Now I must be going really crazy. When I say I don't understand why she was shot in the head, it's not as though I think she should have been shot in the chest. Not even that she should have been shot in the leg.
My disbelief revolves around her being shot at all. Do police not carry batons? Pepper spray? Tasers? Just guns? When all you have is a gun, every suspect looks like a firing range target.
My disbelief revolves around her being shot at all. Do police not carry batons? Pepper spray? Tasers? Just guns? When all you have is a gun, every suspect looks like a firing range target.
That's the thing - apparently, they DO have tazers, and batons. And hell, it's a person just been in a car accident cruising around probably concussed who isn't visibly armed, and tackle them to the floor?
That's the thing - apparently, they DO have tazers, and batons. And hell, it's a person just been in a car accident cruising around probably concussed who isn't visibly armed, and tackle them to the floor?
Or, you know, just follow her until she runs out of steam? I have been to DC and you can't shake a stick without hitting a law enforcement officer (bad analogy). There are like two dozen whole law enforcement agencies operating in and around the White House / Capitol area.
Now I'm just imaginging a ring of cops just linking hands and not touching her, but forming a ring around her, and just following her that way, singing ring-a-ring-a-rosie. If you can't shoot 'em, confuse the shit out of 'em.
I'm not arguing that she should have been shot in the chest, I'm only saying that she was shot in the head, against standard police policy as far as I know, seems to imply that it was done out of anger and not necessity in the first place.
There's definitely still a lot missing in the reports.
One thing I read is that she reached speeds of 80mph during the chase, and we're not talking about a highway. Considering it would be pretty easy for her to kill someone, even by accident at that speed, wouldn't that alone justify deadly force to stop her?
To me, the SHOOTING seems to imply the shooting was done either out of anger or bad training, regardless of the final wound. America isn't scary because of the guns, it's scary because of the blithe acceptance of guns.
There's definitely still a lot missing in the reports.
One thing I read is that she reached speeds of 80mph during the chase, and we're not talking about a highway. Considering it would be pretty easy for her to kill someone, even by accident at that speed, wouldn't that alone justify deadly force to stop her?
They used deadly force after her car had come to a stop. At that point, is shooting her in the head the best way to stop her from hypothetically killing other people in the future? Should EVERYONE who might kill someone by driving too fast in the future be shot in the head? It's like the Bush doctrine in a weirdly small scale.
To me, the SHOOTING seems to imply the shooting was done either out of anger or bad training, regardless of the final wound. America isn't scary because of the guns, it's scary because of the blithe acceptance of guns.
I absolutely agree with this, but I still think the location of the shot makes it more damning, in light of that acceptance. Maybe you have to be a warped American to understand.
I was watching Fox news while running for a bit, and I wouldn't be surprised if Republicans started to toe the republican line more then they have been. It's actually bizarro world over there right now.
Due to the "everyone should feel the pain" goal of the (Democrats?) Public opinion appears to be shifting and this is becoming Obama's shutdown.
It seemed bound to backfire to me. It seemed extremely disingenuous.
While I can understand the strategy behind the idea the actual tacticle methods used to implement the strategy have been extremely obvious and counterproductive. It's one thing to say, "sorry but due to budget problems we have to closed this staffed location to the public." It is quite another to say," since the staffed locations have been closed we will close every single location we possibly can and even expend more man power to keep these places close than we ever spent keeping them open."
Same goes for websites that went dark in time with the shutdown. I would expect any part of a website that requires a staffer to go dark but otherwise I expect to see a site with no updates since the beginning of the shutdown. Redirecting to a childish shutdown splash page required effort.
It requires less effort than maintaining enough servers to handle a non-static web page. These aren't servers that can keep running without oversight.
Then image them before the shutdown and let the public see them degrade in real time.
Same goes for the open air monuments and the national mall. Rather than close just focus on the impact of all those visitors and no people working to clean up.
“What we are looking at here again is an administration and president that seems to be unwilling to sit down and talk to us,” House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) bemoaned at a press conference on Saturday morning.
While Cantor is right that Democrats aren't exactly in the talking mood, the suggestion that they aren’t wiling to negotiate ignores that they’ve already given Republicans a major win. The continuing resolution that the White House and congressional Democrats have agreed to funds the government at sequestration levels. And even some members of Cantor's own caucus admit that they got the good end of that deal.
“It is a concession, I acknowledge that,” Rep. Doug Lamborn (R-Colo.) told The Huffington Post on Saturday. “I was glad to see that lower number. It didn’t take defense spending into account. We still have a big discrepancy between the House and Senate version. But there has been some compromise and I acknowledge that.”
(Lamborn, for what it's worth, is no centrist. He signed on to a letter saying a government shutdown was preferable to the implementation of Obamacare.)
Comments
My disbelief revolves around her being shot at all. Do police not carry batons? Pepper spray? Tasers? Just guns? When all you have is a gun, every suspect looks like a firing range target.
There's definitely still a lot missing in the reports.
One thing I read is that she reached speeds of 80mph during the chase, and we're not talking about a highway. Considering it would be pretty easy for her to kill someone, even by accident at that speed, wouldn't that alone justify deadly force to stop her?
Same goes for websites that went dark in time with the shutdown. I would expect any part of a website that requires a staffer to go dark but otherwise I expect to see a site with no updates since the beginning of the shutdown. Redirecting to a childish shutdown splash page required effort.
Same goes for the open air monuments and the national mall. Rather than close just focus on the impact of all those visitors and no people working to clean up.
Government shuts down Florida Bay. 1,100 square miles of open ocean shut down.
EDIT: OK, they look fringey too...
“What we are looking at here again is an administration and president that seems to be unwilling to sit down and talk to us,” House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) bemoaned at a press conference on Saturday morning.
While Cantor is right that Democrats aren't exactly in the talking mood, the suggestion that they aren’t wiling to negotiate ignores that they’ve already given Republicans a major win. The continuing resolution that the White House and congressional Democrats have agreed to funds the government at sequestration levels. And even some members of Cantor's own caucus admit that they got the good end of that deal.
“It is a concession, I acknowledge that,” Rep. Doug Lamborn (R-Colo.) told The Huffington Post on Saturday. “I was glad to see that lower number. It didn’t take defense spending into account. We still have a big discrepancy between the House and Senate version. But there has been some compromise and I acknowledge that.”
(Lamborn, for what it's worth, is no centrist. He signed on to a letter saying a government shutdown was preferable to the implementation of Obamacare.)