PDA

View Full Version : So, about the guy who killed the two cops in NYC......



Lanie
12-22-2014, 11:14 AM
Do I think that people who protest in favor of killing officers are horrible? Yes. I don't think this is the majority of activists, but they do need to be watched. But this alone is not why this guy killed them. People need the facts about this killer before blaming the entire "Black Lives Matter" movement. This man had a long history. His own mother was afraid of him. It's AP, so I'll just post the link for now.

http://news.yahoo.com/2-cops-ambushed-fatally-shot-car-gunman-kills-081050294.html?soc_src=mediacontentstory&soc_trk=fb

Unless of course people still continue to act like it's all the fault of some activists instead of this guy being nuts. Then, I'll find another article I can copy and paste.

NJCardFan
12-22-2014, 11:27 AM
Do I think that people who protest in favor of killing officers are horrible? Yes. I don't think this is the majority of activists, but they do need to be watched. But this alone is not why this guy killed them. People need the facts about this killer before blaming the entire "Black Lives Matter" movement. This man had a long history. His own mother was afraid of him. It's AP, so I'll just post the link for now.

http://news.yahoo.com/2-cops-ambushed-fatally-shot-car-gunman-kills-081050294.html?soc_src=mediacontentstory&soc_trk=fb

Unless of course people still continue to act like it's all the fault of some activists instead of this guy being nuts. Then, I'll find another article I can copy and paste.

Um, he stated as much as to why he killed them.

Lanie
12-22-2014, 12:07 PM
Um, he stated as much as to why he killed them.

You do know his history right? He was a complete wackjob with a LOOOOOOOONG criminal history.

I remember when people shot abortion doctors, the pro-life movement got blamed even though it was one wackjob. Like the pro-life movement, I do see people in this one condemning violence. Somehow, wackjobs get more attention in the media and always have.

onlinebiker
12-22-2014, 12:21 PM
Want to see racism?? Look to the bozos carrying a "Black Lives Matter" sign....

Why is that racism???

Simple.....

If there was NO racism - the sign would say "Lives Matter".

They want to make it all about skin color.

Lanie
12-22-2014, 12:34 PM
Want to see racism?? Look to the bozos carrying a "Black Lives Matter" sign....

Why is that racism???

Simple.....

If there was NO racism - the sign would say "Lives Matter".

They want to make it all about skin color.

It's based on the belief that blacks are unfairly targeted to be killed by cops. When people hold up signs saying "Police Lives Matter," do they only mean that they only care if cops live?

In any case, did you notice the cops killed were not white? Interesting.

Dori
12-22-2014, 12:37 PM
You do know his history right? He was a complete wackjob with a LOOOOOOOONG criminal history.


I happen to think anyone who can commit murder has a screw loose, unless it's done out of self defense. Hatred is what killed these cops.

Have you ever heard of the Muslim street? That's kind of what we have going on here.

Lanie
12-22-2014, 01:41 PM
I happen to think anyone who can commit murder has a screw loose, unless it's done out of self defense. Hatred is what killed these cops.

Have you ever heard of the Muslim street? That's kind of what we have going on here.

Here's what I'm seeing. You have a group of people concerned about police brutality. A lot of them are good people. But honest, a shitload of them are far left lunatics that could probably care less about the cause. They will advocate violence and do what it takes to get a point across. Every cause has its extremists. It was this way during the anti-war movement, the pro-Palestinian movement, the first civil rights movement, the pro-life movement, the environmental movement, etc. Labeling a whole group of people as evil is what got us into this mess. We're not going to make cops safer by labeling all protesters as violent.

I watched the news about a protest near where I lived the other day. A black protester got up on TV and said how terrible it was to kill the cops because there are still a whole lot of good police officers. This is more of the attitude we need shown. I don't believe all cops are violent and I don't believe all protesters are either.

NJCardFan
12-22-2014, 01:43 PM
You do know his history right? He was a complete wackjob with a LOOOOOOOONG criminal history.

I remember when people shot abortion doctors, the pro-life movement got blamed even though it was one wackjob. Like the pro-life movement, I do see people in this one condemning violence. Somehow, wackjobs get more attention in the media and always have.

Don't give a flip about his history. I know he was a gang banger. His direct motivation was the death of Garner. He said as much.

NJCardFan
12-22-2014, 01:51 PM
It's based on the belief that blacks are unfairly targeted to be killed by cops. When people hold up signs saying "Police Lives Matter," do they only mean that they only care if cops live?

In any case, did you notice the cops killed were not white? Interesting.

The difference being, of course, that there's no #killblacks or there are no marches with people chanting, "What do we want(dead blacks!), When do we want them(now!). Cops, when they shoot someone, it's always, let me repeat that a little louder, ALWAYS during some kind of apprehension situation. This was an out and out murder in the 1st degree. As for the race of the cops killed, the killer wanted to kill cops and these 2 presented the first opportunity.

Apache
12-22-2014, 04:14 PM
You do know his history right? He was a complete wackjob with a LOOOOOOOONG criminal history.

I remember when people shot abortion doctors, the pro-life movement got blamed even though it was one wackjob. Like the pro-life movement, I do see people in this one condemning violence. Somehow, wackjobs get more attention in the media and always have.

Totally wrong analogy Lanie. First off when those doctors were killed, the powers that be, in the pro-life movement, were quick to denounce and distance themselves from such actions. They didn't chant in the street calling for those murders. Sharpton was the one leading the "What do we want..." march. Did he denounce or condemn the chant? What about the Mayor? The "Justice Dept"? Where's our dear "Leader"?

Now Lanie, don't get me wrong, I too have seen Blacks condemning these murders and assaults AND riots.... They are NOT the recognized leadership (ie. mouthpieces) for the Black "community".

Elspeth
12-22-2014, 04:48 PM
Do I think that people who protest in favor of killing officers are horrible? Yes. I don't think this is the majority of activists, but they do need to be watched. But this alone is not why this guy killed them. People need the facts about this killer before blaming the entire "Black Lives Matter" movement. This man had a long history. His own mother was afraid of him. It's AP, so I'll just post the link for now.

http://news.yahoo.com/2-cops-ambushed-fatally-shot-car-gunman-kills-081050294.html?soc_src=mediacontentstory&soc_trk=fb

Unless of course people still continue to act like it's all the fault of some activists instead of this guy being nuts. Then, I'll find another article I can copy and paste.

OK, kiddo,

Let's do a little lesson in how to read a news article.

Start with the first paragraph:


NEW YORK (AP) — The gunman who fatally ambushed two police officers in their squad car had a long criminal record, a hatred for police and the government and an apparent history of mental instability that included an attempt to hang himself a year ago, authorities said Sunday.


You have neglected the first two adjectives and these are proven facts: the criminal record is easily accessible and his hatred for the police was all over his Facebook page. (If you haven't seen the screen shots, google them. They're easily found.) So that's what we have actual evidence for.

Now for more evidence:

Your article states:


Investigators were trying to determine if Brinsley had taken part in any protests over the deaths of Michael Brown and Eric Garner, whose names he invoked in his online threat, or simply latched on to the cause for the final act in a violent rampage.

Now, the fine journalists at Yahoo neglected to check other sources that actually verified that the shooter was, in fact, a protestor:



http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2882105/Two-New-York-police-officers-shot-Brooklyn.html#i-5263f4024b93e8d2

Another member of the group, Paul Yawney, said Brinsley took part in the recent anti-police protests.

Yawney said: ‘He posted motivational stuff on Instagram and went to the protests. I think this really came as a shock to a lot of us.

I only post this to point out to you that Yahoo did not do direct research on Brinsley. This article with the information about the protests (The Daily Mail) was published early yesterday, is easily found on the net, and the names of Brinsley's friends are stated clearly. If Yahoo was even a little journalistic, they should have checked this out.

Now let's go back to the article:


They said he traveled frequently between the South and New York, where he fathered a child in Brooklyn, and had been in the city earlier in the week

This is not some helpless loon. This is a guy who was capable enough to travel from Baltimore to New York on a regular basis to see his kid. Surely, had he been acting CRRAZZY on the Greyhound bus, that would have been noticed. The bus company would have records and the police, who have a vested interest in vilifying this guy, would be spreading that info around. So he must have appeared civilized and controlled enough to travel on a 5 hour bus ride from Baltimore to NY City on a regular basis.

Now, back to the article, and to--VERY IMPORTANT--a sleight of hand that occurs here:


Brinsley, 28, had at least 19 arrests in Georgia and Ohio, spent two years in prison for gun possession and had a troubled childhood so violent that his mother was afraid of him, police said. He ranted online about police and the government and expressed "self-despair and anger at himself and where his life was," Boyce said.

Now why did I color code this?

Because the red portions are about his adult life, and the green portion is about his childhood. See how the article weaved these together?

So what do you have? As an adult Brinsley was arrested 19 times. That works out to be 2-3 times a year from the time he was 18. Remember he spent 2 years in prison and this is an adult arrest record: so he had 19 arrests in 8 years, approximately 2.7 arrests per year. Mental illness is not mentioned in connection with any of these arrests. There were lots of thefts among them, but you don't have to be mentally ill to rob a store.

We also know that--AS AN ADULT-he ranted online. Who doesn't? Does ranting on line about hating the police or hating your life mean that you are mentally ill? If so, then lots and lots of Facebook and Twitter users are mentally ill. LOL! He is 28 years old, and young people in this age group are used to venting on line--under their own names.

Now you might say that threatening to kill cops on Facebook--which he did, right before he traveled to NY this week--is a sign of mental illness. But without independent verification of a specific mental illness,--a diagnosis, a record of recently taken meds, etc-- there is NO WAY to decide whether Brinsley's rantings on Facebook are mental illness or just rage. Remember, sane people have rage. Sane people can kill in a rage. Think about domestic violence. Anger can take you over. And Obama, Holder, Sharpton and deBlasio have been stoking that rage for weeks.

Also remember that Brinsley managed to get a gun, get himself on a bus, get into NY City, find two cops sitting in a patrol car, and shoot them execution style. He didn't just start shooting in a crazy fashion. His shots were very deliberately and done carefully, with stealth. Neither cop had time to resist or reach for a gun. Certainly Brinsley's critical faculties were working well to accomplish that kind of shooting.

Now. Look back at the GREEN portion above. That portion is about his childhood.


had a troubled childhood so violent that his mother was afraid of him

This information could only have come from his mother. There is no independent verification. His mother basically said that he was a violent kid, so violent she was afraid of him. He may have also been troubled, but we don't know if that the mother's word or Yahoo's word. If it's Yahoo's word, it's useless. We have already seen that Yahoo is sloppy in the writing of its articles, as in not fact checking (see above). Even if the mother said "troubled" that would simply be her own interpretation of his violent behavior. (No mother wants to believe she's raised a psychopath.)

The one thing we do get is that the mother was afraid of him because he was violent.

What Yahoo does--irresponsibly or by design--is weave the word "troubled" in with his adult experiences. Considering the NY Times article from yesterday, which also tries to paint Brinsely as "mentally ill" without actual proof, I will assume that Yahoo's interweaving of the adult life and childhood is a deliberate attempt to SUGGEST mental illness as a cause for the shooting without actually saying so directly.

But remember, we still have no proof of mental illness.

Next:


Boyce said Brinsley's mother believed he had undiagnosed mental problems and may have been on medication at some point, but detectives were still trying to determine if he had a mental illness.

Here again, this is Brinsley's mother stating a belief: "Brinsley's mother believed he had undiagnosed mental problems."

Any mother whose kid has just shot two cops and then himself is going to want to believe he was mentally ill. But there is still no proof, no medical records, no diagnosis, etc. THERE IS NO EVIDENCE HERE.

However, what Yahoo has done is to fool lots of readers, like yourself, who believe that anyone who would do an act of violence is CRRAAZZZY! and not just violent, ill intended, or evil. Evil acts can be committed without one iota of mental illness.

The rest of the article in a retelling of the shooting, but now that Yahoo has painted "mental illness" into the picture, you may not be paying any more attention to the details:


Hours earlier, Brinsley had shot and wounded his ex-girlfriend at her home outside Baltimore, then made threatening posts online, including a vow to put "wings on pigs" and references to the Brown and Garner cases.

Baltimore-area police warned the New York department that Brinsley was in the city and bent on violence. But New York police were still getting the word out when Brinsley struck.

Here, then, are the facts.


Brinsley writes threats on his Facebook page to kill cops.
Brinsley shoots his ex. We still don't know why.
Brinsley shoots two cops execution style.



That's it. That's what we actually know.

Now, leaving the Yahoo article, I have read the account in the NY Times that Brinsley was at some point treated for mental illness:

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/22/nyregion/a-divided-city-mourns-the-deaths-of-two-officers.html?_r=1


During an August 2011 plea hearing in Cobb County, Ga., he was asked: “Have you ever been a patient in a mental institution or under the care of a psychiatrist or psychologist?”

According to a court record, he responded yes. The record did not provide any other details.

That's it.

He may have had therapy, he may have had meds, he may have gone for a long time or a short time. We simply don't know. This the evidence thus far of mental illness and it is one word during a plea hearing.

Now as to the suicide attempt, other papers are going to Brinsley's mother as well:

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2014/12/what-we-know-about-ismaaiyl-brinsley.html


He had attempted suicide in the past. According to Boyce, Brinsley's family said that he was estranged from his mother and sisters and that he had tried to hang himself last year. Brinsley's mother also said that she was frightened of her son and indicated that he had been medicated for mental illness in the past. His childhood was described as "violent."

NY Mag interviewed the mother and at least one other family member, it seems. We only have their word for what happened, although there is no reason to disbelieve them yet.

He apparently attempted to commit suicide last year.
He also, apparently, got meds at some point.

What we don't know is if the two are connected. We don't know what meds he was on. We don't know if the family was just mistaken.

So, here's the deal.

The entire "mental illness" meme comes from two sources: a plea hearing in 2011, where he admits to some kind of therapeutic care--we don't know what; and unchecked statements of a mother and other family member, who have everything to gain by painting their son as mentally ill and not as a cop killer. (They might need the cops in the future themselves.)

And yes, I'm being very cautious and suspicious here. Remember, I deconstructed the Trayvon Martin case myself and understand that the Trayvon media narrative was a complete and deliberate lie. I expect no less here. The media has an agenda: it doesn't look good to have a violent black man kill two cops when paid protestors are in the streets trying to get police to not arrest or shoot violent black men.

Elspeth
12-22-2014, 05:00 PM
http://pixel.nymag.com/imgs/daily/intelligencer/2014/12/20/20-brinsley-1.w529.h352.2x.jpg

http://pixel.nymag.com/imgs/daily/intelligencer/2014/12/20/20-brinsley-2.w529.h352.2x.jpg

Lanie
12-22-2014, 05:52 PM
OK, kiddo,

Let's do a little lesson in how to read a news article.

Start with the first paragraph:



You have neglected the first two adjectives and these are proven facts: the criminal record is easily accessible and his hatred for the police was all over his Facebook page. (If you haven't seen the screen shots, google them. They're easily found.) So that's what we have actual evidence for.

Now for more evidence:

Your article states:



Now, the fine journalists at Yahoo neglected to check other sources that actually verified that the shooter was, in fact, a protestor:



I only post this to point out to you that Yahoo did not do direct research on Brinsley. This article with the information about the protests (The Daily Mail) was published early yesterday, is easily found on the net, and the names of Brinsley's friends are stated clearly. If Yahoo was even a little journalistic, they should have checked this out.

Now let's go back to the article:



This is not some helpless loon. This is a guy who was capable enough to travel from Baltimore to New York on a regular basis to see his kid. Surely, had he been acting CRRAZZY on the Greyhound bus, that would have been noticed. The bus company would have records and the police, who have a vested interest in vilifying this guy, would be spreading that info around. So he must have appeared civilized and controlled enough to travel on a 5 hour bus ride from Baltimore to NY City on a regular basis.

Now, back to the article, and to--VERY IMPORTANT--a sleight of hand that occurs here:



Now why did I color code this?

Because the red portions are about his adult life, and the green portion is about his childhood. See how the article weaved these together?

So what do you have? As an adult Brinsley was arrested 19 times. That works out to be 2-3 times a year from the time he was 18. Remember he spent 2 years in prison and this is an adult arrest record: so he had 19 arrests in 8 years, approximately 2.7 arrests per year. Mental illness is not mentioned in connection with any of these arrests. There were lots of thefts among them, but you don't have to be mentally ill to rob a store.

We also know that--AS AN ADULT-he ranted online. Who doesn't? Does ranting on line about hating the police or hating your life mean that you are mentally ill? If so, then lots and lots of Facebook and Twitter users are mentally ill. LOL! He is 28 years old, and young people in this age group are used to venting on line--under their own names.

Now you might say that threatening to kill cops on Facebook--which he did, right before he traveled to NY this week--is a sign of mental illness. But without independent verification of a specific mental illness,--a diagnosis, a record of recently taken meds, etc-- there is NO WAY to decide whether Brinsley's rantings on Facebook are mental illness or just rage. Remember, sane people have rage. Sane people can kill in a rage. Think about domestic violence. Anger can take you over. And Obama, Holder, Sharpton and deBlasio have been stoking that rage for weeks.

