Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Sunday October 30 2016, @11:26AM   Printer-friendly
from the peaceful-protest-vs-armed-protest dept.

Catholic Online reports

On Thursday [October 27], the Bundy gang of ranchers who took over a federal building in Oregon and led a 41-day standoff were acquitted on all charges. At least five of the seven surviving militia members will now walk free from federal custody as a result. Ammon Bundy will not be released however because he still faces charges in Nevada over the standoff at his father's ranch two years ago. His brother, Ryan Bundy also remains in custody. An eighth member of their gang was killed by police when the standoff drew to an end.

[...]The Bundy gang also staged their occupation on sacred Native American land. This cannot be condoned; it would be like legitimizing the armed takeover of a parish church.

[...]At the same time the Bundy gang was being acquitted, heavily armed paramilitary-police moved into the crowds at Cannonball, North Dakota gassing and arresting protesters. The key difference in this case is [that] the protesters in North Dakota are peaceful and unarmed.

[...] During Thursday's protest, a fire broke out at the site and police moved in with riot gear and military-grade armored vehicles. They attacked the crowd with tear gas, a sound cannon, batons, and bean-bag ammunition. Police are evicting the protesters by force to make way for the pipeline's construction. Protesters have built barricades to keep authorities at bay.

Peoples World continues

[Continues...]

Encampment at Standing Rock cleared; over 140 arrested

Police and those present at the #NoDAPL protest encampment yesterday say that protesters have been cleared from the northern camp along the Cannon Ball River near the Standing Rock Sioux Reservation in North Dakota. News reports say over 140 people were arrested, and officers used pepper spray against protesters but no serious injuries were reported.

Beginning at 11:15 am MT [PDF], officers moved toward a group of people camping out near highway 1806 near the town of Cannon Ball, ND. According to the Associated Press, some of the officers were in riot gear, some were armed, and they arrived with soldiers driving trucks and military Humvees. They also deployed helicopters and an airplane that monitored them from above.

The Federal Aviation Administration began restricting flights over the area on Tuesday afternoon [October 25], and will continue to do so until Nov. 5, according to the FAA website, which cites "hazards" in the area.

The police operation came the day after the Morton County Sheriff's Department asked protesters to leave the land, [PDF] which is in the path of the Dakota Access Pipeline under construction.

Additionally, over the last several weeks, over 140 "water and land protectors", as those protesting the building of the Dakota Access oil pipeline call themselves, have been arrested during police raids. The mainstream media has remained relatively mum about the human rights violations that have been unfolding at Standing Rock, where the construction of the multi-billion dollar funded Dakota Access Pipeline is underway.

[...] Frustrations continue to rise as [a] media blackout continues.

[...] Many have voiced outrage over the selective coverage being given by the media to such a critical issue.

Update:

Last week, Energy Transfer Partners, the company constructing the Dakota Access Pipeline, voluntarily stopped work at the building site just North of the Standing Rock Sioux Reservation.

The Army Corps of Engineers has confirmed that the company doesn't have a written easement from the agency to build on Corps property. A Corps spokesperson says that Energy Transfer Partners has filed the paperwork for the easement but it's still under review.

Previous Coverage:
Ammon & Ryan Bundy Arrested in Oregon; One Dead in Shootout with Cops
Militia Occupies Federal Building in Oregon After Rancher Arson Convictions


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 5, Interesting) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday October 30 2016, @11:27AM

    And the lesson here is: if you're going to protest, be armed while you do.

    --
    My rights don't end where your fear begins.
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +3  
       Insightful=1, Interesting=2, Total=3
    Extra 'Interesting' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   5  
  • (Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 30 2016, @12:07PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 30 2016, @12:07PM (#420484)

    > And the lesson here is: if you're going to protest, be armed while you do.

    Yeah. That worked out great for LaVoy Finicum [cnn.com]

    The actual lesson here is: Being white still rocks.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 30 2016, @12:08PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 30 2016, @12:08PM (#420485)

      Yes, being white will get you shot.

    • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday October 30 2016, @12:25PM

      Yeah. That worked out great for LaVoy Finicum

      It did in fact. Death should always be preferable to allowing your liberty to be infringed for any American.

      The actual lesson here is: Being white still rocks.

      Racist fool.

      --
      My rights don't end where your fear begins.
      • (Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 30 2016, @12:41PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 30 2016, @12:41PM (#420491)

        > It did in fact. Death should always be preferable to allowing your liberty to be infringed for any American.

        Lol. Big talk internet tough guy.

        > Racist fool.

        Takes one to know one.

        • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday October 30 2016, @12:47PM

          Oh noes! Your fourth grade level retorts have undone me entirely! However shall I go on?

          --
          My rights don't end where your fear begins.
          • (Score: 0, Offtopic) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 30 2016, @12:52PM

            by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 30 2016, @12:52PM (#420493)

            Apparently by posting more ego-defending whines.

    • (Score: 3, Interesting) by Fauxlosopher on Sunday October 30 2016, @03:51PM

      by Fauxlosopher (4804) on Sunday October 30 2016, @03:51PM (#420532) Journal

      Funny you should mention LaVoy Finicum's death - turns out one of the FBI guys shot him in the chest with a "rubber bullet", and only afterwards is LaVoy seen "reaching for his chest" multiple times. Don't take my word for it, though: we can look at the FBI's video for the evidence.

      One of the passengers in LaVoy's truck released a complete, uncut video-and-audio recording of the entire incident, which was synced with the FBI video to provide a more complete picture. As a result, the following two videos present clear evidence of premeditated murder of LaVoy Finicum by members of the FBI. (Once it it known what to look for, the evidence can be clearly seen in the FBI's own aerial camera recording of LaVoy's murder [youtube.com] even in the low-res version on YouTube.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PBWQtH2PhJ0 [youtube.com] ("The Foam Bullet Used to Justify Killing LaVoy Finicum", 26min; detailing LaVoy being shot prior to lowering his arms)
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0fpO6Oh0r2U [youtube.com] ("LaVoy Finicum Assassination Forensic Study Released!", 50min; covers the premeditated setup for murder by FBI, including the first stop before the roadblock, and the roadblock just after a blind curve on a downhill grade)

      • (Score: 1) by Ethanol-fueled on Sunday October 30 2016, @05:16PM

        by Ethanol-fueled (2792) on Sunday October 30 2016, @05:16PM (#420563) Homepage

        The FBI also carried out a summary execution of Chris Dorner -- although I think that was a fake op to test whether or not the public would tolerate summary executions as well as public support of the law in general (by seeing how much support Dorner garnered).

        Then you have Waco and Ruby Ridge and the Leonard Peltier incident. American federal law enforcement services should be held to a higher standard and refrain from banana-republic style lawlessness, even if the Waco and Ruby Ridge guys were a little on the nutty side.

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 30 2016, @09:53PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 30 2016, @09:53PM (#420663)

          #ChristianExtremistLivesMatter

          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 31 2016, @12:05AM

            by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 31 2016, @12:05AM (#420716)

            Mormon Spiritual Wives Matter!

      • (Score: 1) by Burz on Sunday October 30 2016, @11:43PM

        by Burz (6156) on Sunday October 30 2016, @11:43PM (#420710)

        LaVoy has been recorded in the past saying his purpose was to force police to kill him. He espoused a wannabe-martyr's world view... a truly crazy dipshit.

        And yes, charging at cops with a vehicle (and nearly missing one) is one way to accomplish that. Doubly so if you are supposed to have your hands in the air and reach for towards a part of your body that just happens to be holding a semi-automatic weapon while you're approaching said cops.

        If he didn't want to get shot and was really trying to surrender, the smartest thing to do would have been to leave the weapon in the truck or at the very least keep his hands in the air.

