quote:

Originally posted by BamaJeepster:
Good luck in Louisville!

Anyone with any brain cells NOT see this coming?

quote:

Originally posted by 83v45magna:

quote:

Originally posted by sigfreund:

quote:

Originally posted by Skins2881:
It has one of the best descriptions of the event, best quality video, and angles that were not previously shown/posted.

Well worth the 11 min watch.

Yes, it does; and yes, it is.

I just tried it and it will not play. Doesn't say it was taken off, it just says it may be offensive to some viewers. But it wont play. Searched the title on BitChute but it's not on there.

YouTube restricted the video for content. Once again, the tech overlords have decreed they will do everything they can to impede you and I from knowing what really happened in Kenosha that night, and this video clearly laid out that Rittenhouse acted in self defense. Just more ideological censorship by big tech.

quote:

YouTube restricted the video for content. Once again, the tech overlords have decreed they will do everything they can to impede you and I from knowing what really happened in Kenosha that night, and this video clearly laid out that Rittenhouse acted in self defense. Just more ideological censorship by big t

While they flagged the video, it still plays, at least for me. It gives me an "I understand and wish to proceed" box, but it still plays, at least they didn't take it down.

Yep just click the button that says you don't care about graphic content. Might want to try before it's completely banned.

quote:

Originally posted by Skins2881:
Yep just click the button that says you don't care about graphic content. Might want to try before it's completely banned.

Just notice you can no longer share the video or link to it as normal, and whoever is attempting to view it must be signed into YouTube to watch it, unlike the continual stream of police violence videos which are available to everyone.

I checked and I did not have 'resricted mode' on. I turned it on, then the control disappeared. I closed the browser and reopened it, went into YT and disabled restricted mode. It still won't play on YT after clicking the content disclaimer. The play '>' symbol is always present. When playing it should show a pause symbol. This never happens.

It will however play here on SigForum through the linked post above. Strange huh? So I did get to see it.
I'm sure it's all just a big misunderstanding at YouTube and not some general intentional difficulty thrown in to discourage viewing content they are about to remove anyway.

Sure.

quote:

Originally posted by BamaJeepster:
Good luck in Louisville!

Good luck, Louisville. I'm making popcorn.

Another source for the Rittenhouse video:

American Partisan

Silent

Kentucky AG: "Mob Justice is Not Justice"
Burn Loot Murder Is Already Pulling Out Their Guns in Louisville

One (former) cop was indicted for multiple counts of "wanton endangerment." The two (former) detectives were not indicted.

That wasn't enough for the Burn Loot Murder mob.

They're getting an early start on terrorist violence -- they're starting before Sundown Joe Biden has even called a lid on the day!

http://ace.mu.nu/

https://www.whas11.com/article...3iE-t7SVIXN3xbOKhhv4

As expected, only charges are against the already terminated detective that fired his weapon from outside, which impacted into an adjacent apartment where others were located. The other two officers were justified in shooting.

The detective that was shot suffered gunshot wound to thigh which hit his femoral artery, which required 5 hours of surgery and blood transfusions in hospital; not the “non-life threatening flesh wound“ that the news media would have you believe.

Several local Target stores, and a Kroger grocery that was previously looted, have boarded up with plywood and jersey barricaded entrances.

Currently, protestors are meander marching around the central part of City with no known destination apparent. Just a couple of garbage cans ignited during daylight.

Metro Louisville is under a curfew from 9:00pm to 6:30am for the next 72 hours. I fully expect that once sunset occurs, all hell will break loose.

Roiters mobilizing in Ky.
Crowd getting bigger rioters carrying bats and 2x4's.

https://youtu.be/-GhQ0AuAghY

.

Shelby Talcot is there, she covers a lot of riots and does a great job. One of her videos shows a parked U Haul that opens up and starts passing out signs, shields, etc. All the usual antifa riot gear. These dirtbags are organized and looking to case mayhem.


Shelby Talcott Twitter

Currently, Hannity is droning on about this being a no-knock warrant, at the wrong address, and that Breonna Taylor was shit 8 times.

There's a reason I have quit listening to this twatwaffle, best I can tell the above details all being wrong, is part of that reason... Am I wrong about these details?

quote:

Originally posted by mbinky:
One of her videos shows a parked U Haul that opens up and starts passing out signs, shields, etc. All the usual antifa riot gear. These dirtbags are organized and looking to case mayhem.

Hope someone gets the license plate number, tracks it down, and traces who provided the funding for renting it. Until those with deep pockets who are funding the violence (possibly Soros?) are found and charged, the rioters will continue their destruction.

quote:

Originally posted by comet24:

quote:

Originally posted by sigfreund:

quote:

Originally posted by Veeper:
I'm curious as to whether I'm to feel a certain way ...?

Well, then, take it as the question I asked: Does anyone reading it still believe that the police don’t prevent crimes by their actions? Don’t recent, and not-so-recent events like the ones in Ferguson or Baltimore demonstrate what happens in societies when the laws are enforced poorly or not at all and the actions of the police are based more on the shifting winds of politics rather than the laws themselves?