Also remember that Brinsley managed to get a gun, get himself on a bus, get into NY City, find two cops sitting in a patrol car, and shoot them execution style. He didn't just start shooting in a crazy fashion. His shots were very deliberately and done carefully, with stealth. Neither cop had time to resist or reach for a gun. Certainly Brinsley's critical faculties were working well to accomplish that kind of shooting.

Now. Look back at the GREEN portion above. That portion is about his childhood.



This information could only have come from his mother. There is no independent verification. His mother basically said that he was a violent kid, so violent she was afraid of him. He may have also been troubled, but we don't know if that the mother's word or Yahoo's word. If it's Yahoo's word, it's useless. We have already seen that Yahoo is sloppy in the writing of its articles, as in not fact checking (see above). Even if the mother said "troubled" that would simply be her own interpretation of his violent behavior. (No mother wants to believe she's raised a psychopath.)

The one thing we do get is that the mother was afraid of him because he was violent.

What Yahoo does--irresponsibly or by design--is weave the word "troubled" in with his adult experiences. Considering the NY Times article from yesterday, which also tries to paint Brinsely as "mentally ill" without actual proof, I will assume that Yahoo's interweaving of the adult life and childhood is a deliberate attempt to SUGGEST mental illness as a cause for the shooting without actually saying so directly.

But remember, we still have no proof of mental illness.

Next:



Here again, this is Brinsley's mother stating a belief: "Brinsley's mother believed he had undiagnosed mental problems."

Any mother whose kid has just shot two cops and then himself is going to want to believe he was mentally ill. But there is still no proof, no medical records, no diagnosis, etc. THERE IS NO EVIDENCE HERE.

However, what Yahoo has done is to fool lots of readers, like yourself, who believe that anyone who would do an act of violence is CRRAAZZZY! and not just violent, ill intended, or evil. Evil acts can be committed without one iota of mental illness.

The rest of the article in a retelling of the shooting, but now that Yahoo has painted "mental illness" into the picture, you may not be paying any more attention to the details:



Here, then, are the facts.


Brinsley writes threats on his Facebook page to kill cops.
Brinsley shoots his ex. We still don't know why.
Brinsley shoots two cops execution style.



That's it. That's what we actually know.

Now, leaving the Yahoo article, I have read the account in the NY Times that Brinsley was at some point treated for mental illness:

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/22/nyregion/a-divided-city-mourns-the-deaths-of-two-officers.html?_r=1



That's it.

He may have had therapy, he may have had meds, he may have gone for a long time or a short time. We simply don't know. This the evidence thus far of mental illness and it is one word during a plea hearing.

Now as to the suicide attempt, other papers are going to Brinsley's mother as well:

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2014/12/what-we-know-about-ismaaiyl-brinsley.html



NY Mag interviewed the mother and at least one other family member, it seems. We only have their word for what happened, although there is no reason to disbelieve them yet.

He apparently attempted to commit suicide last year.
He also, apparently, got meds at some point.

What we don't know is if the two are connected. We don't know what meds he was on. We don't know if the family was just mistaken.

So, here's the deal.

The entire "mental illness" meme comes from two sources: a plea hearing in 2011, where he admits to some kind of therapeutic care--we don't know what; and unchecked statements of a mother and other family member, who have everything to gain by painting their son as mentally ill and not as a cop killer. (They might need the cops in the future themselves.)

And yes, I'm being very cautious and suspicious here. Remember, I deconstructed the Trayvon Martin case myself and understand that the Trayvon media narrative was a complete and deliberate lie. I expect no less here. The media has an agenda: it doesn't look good to have a violent black man kill two cops when paid protestors are in the streets trying to get police to not arrest or shoot violent black men.

You sure are hung up on the fact that I alled him a wack job. My main point isn't that he was mentally ill although I personally think he had some mental issues that even made his mother afraid of him as a child.

My point is that if he hated the cops, it might have been because the cops were always arresting him for violent crime. He has problems before the current events. Even his fellow activist seemed to be surprised.


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...63f4024b93e8d2

Another member of the group, Paul Yawney, said Brinsley took part in the recent anti-police protests.

Yawney said: ‘He posted motivational stuff on Instagram and went to the protests. I think this really came as a shock to a lot of us.


Does the movement have its demons? Yes! To blame the murder of these two cops on the movement itself when the man was violent HIS ENTIRE LIFE is ridiculous though.

Elspeth
12-22-2014, 06:17 PM
By the way, to anyone reading this thread, Yahoo and the NY Times are amateurs in creating a narrative to The Daily Beast.

The Daily Beast, knowing that most people only read the headline, put a COMPLETELY FALSE statement in the headline:


Alleged Cop Killer Ismaaiyl Brinsley Had a Death Wish


http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/12/21/alleged-cop-killer-ismaaiyl-brinsley-had-a-deathwish.html


Now look at that headline: it tells the casual (lo info) reader that the shooter was "mentally ill"--"death wish" is a Freudian concept and indicates a certain type of mental state. However, there is NOTHING in the article to support that. It's pure fiction.

If you read through the article, you learn that Brinsley's mother says that her son was NEVER diagnosed with any mental illness.

The author, ML Nestel, has LIED in that headline. There's no other word for it. When they have to lie, they've got nothing. In fact, if you look through the rest of the article, it becomes clear that Brinsley was pretty clear-eyed and could argue effectively with a cop who was searching for drugs.

Nestel also lies through the article, making irresponsible statements with ZERO support. Nestel either can't tell fact from his own personal emotion, or he's deliberately putting in dishonest commentary to create an impression. Read the article and note the PINK parts--these are deliberate fictions with no backup. I have bolded the actual facts about Brinsley's life.

THE ARTICLE

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/12/21/alleged-cop-killer-ismaaiyl-brinsley-had-a-deathwish.html

Alleged cop killer Ismaaiyl Brinsley may have claimed that he was hunting police officers as a sort of twisted revenge for Michael Brown and Eric Garner, who both suffered tragic deaths at the hands of cops.

But Brinsley was more deranged loser than militant radical. A day after Brinsley allegedly shot to death two New York cops, a rough sketch of the killer is starting to emerge, pieced together from police sources and published reports. And it shows a suicidal, serial criminal who finally got his death wish in Brooklyn on Saturday.

As New York tries to process the assassinations allegedly committed by Brinsley, they’re causing a domino effect throughout the city.

The New York Police Department’s longstanding auxiliary police detail (whose unarmed volunteers aid cops) temporarily has been put on hold; politically charged police union chiefs want no less than two units out on calls; and even some officers are publicly shunning their mayor over what they see as his wavering support for the department’s rank-and-file.

Brinsley was a 28-year-old with a long rap sheet: 19 arrests that landed him in the clink in two states: Ohio and Georgia, where he lived with his estranged sister. Some of the crimes were petty shoplifting busts. But Brinsley went away for two years in prison for weapons possession in August 2011.

According to The Wall Street Journal, while Brinsley was in custody in Cobb County, Georgia, in 2011, he marked “yes” to a questionnaire asking if he’d ever been admitted to a mental institution or been under the care of a psychiatrist or psychologist. (Note: this is the same fact that keeps reappearing. It is the ONLY indication of mental health care.)

Brinsley got out of jail last July, and was desperate and aimless. No proof given for this. He even tried to unsuccessfully hang himself last year, New York Police Department Chief of Detectives Robert Boyce told reporters in a Sunday press conference at NYPD headquarters.

Perhaps it’s no surprise, given his long criminal record, that he showed a disdain for the government and a hatred for the NYPD, police sources confirmed.

On his Instagram account (which has since been taken down), Brinsley made one reference to burning an American flag.

According to the man’s mother, who was recently interviewed by investigators at her Brooklyn home, her son endured a rough upbringing, in which violence was almost a mainstay. Weasel word alert: we know from other accounts that the mother was frightened of the son because he was violent. The Daily Beast's Nestel never mentions this. He only implies that the violence was directed toward Brinsley (violence was a mainstay) but does not quote the mother on her fear of her son.

Police sources confirm that Brinsley’s mom believed her son wasn’t diagnosed with a mental illness but he may have been on meds and possibly had mental problems that went undetected.

First, this shows us how little the mother actually knows. She doesn't think he was ever diagnosed--hence the media's need to create false impressions--they have no facts. She thinks he may have been on meds? She doesn't know and doesn't know what kind they were. This one paragraph gives the LIE to whole mental illness narrative. They are desperately trying to say the guy was mentally ill with little to no evidence.


All the while, his run-ins with the law continued. A cellphone video believed to have been shot over a year ago and lifted off Brinsley’s now-deleted Facebook account documents Brinsley aboard a bus.

