshard Brooks’ death was tragic, Officer Garrett Rolfe’s actions were justified under Georgia law and that there is no legal basis to charge him with 11 felonies. On June 12, 2020, Officer Brosnan responded to a call that a person was passed out in a car at a Wendy’s. Suspecting that the driver, Rayshard Brooks, was drunk, Officer Brosnan requested the assistance of an officer with specialized training in conducting DUI investigations: Officer Rolfe. The DUI investigation that followed was routine, and at the end of it, Officer Rolfe determined that he had probable cause arrest Mr. Brooks. No one is disputing that probable cause existed for Mr. Brooks’ arrest. And there is no argument that Officer Rolfe was anything other than courteous to Mr. Brooks over the course of their encounter. There is also no dispute that, up until the moment of his arrest, Mr. Brooks, too, was polite and cooperative. Suddenly, something changed. Mr. Brooks began to struggle with, and attack, both Officer Brosnan and Officer Rolfe. Under Georgia law, Mr. Brooks’ forceful resistance to arrest, and his attack on the officers, constituted felony obstruction. All Georgia citizens, including police officers, are entitled to use force to defend themselves from forcible felonies. Over the course of the encounter, Officers Brosnan and Rolfe attempted to use the least amount of force necessary to end the encounter and ensure their safety, while Mr. Brooks continued to escalate, until he at last he punched Officer Rolfe in the face, a second felony. Then, Mr. Brooks took Officer Brosnan’s TASER, a third felony. A TASER is an offensive weapon under Georgia law and has been declared to be a deadly weapon by Paul Howard; in fact, one of his investigators swore that a TASER is a deadly weapon before the Honorable Belinda Edwards on June 2, 2020. - 2 - One video shows Mr. Brooks pointing the TASER at Officer Brosnan’s head, and Officer Brosnan’s lawyer stated that Mr. Brooks shot Officer Brosnan with the TASER, a fourth felony. At that point, Officer Rolfe deployed his TASER, but it had no effect. Mr. Brooks began running through the parking lot armed with Officer Brosnan’s TASER. But he wanted to deter pursuit. So instead of continuing to run, he paused, reached back, pointed, and fired what we now know was Officer Brosnan’s TASER at Officer Rolfe; this was an additional aggravated assault, a fifth felony. Officer Rolfe heard a sound like a gunshot and saw a flash in front of him, and so he did what any officer in that situation would do: he dropped his TASER, pulled his gun, and fired it at Mr. Brooks. Mr. Brooks fell to the ground, Officer Rolfe gathered himself, and then he immediately called for EMS and began life-saving measures. That Officer Rolfe was justified is clear under Georgia law. A police officer may use deadly force to apprehend a suspected felon when the officer reasonably believes that the suspect possesses a deadly weapon or any object, device, or instrument which, when used offensively against a person, is likely to or actually does result in serious bodily injury; when the officer reasonably believes that the suspect poses an immediate threat of physical violence to the officer or others; or when there is probable cause to believe that the suspect has committed a crime involving the infliction or threatened infliction of serious physical harm. When Mr. Brooks chose to attack two officers, to disarm one of them, and to point and fire a deadly weapon at Officer Rolfe, he took their lives, and his own, into his hands. He took the risk that their justified response might be a deadly one. Nobody is here to applaud the death of Mr. Brooks. He was a father, he was a member of his community, and his death was a tragedy. But not every tragedy is a crime. Time and again in this country, we have used tragic deaths to push for new and harsher prosecutions and for less empathy for the accused. But following every sad event with yet another prosecution isn’t an end to this cycle— it is simply another aspect of its continuation. Although we can all understand the grief of Mr. Brooks’ family, Officer Rolfe’s actions were justified by the law. But Paul Howard’s choice to charge him is justified only by his hopes to improve his performance against Fani Willis in the upcoming runoff election. I will be joined by Bill Thomas of the W.H. Thomas Firm in defending Garrett Rolfe in reference to the criminal charges and we will announce the rest of our team at a later date." Noah H. Pines Ross & Pines, LLC
  17. Thanks
    mirkwood got a reaction from Colirio in LAPD Budget   
    Mike Petchenik-WSB-TV     YetmStsteSugarpsditodayn nmats he1m0ils:u4mr1 aAorMedn  ·  JUST IN: Statement from former APD Officer, Garrett Rolfe's new criminal defense team: "I’ve been prosecuting or defending Georgians in the criminal justice system for 25 years. But never in my career have I seen a District Attorney act so unethically without regard for his professional obligations in pursuit of reelection. Twice in the past few weeks Paul Howard has put his own ambitions ahead of the good of his constituents as he seeks to capitalize on a series of national tragedies. Under Georgia’s Rule of Professional Conduct 3.8, Paul Howard is prohibited from making “extrajudicial comments that have a substantial likelihood of heightening public condemnation of the accused.” In fact, he is only permitted to inform the “pubic of the nature and extent” of his actions “that serve a legitimate law enforcement purpose.” He has violated that rule today and also made blatant false statements. He has also acted rashly, before the official investigation has been completed by the Georgia Bureau of Investigation (GBI). Had Paul Howard waited for the GBI to complete its investigation he would have learned that while Rayshard Brooks’ death was tragic, Officer Garrett Rolfe’s actions were justified under Georgia law and that there is no legal basis to charge him with 11 felonies. On June 12, 2020, Officer Brosnan responded to a call that a person was passed out in a car at a Wendy’s. Suspecting that the driver, Rayshard Brooks, was drunk, Officer Brosnan requested the assistance of an officer with specialized training in conducting DUI investigations: Officer Rolfe. The DUI investigation that followed was routine, and at the end of it, Officer Rolfe determined that he had probable cause arrest Mr. Brooks. No one is disputing that probable cause existed for Mr. Brooks’ arrest. And there is no argument that Officer Rolfe was anything other than courteous to Mr. Brooks over the course of their encounter. There is also no dispute that, up until the moment of his arrest, Mr. Brooks, too, was polite and cooperative. Suddenly, something changed. Mr. Brooks began to struggle with, and attack, both Officer Brosnan and Officer Rolfe. Under Georgia law, Mr. Brooks’ forceful resistance to arrest, and his attack on the officers, constituted felony obstruction. All Georgia citizens, including police officers, are entitled to use force to defend themselves from forcible felonies. Over the course of the encounter, Officers Brosnan and Rolfe attempted to use the least amount of force necessary to end the encounter and ensure their safety, while Mr. Brooks continued to escalate, until he at last he punched Officer Rolfe in the face, a second felony. Then, Mr. Brooks took Officer Brosnan’s TASER, a third felony. A TASER is an offensive weapon under Georgia law and has been declared to be a deadly weapon by Paul Howard; in fact, one of his investigators swore that a TASER is a deadly weapon before the Honorable Belinda Edwards on June 2, 2020. - 2 - One video shows Mr. Brooks pointing the TASER at Officer Brosnan’s head, and Officer Brosnan’s lawyer stated that Mr. Brooks shot Officer Brosnan with the TASER, a fourth felony. At that point, Officer Rolfe deployed his TASER, but it had no effect. Mr. Brooks began running through the parking lot armed with Officer Brosnan’s TASER. But he wanted to deter pursuit. So instead of continuing to run, he paused, reached back, pointed, and fired what we now know was Officer Brosnan’s TASER at Officer Rolfe; this was an additional aggravated assault, a fifth felony. Officer Rolfe heard a sound like a gunshot and saw a flash in front of him, and so he did what any officer in that situation would do: he dropped his TASER, pulled his gun, and fired it at Mr. Brooks. Mr. Brooks fell to the ground, Officer Rolfe gathered himself, and then he immediately called for EMS and began life-saving measures. That Officer Rolfe was justified is clear under Georgia law. A police officer may use deadly force to apprehend a suspected felon when the officer reasonably believes that the suspect possesses a deadly weapon or any object, device, or instrument which, when used offensively against a person, is likely to or actually does result in serious bodily injury; when the officer reasonably believes that the suspect poses an immediate threat of physical violence to the officer or others; or when there is probable cause to believe that the suspect has committed a crime involving the infliction or threatened infliction of serious physical harm. When Mr. Brooks chose to attack two officers, to disarm one of them, and to point and fire a deadly weapon at Officer Rolfe, he took their lives, and his own, into his hands. He took the risk that their justified response might be a deadly one. Nobody is here to applaud the death of Mr. Brooks. He was a father, he was a member of his community, and his death was a tragedy. But not every tragedy is a crime. Time and again in this country, we have used tragic deaths to push for new and harsher prosecutions and for less empathy for the accused. But following every sad event with yet another prosecution isn’t an end to this cycle— it is simply another aspect of its continuation. Although we can all understand the grief of Mr. Brooks’ family, Officer Rolfe’s actions were justified by the law. But Paul Howard’s choice to charge him is justified only by his hopes to improve his performance against Fani Willis in the upcoming runoff election. I will be joined by Bill Thomas of the W.H. Thomas Firm in defending Garrett Rolfe in reference to the criminal charges and we will announce the rest of our team at a later date." Noah H. Pines Ross & Pines, LLC
  18. Thanks
    mirkwood got a reaction from Colirio in LAPD Budget   
