The unofficial online home for fans of the Western Michigan University Broncos. Part of Collegiate Sports Nation (CSN).

(07-29-2020 12:24 PM)wmubroncopilot Wrote:  

(07-29-2020 11:51 AM)Cucumber Salad Wrote:  

(07-27-2020 05:55 PM)wmubroncopilot Wrote:  Not the point. We're talking about the role of government here. Yes or no-- should unidentified federal cops be driving around cities and grabbing people off the streets?

It is the point. Everything happens in context. As you describe it in a vacuum of course the answer is no. But it’s not in a vacuum and it’s not devoid of context as you must have it in order to make you silly point.

Shortly after Minneapolis Philadelphia was attacked by rioters and looters. I watch it on live TV. The host of marked police cars we are torched and destroyed and used as battering rams by protesters who had confiscated the cars. Easy targets because they were marked.

Here’s a litany of media tapes with the audacity to think you’re so dull it as the fires burn in the background they can say to you with a straight face that the protests are basically peaceful. Basically? As buildings burn in the background? As police officers are murdered?

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=BbKvhnLoV0...e=youtu.be

I'm not denying violence has been involved in some (certainly not all) of the protests.

I asked you a direct question and despite "providing context" you failed to answer.

I answered plainly. In a vacuum? No! In this context absolutely!

I hope you realize you just tried to justify using context. Not all! Fine but for those who are protesting and doing so violently they should be arrested. Plain clothes cops or federal agents it doesn’t matter. Someone or group keeps breaking into your house damaging your family and your possessions you don’t give a hell whether it’s Barney Fife or G.I. Joe Who comes to the rescue. Let’s don’t hide behind civil rights when you’re acting uncivilly.

Don’t confuse these clowns with MLK, Ralph Abernathy and John Lewis.
They’re Billy Ayers and Bernadine Dorn wannabes.

(07-29-2020 01:38 PM)Cucumber Salad Wrote:  

(07-29-2020 12:24 PM)wmubroncopilot Wrote:  

(07-29-2020 11:51 AM)Cucumber Salad Wrote:  

(07-27-2020 05:55 PM)wmubroncopilot Wrote:  Not the point. We're talking about the role of government here. Yes or no-- should unidentified federal cops be driving around cities and grabbing people off the streets?

It is the point. Everything happens in context. As you describe it in a vacuum of course the answer is no. But it’s not in a vacuum and it’s not devoid of context as you must have it in order to make you silly point.

Shortly after Minneapolis Philadelphia was attacked by rioters and looters. I watch it on live TV. The host of marked police cars we are torched and destroyed and used as battering rams by protesters who had confiscated the cars. Easy targets because they were marked.

Here’s a litany of media tapes with the audacity to think you’re so dull it as the fires burn in the background they can say to you with a straight face that the protests are basically peaceful. Basically? As buildings burn in the background? As police officers are murdered?

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=BbKvhnLoV0...e=youtu.be

I'm not denying violence has been involved in some (certainly not all) of the protests.

I asked you a direct question and despite "providing context" you failed to answer.

I answered plainly. In a vacuum? No! In this context absolutely!

I hope you realize you just tried to justify using context. Not all! Fine but for those who are protesting and doing so violently they should be arrested. Plain clothes cops or federal agents it doesn’t matter. Someone or group keeps breaking into your house damaging your family and your possessions you don’t give a hell whether it’s Barney Fife or G.I. Joe Who comes to the rescue. Let’s don’t hide behind civil rights when you’re acting uncivilly.

Don’t confuse these clowns with MLK, Ralph Abernathy and John Lewis.
They’re Billy Ayers and Bernadine Dorn wannabes.

You still seem to have missed the part where DHS openly admitted to "proactive" arrests, meaning, they are not only arresting people they've witnessed committing crimes but people they think might do so in the future. No warrant, no charges, nothing.

Nobody is "hiding behind civil rights". People are supposed to have them, always, until charged. What a disgusting un-American statement.

(07-27-2020 06:39 PM)DtownBronco Wrote:  

(07-27-2020 05:55 PM)wmubroncopilot Wrote:  Not the point. We're talking about the role of government here. Yes or no-- should unidentified federal cops be driving around cities and grabbing people off the streets?

Yes. They are arresting criminals with the authority granted to them by the Homeland Security act of 2002.

---

40 U.S. Code § 1315. Law enforcement authority of Secretary of Homeland Security for protection of public property

U.S. Code

a) In General.—
To the extent provided for by transfers made pursuant to the Homeland Security Act of 2002, the Secretary of Homeland Security (in this section referred to as the “Secretary”) shall protect the buildings, grounds, and property that are owned, occupied, or secured by the Federal Government (including any agency, instrumentality, or wholly owned or mixed-ownership corporation thereof) and the persons on the property.
b) Officers and Agents.—
(1) Designation.—
The Secretary may designate employees of the Department of Homeland Security, including employees transferred to the Department from the Office of the Federal Protective Service of the General Services Administration pursuant to the Homeland Security Act of 2002, as officers and agents for duty in connection with the protection of property owned or occupied by the Federal Government and persons on the property, including duty in areas outside the property to the extent necessary to protect the property and persons on the property.
(2) Powers.—While engaged in the performance of official duties, an officer or agent designated under this subsection may—
A) enforce Federal laws and regulations for the protection of persons and property;
B) carry firearms;
C) make arrests without a warrant for any offense against the United States committed in the presence of the officer or agent or for any felony cognizable under the laws of the United States if the officer or agent has reasonable grounds to believe that the person to be arrested has committed or is committing a felony
D) serve warrants and subpoenas issued under the authority of the United States;
E) conduct investigations, on and off the property in question, of offenses that may have been committed against property owned or occupied by the Federal Government or persons on the property; and
F) carry out such other activities for the promotion of homeland security as the Secretary may prescribe.

Link

yep. No warrant needed. But personally I think we should just let them destroy their own city. If they want to destroy federal buildings there, let them - but cut off federal funding to these mayors & governors then.