In the video, the bus is getting searched by a cop with a German shepherd.

Brinsley is seated toward the rear. Front and center is the dog’s snout sniffing at Brinsley’s bag.

Then, the plainclothes cop announces that he had probable cause to search Brinsley’s bag.

But Brinsley is unconvinced and the two trade terse responses.

“He didn’t bark or anything,” Brinsley says.

And the cop, likely trying to find a stash of drugs, has a nonplussed comeback, before ultimately directing Brinsley to quit recording.

“Have you been to dog K-9 training school?” the cop asks. “If you haven’t been, you probably don’t know how my dog indicates.”

Before he allegedly butchered two policemen in New York, Brinsley was wanted by Baltimore cops for gunning down his ex-girlfriend, Boyce said. Twenty-nine-year-old Air Force reservist Shaneka Thompson was shot at her Owings Mills, Maryland, home, early Saturday morning.

By the time a critical wanted poster sent through fax arrived, more than two hours elapsed. According to a police source, that fax came in at 2:46 p.m.—literally a minute after the fatal bullets flew.

Apparently Brinsley gained entry with an illicit key and proceeded to argue with Thompson before he struck her down with a single shot.

Thompson’s grandfather, James Delly of Fayetteville, North Carolina, told The Wall Street Journal that he disapproved of Brinsley: “I’m shocked that my granddaughter would be associated with a guy of that mentality.”

After he fled that scene, Brinsley took a Bolt bus to New York—all the while beaming disturbing missives from his ex-girlfriend’s stolen iPhone.

Using the charged hashtags #Shootthepolice #RIPErivGardner[sic] RIPMikeBrown, he vowed on Instagram to put “wings on pigs.”

New York—and Brooklyn in particular—was familiar turf for Brinsley.

Not only does his mom live in Brooklyn, but he also has a child with a woman there. According to police sources, was believed to have visited New York City sometime last week.

According to the local CBS New York affiliate, detectives were determining if Brinsley was in New York during a series of rallies and protests over the treatment of Eric Garner and Michael Brown. Both were killed by police officers, but grand juries failed to indict in either case.

Sometime around 10 a.m. Saturday, Brinsley’s bus arrived in Manhattan. He bought two Metro subway cards. He swiped one of them to get from midtown Manhattan to Brooklyn.

According to police sources, the Baltimore Police Department was already tracking Brinsley though his ex’s phone as he traveled to the Barclays Center, home of the Brooklyn Nets.

It was around noon that Brinsley chucked the phone behind a radiator at the basketball stadium and went off the grid.

Cops in New York, meanwhile, were alerted of the gunman’s arrival to town.

But by the time a critical wanted poster sent via fax arrived, more than two hours elapsed. According to a police source, that fax came in at 2:46 p.m.—literally a after before the fatal bullets flew.

“Tragically, this was essentially at the same time as our officers were being ambushed and murdered by Brinsley,” police reports say.

Brinsley came from behind a police cruiser parked on a busy street in the shadow of the Tompkins Public Houses.

According to Boyce, Police Officers Rafael Ramos and Wenjian Liu were sitting ducks as Brinsley allegedly announced his murderous intent to bystanders: “Watch what I’m going to do.”

At 2:45 p.m., as Officer Rafael Ramos was sitting in the front seat of their car and Officer Wenjian Liu was beside him in the passenger seat, Brinsley creeped up, steadied his stance, and with his silver semi-automatic Taurus fired several rounds through the front window panel, striking the officers’ with headshots.

Neither officer had “the opportunity to draw their weapons,” according to police reports.

Both officers were rushed to Woodhull Hospital where they were pronounced dead.

After he allegedly unloaded on the cops, Brinsley attempted to make a getaway to a nearby subway.

Police sources told The Daily Beast that a few moments after the deadly rounds were fired, Con Ed utility workers bravely gave chase to snatch up Brinsley.

They waved down a pair of responding cops who followed the alleged cop killer into the subway.

A train had actually arrived at the station but its doors were already shut.

And Brinsley must have sensed he was doomed.

“’Oh shit,’” Brinsley squealed before turning his gun on himself, sources said.



THAT IS THE ENTIRE ARTICLE.

Anyone see proof of mental illness? Anyone see proof of a "death wish"?

txradioguy
12-22-2014, 06:17 PM
You guys better quit picking on Bridget and pointing out the facts to her...she's got a bodyguard at CU that will rush to her defense if you get too "mean"

Sent from my Z10 using Tapatalk

txradioguy
12-22-2014, 06:20 PM
Elspeth you did a world class job of breaking it down Barney style for Lanie/Bridget and the other Libs here...you honestly did.

But as your friend here at CU my best advice is to let it go. Her Progressive bleeding heart has bubbled to the surface and no matter how much you try to show her the facts...her Progressive dogma and moral equivalence won't let her comprehend what you're saying.

Sent from my Z10 using Tapatalk

NJCardFan
12-22-2014, 06:29 PM
To blame the murder of these two cops on the movement itself[/B] when the man was violent HIS ENTIRE LIFE is ridiculous though.

Lanie, what the holy frack! THEY WERE CHANTING FOR THE DEATH OF COPS FOR CHRIST SAKE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Why you must be so frigging obtuse and ignorant is beyond me. Here is the video in case you're too lazy to look it up:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dj4ARsxrZh8

This is Al Sharpton's group, Lanie. Chanting for the death of cops.

And now we have a Ferguson protester changing "Pigs in a blanket!" while other hood rats chant "smells like bacon".


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8dAthWB_7QA

You keep denying the truth. Keep telling yourself that this isn't the movement itself. I just gave you 2 pieces of video evidence. Now I await you dancing around these in a manner that would make Juliette Prowse proud.

Elspeth
12-22-2014, 06:30 PM
You sure are hung up on the fact that I alled him a wack job.

I am "hung up on" your LACK OF PROOF and your LACK of critical thought.


My main point isn't that he was mentally ill although I personally think he had some mental issues that even made his mother afraid of him as a child.

Your beliefs are not based on anything substantial. I have combed through this evidence for you, and you still don't understand. There is no evidence for your belief. He may have simply been a violent child. And, yes, that can happen.


My point is that if he hated the cops, it might have been because the cops were always arresting him for violent crime. He has problems before the current events.

His Facebook page clearly mentions the Ferguson and Garner cases. They were certainly part of the motivation.


Even his fellow activist seemed to be surprised.

You mean the friends that were surprised that Brinsley went to protest marches? Or that he killed cops? Either way, that indicates that his behavior before the news coverage of the protests started was more "normal" and didn't alarm them. That actually indicates the OPPOSITE of mental illness.

The friends' reaction actually supports the contention that the news coverage of the protests in New York--and remember, Brinsley was up there a lot--DID influence him, DID change his personality, and motivated this murder.



Does the movement have its demons? Yes! To blame the murder of these two cops on the movement itself when the man was violent HIS ENTIRE LIFE is ridiculous though.

See above. It's clear that the coverage of the protests and the violent rhetoric coming out of Washington and New York had an effect. In fact, a violent person is more likely to be influenced to do violence by such rhetoric than a non-violent person.

Elspeth
12-22-2014, 06:31 PM
You guys better quit picking on Bridget and pointing out the facts to her...she's got a bodyguard at CU that will rush to her defense if you get too "mean"

Sent from my Z10 using Tapatalk

Bring it on!

Elspeth
12-22-2014, 06:32 PM
Elspeth you did a world class job of breaking it down Barney style for Lanie/Bridget and the other Libs here...you honestly did.

But as your friend here at CU my best advice is to let it go. Her Progressive bleeding heart has bubbled to the surface and no matter how much you try to show her the facts...her Progressive dogma and moral equivalence won't let her comprehend what you're saying.

Sent from my Z10 using Tapatalk

You know that I only get involved with these kinds of conflicts when facts are being misconstrued. Now that I have set the facts straight, I think I'm done.

NJCardFan
12-22-2014, 06:40 PM
See above. It's clear that the coverage of the protests and the violent rhetoric coming out of Washington and New York had an effect. In fact, a violent person is more likely to be influenced to do violence by such rhetoric than a non-violent person.

Here's the ironically maddening and yet not surprising aspect here. For years all we heard from the left is that the rhetoric coming from the right is going to cause violence and not once, let me be clear on that, NOT ONCE has anyone who either claims to be in the Tea Party movement or any conservative committed any act of violence against anyone based on what's been said on the radio or Fox News or anywhere and yet here we have someone, 1 week after protesters were chanting death threats to police, kill 2 police officers and people like Lanie are dancing like Fred Astaire trying to distance these people from the movement.