    Mike Petchenik-WSB-TV     YetmStsteSugarpsditodayn nmats he1m0ils:u4mr1 aAorMedn  ·  JUST IN: Statement from former APD Officer, Garrett Rolfe's new criminal defense team: "I’ve been prosecuting or defending Georgians in the criminal justice system for 25 years. But never in my career have I seen a District Attorney act so unethically without regard for his professional obligations in pursuit of reelection. Twice in the past few weeks Paul Howard has put his own ambitions ahead of the good of his constituents as he seeks to capitalize on a series of national tragedies. Under Georgia’s Rule of Professional Conduct 3.8, Paul Howard is prohibited from making “extrajudicial comments that have a substantial likelihood of heightening public condemnation of the accused.” In fact, he is only permitted to inform the “pubic of the nature and extent” of his actions “that serve a legitimate law enforcement purpose.” He has violated that rule today and also made blatant false statements. He has also acted rashly, before the official investigation has been completed by the Georgia Bureau of Investigation (GBI). Had Paul Howard waited for the GBI to complete its investigation he would have learned that while Rayshard Brooks’ death was tragic, Officer Garrett Rolfe’s actions were justified under Georgia law and that there is no legal basis to charge him with 11 felonies. On June 12, 2020, Officer Brosnan responded to a call that a person was passed out in a car at a Wendy’s. Suspecting that the driver, Rayshard Brooks, was drunk, Officer Brosnan requested the assistance of an officer with specialized training in conducting DUI investigations: Officer Rolfe. The DUI investigation that followed was routine, and at the end of it, Officer Rolfe determined that he had probable cause arrest Mr. Brooks. No one is disputing that probable cause existed for Mr. Brooks’ arrest. And there is no argument that Officer Rolfe was anything other than courteous to Mr. Brooks over the course of their encounter. There is also no dispute that, up until the moment of his arrest, Mr. Brooks, too, was polite and cooperative. Suddenly, something changed. Mr. Brooks began to struggle with, and attack, both Officer Brosnan and Officer Rolfe. Under Georgia law, Mr. Brooks’ forceful resistance to arrest, and his attack on the officers, constituted felony obstruction. All Georgia citizens, including police officers, are entitled to use force to defend themselves from forcible felonies. Over the course of the encounter, Officers Brosnan and Rolfe attempted to use the least amount of force necessary to end the encounter and ensure their safety, while Mr. Brooks continued to escalate, until he at last he punched Officer Rolfe in the face, a second felony. Then, Mr. Brooks took Officer Brosnan’s TASER, a third felony. A TASER is an offensive weapon under Georgia law and has been declared to be a deadly weapon by Paul Howard; in fact, one of his investigators swore that a TASER is a deadly weapon before the Honorable Belinda Edwards on June 2, 2020. - 2 - One video shows Mr. Brooks pointing the TASER at Officer Brosnan’s head, and Officer Brosnan’s lawyer stated that Mr. Brooks shot Officer Brosnan with the TASER, a fourth felony. At that point, Officer Rolfe deployed his TASER, but it had no effect. Mr. Brooks began running through the parking lot armed with Officer Brosnan’s TASER. But he wanted to deter pursuit. So instead of continuing to run, he paused, reached back, pointed, and fired what we now know was Officer Brosnan’s TASER at Officer Rolfe; this was an additional aggravated assault, a fifth felony. Officer Rolfe heard a sound like a gunshot and saw a flash in front of him, and so he did what any officer in that situation would do: he dropped his TASER, pulled his gun, and fired it at Mr. Brooks. Mr. Brooks fell to the ground, Officer Rolfe gathered himself, and then he immediately called for EMS and began life-saving measures. That Officer Rolfe was justified is clear under Georgia law. A police officer may use deadly force to apprehend a suspected felon when the officer reasonably believes that the suspect possesses a deadly weapon or any object, device, or instrument which, when used offensively against a person, is likely to or actually does result in serious bodily injury; when the officer reasonably believes that the suspect poses an immediate threat of physical violence to the officer or others; or when there is probable cause to believe that the suspect has committed a crime involving the infliction or threatened infliction of serious physical harm. When Mr. Brooks chose to attack two officers, to disarm one of them, and to point and fire a deadly weapon at Officer Rolfe, he took their lives, and his own, into his hands. He took the risk that their justified response might be a deadly one. Nobody is here to applaud the death of Mr. Brooks. He was a father, he was a member of his community, and his death was a tragedy. But not every tragedy is a crime. Time and again in this country, we have used tragic deaths to push for new and harsher prosecutions and for less empathy for the accused. But following every sad event with yet another prosecution isn’t an end to this cycle— it is simply another aspect of its continuation. Although we can all understand the grief of Mr. Brooks’ family, Officer Rolfe’s actions were justified by the law. But Paul Howard’s choice to charge him is justified only by his hopes to improve his performance against Fani Willis in the upcoming runoff election. I will be joined by Bill Thomas of the W.H. Thomas Firm in defending Garrett Rolfe in reference to the criminal charges and we will announce the rest of our team at a later date." Noah H. Pines Ross & Pines, LLC
  19. Like
    mirkwood reacted to Carborendum in Conflating Patriotism, Party Loyalty, and Faith   
    The thing to understand here is that she was not here to "discuss" anything.  She was here to air her grievances unfettered and unchallenged. 