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 31 2016, @02:28AM

          by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 31 2016, @02:28AM (#420745)

          LaVoy has been recorded in the past saying his purpose was to force police to kill him

          Where's a link for context? I showed you mine. (I even provided context in the grandparent's linked videos regarding LaVoy stating "you're gonna have to shoot me", in that LaVoy was on his way to meet with law enforcement when he was killed, namely the sheriff of the next county.

          charging at cops with a vehicle (and nearly missing one) is [committing suicide by cop]

          Yeah, it's easy to make such a claim when you ignore the fact that said cop was next to a roadblock, said roadblock was on a blind curve and on a down-grade. Or... you could look at the video I linked - here's another link to the specific relative section of LaVoy's truck and its calculated speed upon approach to the roadblock [youtube.com].

          If he didn't want to get shot and was really trying to surrender, the smartest thing to do would have been to leave the weapon in the truck or at the very least keep his hands in the air

          You apparently didn't even bother to read the very comment you responded to: one of the FBI guys shot him in the chest with a "rubber bullet", and only afterwards is LaVoy seen "reaching for his chest" multiple times". Go back, read it again, and if you're interested in an actual discussion on the matter, examine the evidence presented in the videos which were provided for you to view and critique.

          • (Score: 0, Flamebait) by Burz on Monday November 07 2016, @07:01PM

            by Burz (6156) on Monday November 07 2016, @07:01PM (#423687)

            This is actually funny, its so detached from reality.

            People get to keep speeding when approaching a MANNED police roadblock? ...which didn't suddenly materialize right in front of him.

            And that's just for starters.

            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 15 2016, @04:23AM

              by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 15 2016, @04:23AM (#426857)

              People get to keep speeding when approaching a MANNED police roadblock? ...which didn't suddenly materialize right in front of him.

              The clearly-labelled link in the post you replied to [soylentnews.org] contains information which directly contradicts your "claims". Here it is again: LaVoy did not "continue to speed" at the roadblock; the roadblock did very much appear suddenly to anyone rounding the preceeding curve. [youtube.com]

              And that's just for starters.

              Oh, do go on.

              I'll keep a closer eye out now that I see you like to wait a week to compose your wordy and witty replies apparently consisting of nothing but implied ad hominem and ignoring spoon-fed supporting evidence.

  • (Score: 5, Insightful) by Thexalon on Sunday October 30 2016, @12:26PM

    by Thexalon (636) on Sunday October 30 2016, @12:26PM (#420488)

    There are 2 other possible lessons here:
    1. If you're going to protest, be white.
    2. Opposing the government, even using threats of lethal force, is just fine, but opposing the megacorps, even without breaking any laws, that will get you into real trouble.

    Of those, #2 is more likely, because what they're doing to the NoDAPL people is identical to the basic tactics used against Occupy Wall Street. In essence, destroy protests by force.

    --
    Alcohol makes the world go round ... and round and round.
    • (Score: 2, Insightful) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday October 30 2016, @01:01PM

      1) Dude, racist much?
      2) Dude, cynical much?

      The difference was a hell of a lot of angry people were paying attention to the Bundy incident. Right now the only thing getting paid attention to is the election.

      --
      My rights don't end where your fear begins.
      • (Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 30 2016, @01:25PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 30 2016, @01:25PM (#420500)

        > 1) Dude, racist much?

        He who smelt it dealt it!

      • (Score: 5, Insightful) by mcgrew on Sunday October 30 2016, @05:14PM

        by mcgrew (701) <publish@mcgrewbooks.com> on Sunday October 30 2016, @05:14PM (#420562) Homepage Journal

        Dude, racist much?

        Realistic, not racist. He's pointing out the racism that's inherent in the system. When blacks or Hispanics or indigenous people protest, they're in far more danger of physical harm from the authorities than whites.

        Racism is a tool of the rich to keep the poor at each other's throats so the poor ignore society's inherent classism. Why is it that a rich man can brag publicly about sexually assaulting women and still have half the country rooting for him to be president?

        If anyone I know spoke like that, he'd be a pariah. Why is it okay for a rich person to be an asshole?