NJCardFan
12-22-2014, 06:43 PM
You guys better quit picking on Bridget and pointing out the facts to her...she's got a bodyguard at CU that will rush to her defense if you get too "mean"

Sent from my Z10 using Tapatalk

That bodyguard can kiss my hairy patooti.

Elspeth
12-22-2014, 06:52 PM
Here's the ironically maddening and yet not surprising aspect here. For years all we heard from the left is that the rhetoric coming from the right is going to cause violence and not once, let me be clear on that, NOT ONCE has anyone who either claims to be in the Tea Party movement or any conservative committed any act of violence against anyone based on what's been said on the radio or Fox News or anywhere and yet here we have someone, 1 week after protesters were chanting death threats to police, kill 2 police officers and people like Lanie are dancing like Fred Astaire trying to distance these people from the movement.

EXACTLY!

Elspeth
12-22-2014, 06:52 PM
That bodyguard can kiss my hairy patooti.

Who is this bodyguard?

NJCardFan
12-22-2014, 09:15 PM
Who is this bodyguard?

Not a clue but whoever it is they can kiss my butt.

Lanie
12-23-2014, 12:27 AM
You guys better quit picking on Bridget and pointing out the facts to her...she's got a bodyguard at CU that will rush to her defense if you get too "mean"

Sent from my Z10 using Tapatalk

Who is that? Is he good looking?

Elspeth is fine. She's long, but she's fine.

Lanie
12-23-2014, 12:39 AM
Lanie, what the holy frack! THEY WERE CHANTING FOR THE DEATH OF COPS FOR CHRIST SAKE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Why you must be so frigging obtuse and ignorant is beyond me. Here is the video in case you're too lazy to look it up:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dj4ARsxrZh8

This is Al Sharpton's group, Lanie. Chanting for the death of cops.

And now we have a Ferguson protester changing "Pigs in a blanket!" while other hood rats chant "smells like bacon".


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8dAthWB_7QA

You keep denying the truth. Keep telling yourself that this isn't the movement itself. I just gave you 2 pieces of video evidence. Now I await you dancing around these in a manner that would make Juliette Prowse proud.


I know about both events. You're showing me evidence about *some* people advocating the death of cops. Can you show me that's the majority of protesters?

So, if ALL the protesters get to be judged by the actions of some in this situation, can we judge all righties for this?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-X0cAqfYRMA

Scroll over passed one minute. It's righties talking about how we need to hang Obama because we have rope, that this wouldn't be the first time we hung one from a tree. Now, tell me. If something were to happen to Obama, do we get to blame all people who criticized him or all people who protested him?

People who advocate murdering cops should be treated like the scum they are. People who commit violent acts against cops or others needs to be put in jail. But this man had a violent history. Whether he was truly mentally ill or not is irrelevant. The truth is he was a violent man before Michael Brown. He hated the police long before any of the recent events. This was his excuse to go kill. His murders are your excuse to hate the entire movement.

Lanie
12-23-2014, 12:47 AM
I am "hung up on" your LACK OF PROOF and your LACK of critical thought.



Your beliefs are not based on anything substantial. I have combed through this evidence for you, and you still don't understand. There is no evidence for your belief. He may have simply been a violent child. And, yes, that can happen.



His Facebook page clearly mentions the Ferguson and Garner cases. They were certainly part of the motivation.



You mean the friends that were surprised that Brinsley went to protest marches? Or that he killed cops? Either way, that indicates that his behavior before the news coverage of the protests started was more "normal" and didn't alarm them. That actually indicates the OPPOSITE of mental illness.

The friends' reaction actually supports the contention that the news coverage of the protests in New York--and remember, Brinsley was up there a lot--DID influence him, DID change his personality, and motivated this murder.




See above. It's clear that the coverage of the protests and the violent rhetoric coming out of Washington and New York had an effect. In fact, a violent person is more likely to be influenced to do violence by such rhetoric than a non-violent person.

Elspeth, if you know anything at all about mental illness, you'd know that it comes at different levels. Yes, a person who is mentally ill can act normal. My bi-polar ex-brother-in-law was an expert at acting. You have smaller mental illnesses such as regular depression. Then, you have larger forms of depression such as bi-polar. Sometimes, you have psychopath/sociopaths. Those people are more than capable of not only acting normal, but charming.

And then, you have people with uncontrolled schizophrenia/catatonia. THOSE are usually the people who can't hide their mental illness. A lot of people with mental illness can hide it. It's called adapting to one's own environment. In any case, this guy didn't act normal for long. He eventually got arrested for violent crimes.

While Ferguson and NYC was a motivator, be honest. Do you think he needed an activist movement to get violent with cops when he'd been violent his entire life?

NJCardFan
12-23-2014, 01:15 AM
snip

So, let's see. 2 or 3 idiots compared to a sanctioned group of about 100 or so. Hmm, yeah, they're the same. :rolleyes: The other stark difference. Obama was never lynched but there are 2 dead cops but you keep denying it.

Lanie
12-23-2014, 01:33 AM
So, let's see. 2 or 3 idiots compared to a sanctioned group of about 100 or so. Hmm, yeah, they're the same. :rolleyes: The other stark difference. Obama was never lynched but there are 2 dead cops but you keep denying it.

How about some tea party fun?

http://www.politicususa.com/2014/06/09/las-vegas-shooting-spree-product-tea-party-ideology.html

And let's not forget abortion doctors getting killed because activists said abortion was murder (which I agree with). I remember pro-choicers years ago blaming the entire pro-life movement because some people got violent and some advocated violence. Tell me the difference between right wing violent people and left wing violent people. They both use ideology to excuse their violence. They both have a bunch of activists saying they condemn their acts.

Oh right. It's somehow different. I'm not sure how it's different, but it's different. It's funny. I brought this stuff up on facebook this morning and my right & left wing friends were able to have a conversation about it without it all going to Hell.

Maybe some people here (and DU for that matter) should consider a possibility everything in the world is not left vs. right. Sometimes, it's right vs. wrong. And NO, they are NOT the same thing.

Rockntractor
12-23-2014, 01:58 AM
How about some tea party fun?



There were never any tea party protests where the participants or the leadership were chanting and calling for the death of anyone, no teaparty group encouraged the Vegas killings.
In contrast this black uprising is calling for the deaths of police officers on a daily basis and it is ignored in most cases by authorities, even the leadership of the black movements are calling for murder.
You are coming off the rails and are losing credibility turning your argument in this direction.

Sent from my XT1049 using Tapatalk

Elspeth
12-23-2014, 04:27 AM
Elspeth, if you know anything at all about mental illness, you'd know that it comes at different levels. Yes, a person who is mentally ill can act normal. My bi-polar ex-brother-in-law was an expert at acting. You have smaller mental illnesses such as regular depression. Then, you have larger forms of depression such as bi-polar. Sometimes, you have psychopath/sociopaths. Those people are more than capable of not only acting normal, but charming.

And then, you have people with uncontrolled schizophrenia/catatonia. THOSE are usually the people who can't hide their mental illness. A lot of people with mental illness can hide it. It's called adapting to one's own environment. In any case, this guy didn't act normal for long. He eventually got arrested for violent crimes.

While Ferguson and NYC was a motivator, be honest. Do you think he needed an activist movement to get violent with cops when he'd been violent his entire life?

Can we get out of your personal experience and feelings for a minute and try to examine the actual facts and text?

Here are the facts:

1. There's no diagnosis of mental illness ANYWHERE in the evidence. There's no therapist or doctor of any kind who has made any diagnosis of Brinsley.

2. The mother is not aware of any diagnosis. She thinks he "may" have been on meds, but she's not sure and doesn't know what they were. This isn't a diagnosis. This isn't proof. The mother does remember him being violent and said that she had been afraid of him when he was younger, but this, in no way, indicates mental illness.

3. The mother does say that she thinks Brinsley tried to hang himself last year (2013). We don't have any other validation of this, nor do we know if he was trying to commit suicide. Remember, some young males who die from hanging are trying auto-erotic asphyxiation. Now before you jump on my case, I am not saying that actually happened. What I am saying is that in the absence of information, we cannot assume anything. He may have tried hanging himself to commit suicide or to have an orgasm (and almost died). We simply don't know.

4. The one real piece of evidence we have of anything is that in 2011, in a court hearing, Brinsley said "yes" when asked if he had ever been under a psychiatrist's or psychologist's care or if he had ever been hospitalized for mental illness. We don't know which it is, or what Brinsley was referring to. The fact that the press still doesn't know is interesting. I imagine that they have already gotten the FOIA requests out there, but we shall see.

Now, why am I recapping this: just to be "long"?

I am recapping this because YOU can't distinguish between actual facts and your own feelings. This is a constant problem with you, and I don't know how to solve it. I show you again and again how to take apart a text, find the facts, and ignore the editorializing (narrative) the media is trying to put out there.