    When she found that she'd (gasp!) actually have to defend her position with more than just blanket statements, rhetoric, and straw men, her only explanation for such a response was that we must simply be too blinded by the Orange Man's bluster to hear the unfettered truth as it dripped from her golden tongue.
    In other words:  We're just a bunch of mindless followers.
  20. Like
    mirkwood reacted to Vort in Conflating Patriotism, Party Loyalty, and Faith   
    My friend, there has been plenty of defensiveness on this thread. Almost all of it has come from you. You need to drop the defensiveness and engage in conversation. People here will be far more impressed with your ability to discuss topics and bring up relevant facts and observations than they will be with your status as a nurse/sociologist.
    But having said that, I asked you two very honest questions about "flatten the curve" that your nursing/sociological background might actually be relevant in answering. I would be interested to read what you have to say on that topic.
  21. Like
    mirkwood reacted to NeuroTypical in Conflating Patriotism, Party Loyalty, and Faith   
    I was born into a world that valued the office of President in terms of moral or ethical role model.  Nixon was an exception to the rule, and his party turned on him over watergate.   
    Then Clinton had oral sex in the oval office and lied under oath, was impeached and disbarred.  The number of Americans who expect "presidential" behavior to be a good role model, fell drastically.  I watched half the country shrug it off as if it was no biggie.  I watched his wife defend him out of political expediency.  
    I don't like many things about Trump, his past behaviors, his divisiveness, and some other things.  I also am aware that the "mainstream media" has been in full-on fake news attack mode for 3 years, and people who get their news from such sources, well, the term "brainwashed" isn't as sensational or out-in-left-field as it used to be.  
     
  22. Like
    mirkwood reacted to Vort in Conflating Patriotism, Party Loyalty, and Faith   
    That 58% of Latter-day Saints support Donald Trump does not imply that they "overlook[] his very unchristian behaviors". That is purely your own inference. In my judgment, it is a faulty and false inference.
    If I support Donald Trump, that does not mean that I have "overlook[ed] his very unchristian behaviors." Rather, it means that, given the potential presidential candidates we have before us, I have judged him on the balance to be the best possible (or likely) candidate to be the US President.
    This is not a difficult or particularly subtle distinction to make. On the contrary, even the Book of Mormon explicitly makes a similar distinction, describing the Jaredite king Morianton as a man who "did do justice unto the people, but not unto himself because of his many whoredoms; wherefore he was cut off from the presence of the Lord." It is entirely possible to perceive a man's wickedness yet still acknowledge him as an effective ruler.
  23. Like
    mirkwood reacted to Jane_Doe in Conflating Patriotism, Party Loyalty, and Faith   
    That is fair.
    58% of members in Utah.  Only ~13% of members live in Utah.  
    Now of that small subgroup, what percentage of them are simply going with the lesser evil of their choices?    Obviously that's not a number we have quantified, but it is an important point to remember.  
    That's an unreasonable extrapolation.  It's possible for a person to think he's done a decent job, but also acknowledge that he's a very flawed character (I think Carb would be in that category).  
     
    Let's also remember that a loud supporter is...well loud.  And tend to take a very disproportional amount of the spotlight.   There are many many people whom are quiet and hence tend to just get overlooked.
  24. Haha
    mirkwood got a reaction from Vort in It's hard to stay non-partisan in a heavily polarized environment   
    Crap, four hours too late.
  25. Like
    mirkwood got a reaction from Carborendum in LAPD Budget   
    I've thought of this many times.