        --
        Free Martian whores! [mcgrewbooks.com]
        • (Score: 2) by AthanasiusKircher on Sunday October 30 2016, @06:32PM

          by AthanasiusKircher (5291) on Sunday October 30 2016, @06:32PM (#420589) Journal

          Why is it that a rich man can brag publicly about sexually assaulting women and still have half the country rooting for him to be president?

          It should be noted that a significant percentage of Trump supporters are more interested in preventing Clinton from winning than they are in "rooting for" Trump in any major way. A Pew Center poll last month found that only 28% of Trump supporters would actually be "excited" if he won, with the largest category (61%) saying they'd merely feel "relieved."

          Obviously there are a scary number of Trump sycophants out there, but they're far outnumbered by people who think they're "choosing the lesser of two evils."

          Why is it okay for a rich person to be an asshole?

          Lots of people fantasize about being rich. A significant number of people likely fantasize about how that would enable them to "not live by the rules" most people have to. Frankly, it doesn't surprise me at all that there are a significant number of men who'd just love to be able to grab whatever beautiful woman was around them whenever they wanted. Most would never actually consider such a thing, but for them, Trump gets to "live the dream."

          Maybe? I don't really know. The militant Trump supporters are so confusing to me that it's difficult for me to imagine what goes on inside their heads.

          • (Score: 2) by isostatic on Sunday October 30 2016, @07:40PM

            by isostatic (365) on Sunday October 30 2016, @07:40PM (#420612) Journal

            I suspect most Clinton supporters will be the same - relieved when trump loses, but not particularly excited by more status quo. On the other hand people were excited by Obama and hardly anything groundbreaking appear to happen

            • (Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Monday October 31 2016, @02:20PM

              by tangomargarine (667) on Monday October 31 2016, @02:20PM (#420865)

              On the other hand people were excited by Obama and hardly anything groundbreaking appear to happen

              And on the gripping hand, one of those things that didn't happen was the apocalypse

              --
              "Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 31 2016, @12:54AM

            by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 31 2016, @12:54AM (#420725)

            It should be noted that a significant percentage of Trump supporters are more interested in preventing Clinton from winning than they are in "rooting for" Trump in any major way. A Pew Center poll last month found that only 28% of Trump supporters would actually be "excited" if he won, with the largest category (61%) saying they'd merely feel "relieved."

            Obviously there are a scary number of Trump sycophants out there, but they're far outnumbered by people who think they're "choosing the lesser of two evils."

            While I am sympathetic that many do not want Hillary as President, I am having a hard time with people who think that Trump is a viable alternative. So, you don't want Hillary? Fine. Why not choose a third party candidate instead? Let's just have a reality check here. Trump is not a Republican; he has merely found a bunch of useful idiots who haven't yet noticed that he has rebranded the Republican party as the party of Trump.

            Lots of people fantasize about being rich. A significant number of people likely fantasize about how that would enable them to "not live by the rules" most people have to. Frankly, it doesn't surprise me at all that there are a significant number of men who'd just love to be able to grab whatever beautiful woman was around them whenever they wanted. Most would never actually consider such a thing, but for them, Trump gets to "live the dream."

            If this is true then it does not speak at all well of today's Republican party. For everyone's sake, I hope it is not true.

            Maybe? I don't really know. The militant Trump supporters are so confusing to me that it's difficult for me to imagine what goes on inside their heads.

            There are lots of things about this election cycle that I find baffling. It is like the nation I once knew--the country I was born and raised in--has been stood on it's head!

            • (Score: 1) by khallow on Monday October 31 2016, @12:59AM

              by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Monday October 31 2016, @12:59AM (#420728) Journal
              Same goes for the Democrat party here. This would be the election to vote third party.
        • (Score: 2) by fido_dogstoyevsky on Sunday October 30 2016, @09:11PM

          Why is it that a rich man can brag publicly about sexually assaulting women and still have half the country rooting [urbandictionary.com] for him to be president?

          Here in Oz that wording is... appropriate?... inappropriate?... ironic?... have to settle for funny, but in a strange way.