However you FEEL about mental illness, whatever your experiences were in YOUR life, have NOTHING to do with Brinsley. You don't know him, you have very few facts about him.

I come back to this: THERE IS NO DIAGNOSIS. THERE IS NO (AVAILABLE) RECORD OF MEDICATION.

Until you have these things, musing on Brinsley's "mental illness" is simply irresponsible conjecture.

You have decided in your head that Brinsley is mentally ill. You have no basis on which to do that. You have no evidence. (I just delineated the evidence.)

Now you might say that Brinsley said "yes" in 2011 when asked if he had been treated for mental illness, so that's evidence. And I would say back to you that many, many people get treated TEMPORARILY for mental illness. Some people go through a bad time after the death of a loved one, and the doctor puts them on an antidepressant for a few months. That doesn't mean they are permanently mentally ill and go shoot cops. Brinsley, for example, could have been treated in prison for depression. Lots of people who end up in prison get depressed--because it's prison--and they get meds. If a prisoner has ended up in solitary (because of violence, for example) he can end up going psychotic just from the solitary confinement and nothing else. Here again, the prison system gets the guy meds, but leaves him in solitary.

Now, you might say, "Elspeth, you don't KNOW if Brinsley got meds in prison or if he was in solitary." And I would say, "Exactly. I don't know, and neither do you."

I am merely showing you that there are many ways to interpret the tiny facts that we have. We need MORE information before knowing if he were mentally ill.

Based on the information we have received thus far, we have NO basis--ZERO--for assuming that Brinsley was mentally ill throughout his life or at the time of the shooting. NONE.

Now I know you will continue to ignore this because you want your feelings to be right. I want you to think long and hard about why it's important to look at evidence and not feelings.

Let's say, I'm on a jury and you are accused of sexually abusing a child in your care at a school. And let's say, I find out that you have been sexually abused yourself as a child. Now, my gut feeling might be that since you were sexually abused as a child that you certainly sexually abused the child in your care. Would that be fair? To go by assumptions and feelings? Especially if you were innocent?

Wouldn't you want me to wait until all the facts were in?

Lanie
12-23-2014, 09:12 AM
Can we get out of your personal experience and feelings for a minute and try to examine the actual facts and text?

Here are the facts:

1. There's no diagnosis of mental illness ANYWHERE in the evidence. There's no therapist or doctor of any kind who has made any diagnosis of Brinsley.

2. The mother is not aware of any diagnosis. She thinks he "may" have been on meds, but she's not sure and doesn't know what they were. This isn't a diagnosis. This isn't proof. The mother does remember him being violent and said that she had been afraid of him when he was younger, but this, in no way, indicates mental illness.

3. The mother does say that she thinks Brinsley tried to hang himself last year (2013). We don't have any other validation of this, nor do we know if he was trying to commit suicide. Remember, some young males who die from hanging are trying auto-erotic asphyxiation. Now before you jump on my case, I am not saying that actually happened. What I am saying is that in the absence of information, we cannot assume anything. He may have tried hanging himself to commit suicide or to have an orgasm (and almost died). We simply don't know.

4. The one real piece of evidence we have of anything is that in 2011, in a court hearing, Brinsley said "yes" when asked if he had ever been under a psychiatrist's or psychologist's care or if he had ever been hospitalized for mental illness. We don't know which it is, or what Brinsley was referring to. The fact that the press still doesn't know is interesting. I imagine that they have already gotten the FOIA requests out there, but we shall see.

Now, why am I recapping this: just to be "long"?

I am recapping this because YOU can't distinguish between actual facts and your own feelings. This is a constant problem with you, and I don't know how to solve it. I show you again and again how to take apart a text, find the facts, and ignore the editorializing (narrative) the media is trying to put out there.

However you FEEL about mental illness, whatever your experiences were in YOUR life, have NOTHING to do with Brinsley. You don't know him, you have very few facts about him.

I come back to this: THERE IS NO DIAGNOSIS. THERE IS NO (AVAILABLE) RECORD OF MEDICATION.

Until you have these things, musing on Brinsley's "mental illness" is simply irresponsible conjecture.

You have decided in your head that Brinsley is mentally ill. You have no basis on which to do that. You have no evidence. (I just delineated the evidence.)

Now you might say that Brinsley said "yes" in 2011 when asked if he had been treated for mental illness, so that's evidence. And I would say back to you that many, many people get treated TEMPORARILY for mental illness. Some people go through a bad time after the death of a loved one, and the doctor puts them on an antidepressant for a few months. That doesn't mean they are permanently mentally ill and go shoot cops. Brinsley, for example, could have been treated in prison for depression. Lots of people who end up in prison get depressed--because it's prison--and they get meds. If a prisoner has ended up in solitary (because of violence, for example) he can end up going psychotic just from the solitary confinement and nothing else. Here again, the prison system gets the guy meds, but leaves him in solitary.

Now, you might say, "Elspeth, you don't KNOW if Brinsley got meds in prison or if he was in solitary." And I would say, "Exactly. I don't know, and neither do you."

I am merely showing you that there are many ways to interpret the tiny facts that we have. We need MORE information before knowing if he were mentally ill.

Based on the information we have received thus far, we have NO basis--ZERO--for assuming that Brinsley was mentally ill throughout his life or at the time of the shooting. NONE.

Now I know you will continue to ignore this because you want your feelings to be right. I want you to think long and hard about why it's important to look at evidence and not feelings.

Let's say, I'm on a jury and you are accused of sexually abusing a child in your care at a school. And let's say, I find out that you have been sexually abused yourself as a child. Now, my gut feeling might be that since you were sexually abused as a child that you certainly sexually abused the child in your care. Would that be fair? To go by assumptions and feelings? Especially if you were innocent?

Wouldn't you want me to wait until all the facts were in?

But once again, you're hung up on this mental illness idea and I'm telling you to learn to read. That's NOT my main point.

The point is even without these protests, this man was a violent thug. Blame on what you like. Mental illness, too many steroids, abusive parents, parents not disciplining him, or maybe he was possessed by the Devil. You know, I seriously wonder if that isn't the case with ISIS at times. I'm not joking. I personally sometimes think that ISIS is possessed by the devil. Now, create a bunch of long posts trying to convince me that parts of ISIS are not demon possessed. In the end, it really doesn't matter if they're demon possessed. The point is that they're killing people and they need to be stopped. That was the point with this guy who killed the cops. He was violent his entire life and he needed to be stopped. He was a violent thug, and police were always putting him in jail. Tell me why he wouldn't hate the police.

You talk about facts in a court case. Okay, let's suppose this guy didn't off himself and it went to court. First, he would get the death penalty. No insanity plea would fly because cop killers get the death penalty. That's a fact. Next, his charge wouldn't be attending a protest. His charge would have been murder. Now, if he was seen chanting "Kill the cops" at trial, then that might be used as evidence. His comments about killing cops on Instagram would have been used. However, if you say that attending a protest makes you a cop killer, then the DA is going to have to charge everybody there (whether they chanted death to cops or not).

Now, suppose he was found guilty (which he would be), and the jury is in the phase of deciding if they give him the death penalty or life in prison. What do you think the DA would bring up to make his case? Would it be the fact that he attended some protests or would it have been repeated violence his entire life? He would have used the FACTS that this man was repeatedly violent, was let out of prison, and then killed two cops. That's what he would have used.

Do we have concrete evidence this guy was mentally ill? By legal standards, no. However, here are another set of facts that aren't in. How many people from the protest crowds actually chant death to cops? What percentage? Obviously, big enough to make the news, but what are the actual numbers. Does anybody here have them?

I brought up my own personal experience because you kept saying that a mentally ill person can't act normal. Yes, they can act normal. Go ask experts if they can act normal if you don't believe me. Or if I have time this week, maybe I'll pull up stuff. Today, I'm going to work and hanging out with a friend. I'll probably want to go to bed by the time I get back, so I may not have anything dug up yet.

Lanie
12-23-2014, 09:19 AM
There were never any tea party protests where the participants or the leadership were chanting and calling for the death of anyone, no teaparty group encouraged the Vegas killings.
In contrast this black uprising is calling for the deaths of police officers on a daily basis and it is ignored in most cases by authorities, even the leadership of the black movements are calling for murder.
You are coming off the rails and are losing credibility turning your argument in this direction.

Sent from my XT1049 using Tapatalk

Just for the record, I do not believe that tea party equals extremist. If I did, I wouldn't have voted Republican this year because some of them here do pride themselves in that.

Okay, we have the new Black Panthers and some black group in Furgeson calling for the death of cops (specific ones). We probably also have revolutionary socialists making excuses and probably occasional chants against cops. Remember those people are for violence in general because they think it will lead out to their revolution. That accounts for a small number of protesters. What about the other thousands of people taking to the streets? Do they all want dead cops too?

I will say that I've been trying to speak to my more liberal friends about the people above, and how they need to watch out for them. My argument is that they'll pick a fight with the cops, and then the cops might take it out on all the activists just because they're there (won't be able to differate who is who because they're all around each other). I told one person to get away from certain types of people at a protest.

I'm also worried because it's turning into blacks/protesters vs. cops and it shouldn't be that way. I'd like it if we could have more dialogue between the two groups and not just confrontations. I believe that most cops and hopefully most protesters are good people.

NJCardFan
12-23-2014, 12:47 PM
How about some tea party fun?

http://www.politicususa.com/2014/06/09/las-vegas-shooting-spree-product-tea-party-ideology.html

And let's not forget abortion doctors getting killed because activists said abortion was murder (which I agree with). I remember pro-choicers years ago blaming the entire pro-life movement because some people got violent and some advocated violence. Tell me the difference between right wing violent people and left wing violent people. They both use ideology to excuse their violence. They both have a bunch of activists saying they condemn their acts.

Oh right. It's somehow different. I'm not sure how it's different, but it's different. It's funny. I brought this stuff up on facebook this morning and my right & left wing friends were able to have a conversation about it without it all going to Hell.

Maybe some people here (and DU for that matter) should consider a possibility everything in the world is not left vs. right. Sometimes, it's right vs. wrong. And NO, they are NOT the same thing.

2 things. #1, politicusa is a left wing blog site and is tossing a false narrative. Unless you have evidence to the contrary, you will never find video or anything from a Tea Party rally with chants of violence of any kind. I beg you to fins this evidence from unbiased sources. #2, as stated, there isn't evidence of any kind of Tea Partiers calling for the death of anyone. However, there is evidence, as I've shown, of radicals calling for the deaths of cops and that chant was coming from a sanctioned event from an organized group, the National Action Network, Sharpton's group. But, as usual, you keep on dancing, moving the goalposts, and spinning the narrative all you want. The facts are what they are and that is the stupid anti-cop movements have blood on their hands.

txradioguy
12-23-2014, 01:56 PM
And people wonder why I will always call Lanie a Libtard no matter how much she insists she's not. *chuckle*

Sent from my Z10 using Tapatalk

Lanie
12-23-2014, 03:45 PM
2 things. #1, politicusa is a left wing blog site and is tossing a false narrative. Unless you have evidence to the contrary, you will never find video or anything from a Tea Party rally with chants of violence of any kind. I beg you to fins this evidence from unbiased sources. #2, as stated, there isn't evidence of any kind of Tea Partiers calling for the death of anyone. However, there is evidence, as I've shown, of radicals calling for the deaths of cops and that chant was coming from a sanctioned event from an organized group, the National Action Network, Sharpton's group. But, as usual, you keep on dancing, moving the goalposts, and spinning the narrative all you want. The facts are what they are and that is the stupid anti-cop movements have blood on their hands.

Okay, then.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/06/09/las-vegas-shooting-officers-dead-possible-white-supremacists/

Now, remember with the Bundy ranch, there was a debate as to whether it might be okay to go armed against the government. Just saying. To be fair, the Bundys kicked them off. And who enforces the law? Police?


The couple had visited Cliven Bundy's ranch during an armed standoff earlier this year with federal authorities about a land dispute, Bundy's son said Monday. Ammon Bundy told The Associated Press that they were asked to leave his father's ranch after being there for a few days this spring.

He said that while details were still sketchy, the Millers' conduct was the problem. He called the couple "very radical" and said they did not "align themselves" with the protest's main issues.



But this guy was nuts. Ooops. I shouldn't say nuts. No proof of that. In any case, the killer had a record in this case too.


The duo then left the restaurant and walked over to a nearby Walmart, where Jerad Miller fired a shot into the air and told people to get out, shouting that it was “a revolution,” McMahill said.



Some could argue the guy was just trying to start the revolution spoken about.

https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&q=cliven+bundy+talks+of+revolution&gbv=2&oq=cliven+bundy+talks+of+revolution&gs_l=heirloom-hp.3...796.5523.0.5806.32.12.0.18.5.1.639.1746.2j5 j1j5-1.9.0.msedr...0...1ac.1.34.heirloom-hp..20.12.1667.BWdYsNlwGkQ

Sorry about the lefty source before.

The point is there are extremists everywhere and I see a lot of danger with judging all people by the extremists. That's not going to change. I'm not going to fight anymore, I've made my point.

Merry Christmas. (No, seriously).

Lanie
12-23-2014, 03:46 PM
And people wonder why I will always call Lanie a Libtard no matter how much she insists she's not. *chuckle*

Sent from my Z10 using Tapatalk

May I at least have a RINO card? You still didn't tell me who my protector was.

Merry Christmas to you too. Glad I could make you chuckle.

Lanie
12-23-2014, 03:59 PM
Elspeth! You wanted me to go by facts about mental illness instead of personal experience. I said I brought it up because you said mentally ill people can't act normal. So, here are facts (not that it matter in this guy's case).

http://us.reachout.com/facts/factsheet/understanding-mental-health-difficulties


IT is normal for everyone to have good and bad days. On good days, we may feel like we are flexible and can adapt to many different stressors and circumstances (like school, work, relationships, and how we feel about ourselves). However, on bad days, we may feel like we can’t cope with the stressors in our lives and feel overwhelmed and stuck. Sometimes, these variations in well-being can change from hour to hour or day to day, and can last for weeks, months, or longer.



http://www.merckmanuals.com/home/mental_health_disorders/overview_of_mental_health_care/mental_illness_in_society.html


Mental illness cannot always be clearly differentiated from normal behavior. For example, distinguishing normal bereavement from depression may be difficult in people who have had a significant loss, such as the death of a spouse or child. Likewise, a diagnosis of anxiety disorder in people who are worried and stressed about work is somewhat arbitrary because most people experience these feelings at some time. The line between having certain personality traits and having a personality disorder can be blurry. Thus, mental illness and mental health are best thought of as a continuum. Any dividing line is usually based on how long symptoms last, how much people change from their usual self, and how severely symptoms affect their life. Therefore, when thinking about mental illness, people should distinguish long-lasting (chronic) serious mental illness that severely limits a person's daily activities or ability to work (such as an ongoing, lifelong psychosis) from brief but serious episodes of symptoms that are expected to resolve and from chronic symptoms that do not interfere with activities or work.



IOW, some can seem normal.

Merry Christmas!

wasp69
12-23-2014, 05:23 PM
How about some tea party fun?

http://www.politicususa.com/2014/06/09/las-vegas-shooting-spree-product-tea-party-ideology.html


Did you seriously just post that biased garbage that used the word "teabagger" in almost every sentence as a credible source? Did you seriously just try to equate those two occutards who were shown the door at the Bundy Ranch because they were occutard lunatics to a group that has never wished death upon anyone?

Did you really just do that?!?

txradioguy
12-23-2014, 07:51 PM
Did you seriously just post that biased garbage that used the word "teabagger" in almost every sentence as a credible source? Did you seriously just try to equate those two occutards who were shown the door at the Bundy Ranch because they were occutard lunatics to a group that has never wished death upon anyone?

Did you really just do that?!?

Of course she did. It doesn't take much for Lanie's fake pretense of being a "moderate" or not like her brethren at DU to fade away when she gets going and her meme's and talking points get debunked.

She HAS to make a moral equivalence argument...lest her Progressive beliefs get shredded into kitty litter.

So yeah...she really did just do that.

NJCardFan
12-23-2014, 11:33 PM
Okay, then.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/06/09/las-vegas-shooting-officers-dead-possible-white-supremacists/

Now, remember with the Bundy ranch, there was a debate as to whether it might be okay to go armed against the government. Just saying. To be fair, the Bundys kicked them off. And who enforces the law? Police?



But this guy was nuts. Ooops. I shouldn't say nuts. No proof of that. In any case, the killer had a record in this case too.



Some could argue the guy was just trying to start the revolution spoken about.

https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&q=cliven+bundy+talks+of+revolution&gbv=2&oq=cliven+bundy+talks+of+revolution&gs_l=heirloom-hp.3...796.5523.0.5806.32.12.0.18.5.1.639.1746.2j5 j1j5-1.9.0.msedr...0...1ac.1.34.heirloom-hp..20.12.1667.BWdYsNlwGkQ

Sorry about the lefty source before.

The point is there are extremists everywhere and I see a lot of danger with judging all people by the extremists. That's not going to change. I'm not going to fight anymore, I've made my point.

Merry Christmas. (No, seriously).

Wow, project much? That operation was because the federal government was using it's overreaching power against a citizen. Something they wouldn't use in a billion years against illegals. That was meeting force with force. But all of that said, not a single shot was fired. However, when it comes to leftist extremists, there is always some kind of damage be it property damage or in this case, lives. Again, you're moving the goalposts trying to get this to fit your argument and again, fail.

Lanie
12-24-2014, 02:28 AM
Did you seriously just post that biased garbage that used the word "teabagger" in almost every sentence as a credible source? Did you seriously just try to equate those two occutards who were shown the door at the Bundy Ranch because they were occutard lunatics to a group that has never wished death upon anyone?

Did you really just do that?!?



The first link was one a friend gave me. I should have looked closer at it and I apologize.

Wasp, there were questions at the time about how far some of Bundy's supporters wanted to take things with good reason. People act like Bundy and his supporters were innocent, but they weren't. They had a standoff with police for land that they felt should be theirs, but legally wasn't. I'll agree the federal government shouldn't have taken it away for turtles. Farms and raches should come first, but it wasn't legally his land. He was willing to fight for it. The question was how far was too far to some people.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/05/08/official-fbi-investigating-bundy-ranch-showdown-supporters-reportedly-aimed/

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/07/06/nevada-sheriff-says-cliven-bundy-must-be-held-accountable-for-standoff/

What happened was serious enough that it was considered to be a standoff (with ranchers supposedly pointing guns at the cops) the FBI got involved, and the government tried to label them domestic terrorists.

I personally never cared much about this story because I knew it would pass and I was busy anyway. However, in the back of my mind, I was personally wondering how far some people felt this idea of changing the government should go.

What's my point? The point is people on the right side of the aisle have done things that has scared the left and we're acting like it was nothing. Some people on the right scares the left as much as the left scares them.

I'm sorry that the first source I used was a leftist one.

Lanie
12-24-2014, 02:40 AM
Guys, I do also want to stress that while I barely glanced over the link given to me by a friend, I didn't realize it used words such as "teabagger." I really do apologize for that link. I realize that's an ugly word. It was stupid, sloppy, and insensitive.

NJCardFan
12-24-2014, 02:58 AM
The first link was one a friend gave me. I should have looked closer at it and I apologize.

Wasp, there were questions at the time about how far some of Bundy's supporters wanted to take things with good reason. People act like Bundy and his supporters were innocent, but they weren't. They had a standoff with police for land that they felt should be theirs, but legally wasn't. I'll agree the federal government shouldn't have taken it away for turtles. Farms and raches should come first, but it wasn't legally his land. He was willing to fight for it. The question was how far was too far to some people.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/05/08/official-fbi-investigating-bundy-ranch-showdown-supporters-reportedly-aimed/

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/07/06/nevada-sheriff-says-cliven-bundy-must-be-held-accountable-for-standoff/

What happened was serious enough that it was considered to be a standoff (with ranchers supposedly pointing guns at the cops) the FBI got involved, and the government tried to label them domestic terrorists.

I personally never cared much about this story because I knew it would pass and I was busy anyway. However, in the back of my mind, I was personally wondering how far some people felt this idea of changing the government should go.

What's my point? The point is people on the right side of the aisle have done things that has scared the left and we're acting like it was nothing. Some people on the right scares the left as much as the left scares them.

I'm sorry that the first source I used was a leftist one.

http://media.giphy.com/media/KA187C832M3YI/giphy.gif

Elspeth
12-24-2014, 04:18 AM
But once again, you're hung up on this mental illness idea and I'm telling you to learn to read. That's NOT my main point.

ALL you have talked about is mental illness, especially in the post I was responding to.

Go back and read what you wrote.

And then you'd better apologize for your rudeness in this post.

The post I was responding to:


Elspeth, if you know anything at all about mental illness, you'd know that it comes at different levels. Yes, a person who is mentally ill can act normal. My bi-polar ex-brother-in-law was an expert at acting. You have smaller mental illnesses such as regular depression. Then, you have larger forms of depression such as bi-polar. Sometimes, you have psychopath/sociopaths. Those people are more than capable of not only acting normal, but charming.

And then, you have people with uncontrolled schizophrenia/catatonia. THOSE are usually the people who can't hide their mental illness. A lot of people with mental illness can hide it. It's called adapting to one's own environment. In any case, this guy didn't act normal for long. He eventually got arrested for violent crimes.

While Ferguson and NYC was a motivator, be honest. Do you think he needed an activist movement to get violent with cops when he'd been violent his entire life?


You do know his history right? He was a complete wackjob with a LOOOOOOOONG criminal history.

I remember when people shot abortion doctors, the pro-life movement got blamed even though it was one wackjob. Like the pro-life movement, I do see people in this one condemning violence. Somehow, wackjobs get more attention in the media and always have.


You sure are hung up on the fact that I alled him a wack job. My main point isn't that he was mentally ill although I personally think he had some mental issues that even made his mother afraid of him as a child.

My point is that if he hated the cops, it might have been because the cops were always arresting him for violent crime. He has problems before the current events. Even his fellow activist seemed to be surprised.



Does the movement have its demons? Yes! To blame the murder of these two cops on the movement itself when the man was violent HIS ENTIRE LIFE is ridiculous though.

wasp69
12-24-2014, 01:45 PM
Wasp, there were questions at the time about how far some of Bundy's supporters wanted to take things with good reason. People act like Bundy and his supporters were innocent, but they weren't. They had a standoff with police for land that they felt should be theirs, but legally wasn't. I'll agree the federal government shouldn't have taken it away for turtles. Farms and raches should come first, but it wasn't legally his land. He was willing to fight for it. The question was how far was too far to some people.


Do not try to pull some kind of moral equivalency on this with me.

Don't do it.

These two events (Ferguson protestor executing two police officers, citizens standing up to a very questionable government crackdown) have absolutely zero things in common.

None. Zip. Zilch. Nada.

The most basic knowledge of these events, and the history involved with heavy handed government showdowns (Ruby Ridge, Waco, etc), will demonstrate the basic and fundamental differences between the two groups. You have admitted the leftist trash loves to use violence and provoke law enforcement as a primary tactic. The people at the Bundy Ranch did no such thing.

Understand the difference?

Also, do your own research. It will serve you better in learning, retaining, and understanding.



What happened was serious enough that it was considered to be a standoff (with ranchers supposedly pointing guns at the cops) the FBI got involved, and the government tried to label them domestic terrorists.


Uh, yeah, it was serious. Had the government agents so much as pulled a weapon, they would have been slaughtered; bad news all the way around. There were enough people that were determined the government was not going to pull another Waco or Ruby Ridge.

However...

Not one of those at Bundy Ranch walked up to a patrol car and fired into it.



I personally never cared much about this story because I knew it would pass and I was busy anyway.


But you've paid much more attention to this one which has people acting like morons due to a pack of lies pushed by narrative journalists?



What's my point? The point is people on the right side of the aisle have done things that has scared the left and we're acting like it was nothing. Some people on the right scares the left as much as the left scares them.


Bull. Apples, bananas, oranges, and none related. A bit of research on your part would show as much.



I'm sorry that the first source I used was a leftist one.

You should know better...

wasp69
12-24-2014, 01:46 PM
Guys, I do also want to stress that while I barely glanced over the link given to me by a friend, I didn't realize it used words such as "teabagger." I really do apologize for that link. I realize that's an ugly word. It was stupid, sloppy, and insensitive.

No, it was lazy.

Lanie
12-24-2014, 03:53 PM
But you've paid much more attention to this one which has people acting like morons due to a pack of lies pushed by narrative journalists?

I've paid close attention since Trayvon Martin (not killed by a cop, but is always thrown in there). I'm paying attention to most to all of the cases and their details so I can know what I'm talking about when I say the cop was in the right or when I say the cop was in the wrong.

I'm also paying attention to this particular movement for two reasons. First, it reminds me a little bit of the anti-war one. It has lots of well meaning people and then it it also has some violent thugs (black and white, so nobody go there with my use of that word). I'm watching them try to pull people into their crap. I don't want to see people I know or care about getting hurt because they protested police brutality and was near the wrong people at a protest. I also don't want the cops or anybody else assuming they're all a bunch of violent thugs and encouraging going after all of them. I want these two groups separated. You're not the only ones I'm talking to. I'm talking to liberals too and I'm telling them to be careful. I've told them straight out there are some in that movement that could care less about black lives. They want their revolution and this is their latest cause to push for it. If they have to, they will put innocent protesters at risk by picking fights with the cops because of it. I've seen it.







You should know better...


No, it was lazy.

You're right.