A question isn’t supposed to make anyone feel a certain way, but rather—if they are interested, of course—to answer if it applies to them or at least to ponder when posed on a discussion forum like this one. And I don’t know how many members here share the belief that police don’t prevent crimes, but I suspect it’s more than the one who had the courage of his convictions to post it here. If I am correct, then one of the purposes of my comment was to give them something to think about.

quote:

belief that police don’t prevent crimes,

FWIW I never said that and don't believe that. I know your comment was general and I'm going to comment on it in a general sense I just wanted to make that clear before someone assumes something about this post.

I think the rise is a crime is more a shift in political agendas then police not wanting to prevent crime. Politicians in some places are making it extremely difficult to enforce laws and thus prevent crime. When criminals realize that that they can get away with committing crimes they are going to commit more crimes. You will never stop all crime but there is a group of people that have no issue hurting others either by violence or theft but are kept somewhat in check knowing they do not want to give up their freedom and spend time in jail. As the threat of consequents goes down crime is going up.

More on police preventing crimes. Again of course they do prevent crime but expecting a police officer to be standing near you when someone decides to rob or hurt you is foolish. Just like thinking because you have taken a defensive driving class you don't need to wear a seat belt. Everyone should take steps to protect themselves and their property. We should also support our LEO by giving them the tools to do there job. Those tools are both gear and equipment and also support by judges, politicians, and the public that is willing to deal with the bad elements.

The police and the criminal justice system DO prevent crimes, IF they're provided with the resources to insure that violations of the law are dealt with in a decisive and proper manner. Look at the huge reduction in violent as well as property crime rates (thus indicating prevention of crimes) as a result of law such as "Use a Gun-Go to Prison" and "Three Strikes."

When "third strike" felons were either intimidated by the increased risk of serious crime or taken off the street due to recidivist acts, the general public was safer. In California as well as other states that had similar laws and utilized them, the public enjoyed historically low rates of victimization. What changed that? The decriminalization of narcotics possession, usage, and the "restorative justice" mantra of Leftist legislators who in effect neutered "Three Strikes", and reduced or eliminated penalties for violent and property crimes in an effort to empty prisons of offenders. Violations of law such as Assault with a Deadly Weapon, certain sexual assaults, petty theft with prior convictions for same, possession of stolen firearms by convicted felons, and other crimes were reduced to "non-serious" offenses that required almost immediate release from custody on a written promise to appear in court (citation).

When you consider the effect on those habitually involved in crime (such as addicts that steal for the purpose of buying drugs and other "necessities" they aren't capable of obtaining through employment), why should they change? There's no incentive to enter or successfully complete rehab programs, since there's no "downside" to continuing the lifestyle. This is why (in CA) the "Drug Court" program (that proved so successful before the Left decriminalized drug use and possession) was rendered useless and the failure rate of other rehabilitation programs (funded by the state) are astronomical.

As to the misunderstanding of WHY the police aren't personally liable to protect individuals (barring a "special relationship"): Read the actual case law. Police officers have a general duty to assist/protect the public, but no one individual can claim that their protection can and should have priority over that of any other citizen(s). Cops don't have a crystal ball to predict where, when, and by whom crimes will occur, but as an essential part of the justice system, they serve the good of "The People" at large by being proactive as well as reactive.

Having an ability to protect yourself and family with a firearm, doesn't mean that you can prevent the burglary of your home when you're away at work or elsewhere. Taking addict/burglars off the street, having the ability to respond quickly to reported burglaries, and following up on leads of burglaries does result in both convictions of offenders, recovery of stolen property, and taking burglars of the street.

Carrying concealed doesn't mean you can protect family members when they're outside your immediate presence, or that you can defend yourself from all types of violent threats. (ie: Having a CCW doesn't mean shit, when a DUI driver runs over you in a marked crosswalk, because de-funded police departments can't afford to have officers out looking for impaired drivers and those who commit DUIs recognize the lack of consequences for driving that way.) It's good to have the ability to respond to immediate threats (a CCW), but that in now way lessens the overall necessity to have a police presence in any civilized society.

I notice about every block or 2 water bottles are handed out. Yes, they are organized.

Live in Louisville, Fox News




Link to original video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?...ab_channel=FOX10News

quote:

Originally posted by stoic-one:
Currently, Hannity is droning on about this being a no-knock warrant, at the wrong address, and that Breonna Taylor was shit 8 times.

There's a reason I have quit listening to this twatwaffle, best I can tell the above details all being wrong, is part of that reason... Am I wrong about these details?

(from what I read awhile back) It was a "no-knock", but officers voice announced several times, and knocked, they breached after shots fired from inside through the door.

quote:

Originally posted by Greymann:
Roiters mobilizing in Ky.
Crowd getting bigger rioters carrying bats and 2x4's.

https://youtu.be/-GhQ0AuAghY

.

Livestream from FOX.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NhJ-U5S9bCg

Ugh...Geraldo just described her as America's sweetheart who was a hero...Emergency Room Technician...wonder of this woman's life...man...the quotes just keep coming from this guy.

Hold on - I thought I read that she was pretty involved with the drug dealer and even mixed up in some of his illegal activities? Am I dreaming that up?

Getting warmed up in Lancaster Pa.
LEO had to shoot some guy with a knife at a domestic call. Facts aren't even in and blm has called out the terrorists.

.