          If anyone I know spoke like that, he'd be a pariah. Why is it okay for a rich person to be an asshole?

          A pariah CAN have lots of money, but they're still a pariah. In a civilised place.

          --
          It's NOT a conspiracy... it's a plot.
        • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday October 30 2016, @10:51PM

          Funny, whenever I'm realistic about race, I get called a racist. I guess it's okay to shit on white guys simply because of the color of their skin but anyone else you're a racist.

          --
          My rights don't end where your fear begins.
          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 30 2016, @10:57PM

            by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 30 2016, @10:57PM (#420691)

            I guess it's okay to shit on white guys simply because of the color of their skin but anyone else you're a racist.

            Dude, didn't you get the memo? "Racism" now means 'prejudice based on race, with power', so it's IMPOSSIBLE for any non-white minority to be racist no matter how hard they try or how loudly they scream 'he white! beat his shit!" before doing so. In summary: whites are ALL racist, non-whites CANNOT be racist.

            You racist.

      • (Score: 5, Informative) by Thexalon on Sunday October 30 2016, @07:42PM

        by Thexalon (636) on Sunday October 30 2016, @07:42PM (#420614)

        1) Dude, racist much?

        No, I'm acknowledging that American society is racist. Which is very easy to demonstrate, when you have police killing black guys like Philando Castille and John Crawford III for no reason whatsoever (neither had committed a crime) and nobody being punished, while white guys like the Bundys can point AR-15's at government officers, break into government buildings, vandalize federal property, and not be punished. Now, if you are going to tell me that race has nothing to do with it, you're going to have to come up with some darn good explanations.

        --
        Alcohol makes the world go round ... and round and round.
        • (Score: 3, Interesting) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday October 30 2016, @10:53PM

          False dichotomy. Many, many more white people are killed by cops every year and nobody thinks that's racially motivated.

          --
          My rights don't end where your fear begins.
          • (Score: 2) by Pav on Monday October 31 2016, @12:43AM

            by Pav (114) on Monday October 31 2016, @12:43AM (#420723)

            "Many, many more" translates to almost twice as many... or to put it another way, you're almost three times as likely to be shot if you are black, and over twice as likely even if you're black and unarmed. Even if you want to deny the racial component the police are killing more people of all races despite violent crime being at historic lows. Also, the number of killings per department are not strongly correlated to levels of crime (or lack thereof) in a particular city, so there's a problem even if you don't want to acknowledge the racial component of it.

            • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday October 31 2016, @01:03AM

              False. Do the math yourself. Don't rely on pundits.

              --
              My rights don't end where your fear begins.
              • (Score: 2) by Pav on Monday October 31 2016, @01:28AM

                by Pav (114) on Monday October 31 2016, @01:28AM (#420734)

                The burden of truth certainly isn't on this side of the argument. Like all received wisdom I've checked the math on one or two random facts... not exhaustively, but enough to give me confidence. Links in articles included FBI statistics and reputable research from respected institutions. No, I'm not going to look it all up again for you.

                • (Score: 2) by Pav on Monday October 31 2016, @01:31AM

                  by Pav (114) on Monday October 31 2016, @01:31AM (#420735)

                  Burden of PROOF (not truth)... but meaning is the same I guess.

                • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday October 31 2016, @02:22AM

                  I did the math myself from government sources. It said a factor of something like 1.2 and it was confirmed by someone disagreeing with me right here, though I haven't verified which way that went yet, meaning either white people or black people are only ~20% more likely to be shot by police than the other. Now 20% still ain't inside statistical irrelevancy like it should be but it sure as shit ain't 2-3 times as likely.

                  --
                  My rights don't end where your fear begins.
                  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 31 2016, @03:02AM

                    by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 31 2016, @03:02AM (#420752)

                    > I did the math myself from government sources.

                    That's funny. Not only does the mighty bullshiter have his own opinions, he's got his own government sources.

