Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Cboldt
I think the police official police line will be to deny any attempt or effort to burn the structure.

I tend to agree - the intent was to dispense teargas, so the fire was a byproduct. They're technically telling the truth.

But, even if the intent was to burn him out - what was the alternative? Wait until he killed a few more law officers or citizens? They didn't know what kind of fire power he had. Suppose he'd had some RPGs or SAMs and launched one or more before he could be stopped? The weeping and gnashing of teeth would then have been why didn't the police do something sooner!

If "we the people" stop supporting our police forces and armed services personnel, why should they continue to put their lives on the line for us???

It's for THAT reason that all of us God-loving, patriotic Americans need to go out of our way to thank those who truly serve us.

267 posted on 02/14/2013 11:37:55 AM PST by jda ("Righteousness exalts a nation . . .")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies ]


To: jda
-- They're technically telling the truth. --

I think they are lying, when they say they did not intend for the structure to catch fire.

-- But, even if the intent was to burn him out - what was the alternative? Wait until he killed a few more law officers or citizens? --

I don't know the lay of the land, but if we believe that the police were able to circumvent his attempt to escape and evade, then an alternative is to wait. The technique for preventing the target from hitting others is to stay behind cover, and the means to protect citizens is to deny them access to the area. Both of these techniques are in common use, and are the usual technique. Resorting to arson is not unheard of, but I know of no case where the police admitted to an attempted arson.

-- If "we the people" stop supporting our police forces and armed services personnel, why should they continue to put their lives on the line for us? --

Hmmm. I'd ask why the people are withholding their support. If the police and armed forces are seem as hostile to the people (by the people), then, by definition, the police and armed forces are putting their lives on the line for an entity other than "the people."

At some point, breakdown of trust becomes a problem. I'm slow to assign blame for the breakdown to "the people." "The people" are more numerous, and don't have direct control over the police or armed forces. For example, I don't blame "the people" for the fact that Obama is a lying sociopath. My mistrust of Obama is driven by his actions, not by mine.

287 posted on 02/14/2013 12:15:40 PM PST by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 267 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson