@newtboy Posing fake news.

Tell me about this "intruder" and how he is linked to MEGA or such.

Sure the report is slanted and indicated so but where is the proof?

When does an intruder brake glass "out" onto the outside?


Looks more like a lover spat gone horrible wrong.


No MEGA going on here.
Unless you are using MEGA as:
M Men
E Eating
G Gay
A ASS.

the whole breaking into to serve a warrant is fraught w/danger and sheer stupidity.

- go into a house, the occupants have the right to gun every intruder down. dead cops when one JW witness call could get the door open and layout scanned?
- how many in the home deserve the death penalty?
- should landlords be held liable too? shoot up the f'n' place! good call officer fife.

seems to be just lazy law enforcement. too fast, too uncertain, too inhumane. until they have inside agents clearing the house for innocents (even a dog) it's a desperate act of fools.


yeah. i know. but after reading how a cop carelessly discharged his weapon into the head of a sleeping child - no crime is worth another crime.

If true, and she pleads guilty to whatever charges they levied, then maybe, but if she fights them in court that altruistic assumption is out the window and she gets another strike for wasting the court's time (and our money) on a case she knows she's definitely guilty of.

We assume she's being honest and this was just a security test, but more than one mother has murdered their daughter's high school rival. I'm not willing to take a criminals word when they suggest they were only trespassing as a public service, not falsifying their identity to hide from crimes they're planning.

I don't think school shooters have ever disguised themselves as students when they weren't...and she didn't bring a gun sized piece of metal through the metal detectors....so she wasn't testing against how easy it would be for armed intruders, only unarmed imposters.

Wow, thanks for the laugh. I thought I had heard every 9/11 theory out there. Apparently 6 months wasn't enough time to brief Bush on the Al Qaeda threat, because his schedule was still backed up from the inauguration. And the FBI and CIA were just too polite to intrude on his time clearing brush on the ranch with a vital national security situation. LOL!!!

Also, what were these "plans for Osama?" Haven't heard that one either.

Reply to multiple previous comments:



Re:
"Literally no different from a pistol other than it can have better accuracy and sometimes higher caliber"

.38 (9mm), .40, .45 are the calibers you will see used by police pistols

.223 (5.56mm), .300, .308, are the calibers you will see used by police rifles

Unless an officer is using a personal firearm at work, the pistols should all be higher caliber.

The major difference is muzzle velocity damage.
The pistol cuts a tunnel the diameter of the [expanded] bullet.
The rifle leaves an exit wound multiple inches across, and at point blank will grenade the exit side of the target, painting the wall with gibs.





Re:
"Can you tell me why you believe it's "not a great idea" when the criminals already all have guns too?"

Because police should be there to protect citizens lives, at the cost of their own if needed. (Hence the "hero"/"Public Servant" status they so like to remind us of)

If they protect their own lives, at the cost of citizens if needed, then they become a part of the problem they are supposed to be solving.

Just imagine the uninvolved bystander down the street struck down for no fault of their own.

The better path forward is full head to toe level 4 body armor for police, not heavier police firepower in packed suburbs.

That way they have the option to hold fire and assess the situation without shitting their pants and hosing the place down with lead "just in case, so they minimize the risk of getting hurt".

Full L4 body armor means that when things like the VT shooting happen, the police don't pitch tents outside and wait for SWAT (who actually has armor) to show up while people are likely getting killed inside.

Full L4 body armor means that when police open a door to a bathroom with an intruder inside (or a vacuum), they don't have to be thinking "kill or be killed".





Re:
"You are assuming it's a high velocity rifle. It's likely only 9mm, meaning minimal impact and penetration"

The video shows shots of the rifle magazine. It's not a 9mm pcc (pistol caliber carbine) magazine. It's the standard form factor. Meaning it is likely to be one of common the off the shelf calibers for that form factor :
.223/5.56
.300 blackout
6.8 spc
.224 valkyrie
6.5 grendel
None are 9mm. And other than a subsonic .300 blackout variant (used with suppressors/silencers), all pack a world more hurt than a 9mm.






It's true that a faster/heavier round will pass through more walls, and more houses.

Not sure it matters though, as 9mm ball will go through plenty of sheetrock layers, and rifle ammo stands a chance at fragmenting on impact with obstacles.
Which goes farther for any given shot will depend on what each one strikes along the way, and if it's bullet is of type FMJ/ball or HP or frag or penetrator or whatever.

-scheherazade

Granted. As I wrote above, I think it's likely they both were telling the truth....her leash propped the door open, so he assumed it opened with his fob, she assumed he didn't use one. Neither noticed what the other was doing and both assumed the worst....difference being his assumption was she's a jerk requiring no action, her assumption was he's an intruder in her secure building, requiring action.

Because this is a safety issue and there had been numerous requests by management to under no circumstances allow a stranger into the building without using their fob, and he knew that, and all he would have to do is waive his hand with the fob still in it at the scanner instead of force his way past her physically and be rude and suspicious (showing a random fob doesn't prove a bit it's for that building without using it successfully).....for those reasons combined, I put the lion's share of blame on him.

The entirety of the insanely overboard consequences fell on her before anyone had even partial explanation of her side.

As I also said, I think she should have called police the instant he pushed past her and just followed him, but she wasn't trying to escalate things like I think he was.

I can't be certain of her motives, but I've stopped people from just pushing into my secure building when I lived in one, blacks, whites, Mexicans, men, women, even kids. I made them all use their key or buzz the apartment they were visiting. Had anyone acted like he did, pushing in like a burglar, I would not have been nearly as calm and composed as she was, even if they were a white child....they steal too.

I'm glad you think the reaction as overboard, at least we can agree this didn't warrant death threats on either side.

As I thought, one more instance of a white woman following the rules by asking a black man to follow the fucking rules, and so she's labeled a racist.....who's married to an African American. *facepalm

The man pushed his way into the secure building as she opened the door for her dog and refused to tell her which apartment he lived in or demonstrate that he had a key to the building. He knew that was the procedure requested by the building owners/managers, he got the same emails requesting no one allow any stranger into the secure building that she did, but he refused to follow procedure.
What's more, he decided to publicly shame her over attempting to follow posted safety procedures and building rules because he's racist. Guaranteed he would not have recorded and publicized this if she were black doing exactly the same thing, and news outlets wouldn't air it if he did, but because she's white, game on.

Now, for properly following the building rules, she's fired, ostracized, and getting multiple death threats daily. That's outrageous. He should have the same consequences, as the actual racist in this situation.

Bbq where it's not allowed and rudely refuse to move to where it is allowed, I'll call the cops. Loudly hawk water under my window all day without a permit and rudely refuse to move, I'll call the cops. Push into my secure building and act like a rude intruder instead of my new neighbor, I'll call the cops. I don't give one single fuck what color your skin is.....this bullshit that a white person"snitching" on a black person (who is violating the posted rules/law and being a rude asshole about it) is reason to call them racists is just that, bullshit.
Call me a racist now, because dark skin won't protect you from having to follow the rules and law or be stopped/ reported around me any more or less than pink, yellow, tan, red, or any other color skin would.
Downvote spreading this narrative that whites must ignore the rude illegal actions of non whites or be labeled racist. Fuck that, homie don't play dat.

As I said, it's a semantic argument about what you call an attack. Most people call intruding on a secure government system, testing security, and stealing data an attack, obviously they, and you, don't. You're entitled to that opinion, I'm entitled to disagree if I so choose.

Yes, it's normal across the web to have a pubic website's security tested by potential attackers by scanning the system before launching an attack.

What's not such regular activity is someone successfully breaking into secure government election systems using among other methods Trojan horse emails known to have been designed by hostile foreign powers, which was one detail I recall from 2016.

That's the kind of foreign policy we only like to export from America, not import, cause Merica first!

So, to save you wasting 22 minutes watching this dreck, this is all a semantic argument about how you define "attack".

If you say illicitly intruding on a system and stealing the data, and probing the system to prepare for future intrusions is just "scanning" and to be an "attack" they must successfully, detectably use that stolen data to take over/directly influence the system (like deleting or invalidating voters or freezing/ransomwareing the election computer systems) or to successfully change the results inside election machines, then there was no successful attack detected.
If you think breaking into election systems, stealing the data, and scanning the election system for exploitable vulnerabilities is an attack, there were many attacks detected.

Jebus Christ, this is what Jimmy Dore has become, a ranting conspiracy theorist that gleefully twists any fact to match his narrative? How sad.

If you know it's an intruder (not family or a guest) that's not an accident, it's self defense.
If you don't know but shoot anyway, that's criminal negligence.

The short answer is "it depends on the circumstances".
(Edit: because you have a legal right to do it doesn't mean it's warranted in every instance.)
The longer answer is "Yes I might if I knew for certain it wasn't someone who should be in my house, and Yes I would for certain if it was multiple unannounced intruders or a single armed intruder."

To be technical, in Texas they taught us someone only had to be unannounced on your property, not in your house (explained as a holdover from when horse and cattle rustling was a problem and a capital offense), so in that sense I would not do what I was taught in Texas. I have no qualms whatsoever about killing a known intruder inside my house....with or without warning.

Depends.

If there was an intruder in my home I knew wasn't my wife, cat, or dog (the only ones with any business being here) that didn't announce themselves and entered my bedroom, absolutely 100% they're getting the 12 gauge. It's way easier to get out of jail than out of the morgue, and my wife won't be raped or killed, nor both of us eaten (we have bears here) because I was afraid to protect us.
Because I don't live alone, I would likely call out to be sure it wasn't my wife unless I could actually see her there with me. Because I don't WANT to kill someone, I might fire a warning shot but with a pump action that's not necessary, and my first load is low power bird shot...the second is buckshot, third on are slugs.


Full disclosure, I live in California now, where the law isn't on my side. A few years ago a man in my town shot one of three armed home invaders inside his house and was actually prosecuted. I'm fairly certain he was acquitted, I'm 100% certain he was in the right.

Good lesson.
Don't just enter a house you don't live in, even if you used to live there, and answer clearly when the homeowner asks who you are.
In Texas, I was taught you shoot first and ask who's there later when there's an intruder in your home.

It probably was. If they make any noise around humans at all, it's the warning growl that you'd expect. Unless you're intruding on their territory or threatening their young, they will slink off soundlessly if you come near.