          • (Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Monday October 31 2016, @02:27PM

            by tangomargarine (667) on Monday October 31 2016, @02:27PM (#420867)

            Many, many more white people are killed by cops every year and nobody thinks that's racially motivated.

            That's because there's more of them. You're familiar with what the word "minority" means, right? By the math, whitey should get in trouble ~5.75x (72.4% vs. 12.6%) as often as blacks if we assume egalitarian police trouble.

            False dichotomy.

            Speaking of logical failures...

            --
            "Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
            • (Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 31 2016, @04:06PM

              by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 31 2016, @04:06PM (#420913)

              That assumes racial parity in conduct apt to result in negative police interactions.

              This is something of a third rail - suggesting that the melanin-empowered are crime-prone is obviously racist. But the case that criminal activities are evenly spread throughout society is, at best, unproven.

              Many studies of a sociological nature point to cultural effects correlating with economic circumstances, and then segue into suggesting that institutionalised racism resulted in a race-based crime outcome, but there you get into chicken/egg arguments as well.

              Suffice to say that a simple observation that white people are proportionally less likely to be arrested is not effective evidence of racism as such.

            • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday October 31 2016, @06:06PM

              By the math, whitey should get in trouble ~5.75x (72.4% vs. 12.6%) as often as blacks if we assume egalitarian police trouble.

              I can't tell if you're saying the police give passes to every other race or if you're saying black people are just more crime prone. I hope it's the latter because the former is obvious horse shit.

              --
              My rights don't end where your fear begins.
              • (Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Monday October 31 2016, @06:31PM

                by tangomargarine (667) on Monday October 31 2016, @06:31PM (#420960)

                I'm not making any claim; I'm just pointing out your statement is disingenuous. Obviously white people get in trouble more since there's way more of them. If we took the total number of blacks arrested and the total number of whites arrested in the U.S. and the black number was higher *in total* obviously something is deeply, deeply wrong. (Which is not to say there's not already a problem; it's just not at that scope.)

                This whole argument going up to the GGGGP or whatever (your first reply) is moronic.

                --
                "Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 30 2016, @03:24PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 30 2016, @03:24PM (#420527)

      Nobody was about to build anything in Oregon. Law enforcement could just wait, like a medieval siege.

      On the newly "sacred" land (oh please) there was a need to get stuff done.

      • (Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 30 2016, @04:44PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 30 2016, @04:44PM (#420547)

        On the newly "sacred" land (oh please) there was a need to get stuff done.

        The very reason the pipeline is being built where it is is due to it being moved away from an earlier proposed route due to a nearby "regular USian" city objecting to the pipeline's proximity due to potential oil spills.

        So, once again, the wheels of USian government turn in a manner to crush the rights of Native Americans in spite of promises and treaties made. What, "undisturbed use and occupation [sacredstonecamp.org]" of your lands? That's soooo 1868.

        The Standing Rock protesters, much like those at Bunkerville [youtube.com] and Malheur [youtube.com], were on the moral high ground against a deceitful and malicious enemy of all Americans.

  • (Score: 1) by Ethanol-fueled on Sunday October 30 2016, @05:02PM

    by Ethanol-fueled (2792) on Sunday October 30 2016, @05:02PM (#420554) Homepage

    Yes, mister FBI or ATF agent, I totally agree. In fact, I am now loading my illegal unserialized fully-automatic military-style assault rifle's 200-round magazines full of baby-killing ammo and readying my molotov cocktails and flaming arrows.

    And I will also bring nunchaku, because in addition to being illegal in many states they have the added bonus of making you look really cool, especially while yelling fake Chinese gibberish. I'll have those jackbooted government thugs cowering in fear!

    To get to the protest I will drive in my unregistered truck with its illegally modified exhaust system. *BBbbbbbPPPPRPTPTPTPTPTPTPTPTP!*

  • (Score: 1) by mtm_king on Monday October 31 2016, @05:08AM

    by mtm_king (6133) on Monday October 31 2016, @05:08AM (#420790)

    Like your sig.

    --
    Hey