LaxPower Back-Up Stick

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2020 9:03 pm

Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2020 9:03 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2020 8:50 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2020 6:12 pm

Farfromgeneva wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2020 5:32 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2020 5:28 pm

Farfromgeneva wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2020 4:03 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2020 3:42 pm

Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2020 9:51 am The first cop was a decent guy. The cop that shot him was just the type you run across. Already a bad disposition when he arrived. He needed a new job. So the guy tussles with the cops so they can shoot him? Like I said, I know two high school lacrosse players that punched cops and nothing much happened to them. Wrestled to the ground. No weapons drawn. Of course both had been drinking.

Nice job Dad, living up to your screen name. Did you coach those 2 lax bro knuckleheads too ?
No big deal, of course they'd been drinking. That makes it ok. Sad.

Did your 2 drunken lax bro proteges throw off 2 cops, punch them, take their weapon & flee.
...& the problem was the cop's attitude ?
I can't believe how casual you all are about Brooks drunk driving. No prob. Call him a cab. He won't do it again.

Rolfe patiently & professionally questioned & tested Brooks. He did not escalate a very difficult, potentially dangerous situation. He gave Brooks every opportunity. Brooks just keep digging his hole deeper. Brooks was a risk who needed to be arrested, removed from the road & his driving privileges revoked before he killed someone on the road, maybe his daughters.

You think Brooks posed no immediate risk ? He was drunk out of his mind. He overcame 2 trained police officers who had the advantage on him, injuring one in the process (Brosnan was limping noticeably & having difficulty pursuing). Rolfe had to make a split second decision. He had no way of knowing what Brooks would do. Would he drag someone out of a car & try to escape or enter someone's home & try to hide. Rolfe had to make an immediate, instinctive decision. He eliminated the threat when he was still within close range, before he got away. In situations like that, you instinctively revert to your tactical training. Hesitation can be deadly. It was an "awful but lawful" split second adrenaline fueled decision Rolfe had to make in an instant. Brooks created the situation which cost him his life.

I’m pretty sure training doesn’t include someone without a legally defined lethal weapon to be shot in the back. If so maybe that’s why the chief of police was forced out. Perhaps some phys Ed would be useful too if two guys got manhandled like you suggest but the drunk guy, and he was drunk. If you’re suggesting drunk driving deserves the death penalty, we’ll then say that and let that play out. It’s choosing who’s life is more important that you are doing and as citizens no one should have the power to do that.

At the end of the day there’s all these people far from Atlanta saying this and that but the guy was fired and probably will be convicted so that “awful but lawful” will be proven untrue. And if one wants to argue that the system was rigged well then it applies to been record for every citizen within that same system including the ones some are so fast to proclaim that the guy was an evil gangbanger because he had a record. Either the system is correct or it isn’t but in the community thus happened even most white people are horrified I can say from people at banks and funds to people I know who work at garages.

I'm saying that Brooks was an immediate threat to innocent lives already, just by getting there in that condition.
There was only one safe outcome -- his immediate incarceration, with adjudication initiated before he had the opportunity to get behind the wheel again. His car was his lethal weapon.
It was a death penalty only because he resisted a lawful arrest & assaulted 2 cops correctly doing their job.
4 Atlanta cops were just fired & 2 charged for using their non-lethal tasers, but it's no big deal if an out of control drunk takes one & turns it on the police.

And you don’t see any difference in one given the authority to do so but expected to be held to a very high standard and a regular citizen?

He wasn’t an immediate danger by getting there. The danger had passed. Literally not the case. 45 minutes of calm discussion as well. So again literally not an immediate danger. Doesn’t absolve his behavior, don’t get stupid and go down that path please, I’m explicitly saying that he deserved to be held accountable. But taking his life and shooting where you risk hitting a innocence bystander (again it can be heard w people saying “to, there’s kids around here when they are shooting”) is in no way commensurate with the violation. It is really that simple. Now the shooter has got to go and his pension should go to the family of the victim. Or my share back in my pocket in a refund.

I don’t see only one outcome, seems like you are using a very narrow view of how to manage this situation. Not very thoughtful or creative to say “only one safe outcome”. You certainly can never prove that is true, it’s impossible and it’s not trying to work very hard to have a better overall outcome. Sounds like applying war like military view to domestic life to me.

The danger had not passed. As soon as he was released he could go home & get behind the wheel of the black Volvo. You think not having his license would stop him ? Rolfe fired while he was still at close range, reducing the risk of an errant shot.

absolutely shoot him in the back.
You've sunk to new lows salty. Weird.

It’s not new. His mask slipped a long time ago.

yeah, but this is a new low.

Farfromgeneva wrote: ↑Tue Jun 16, 2020 1:30 am

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2020 9:03 pm

Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2020 9:03 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2020 8:50 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2020 6:12 pm

Farfromgeneva wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2020 5:32 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2020 5:28 pm

Farfromgeneva wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2020 4:03 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2020 3:42 pm

Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2020 9:51 am The first cop was a decent guy. The cop that shot him was just the type you run across. Already a bad disposition when he arrived. He needed a new job. So the guy tussles with the cops so they can shoot him? Like I said, I know two high school lacrosse players that punched cops and nothing much happened to them. Wrestled to the ground. No weapons drawn. Of course both had been drinking.

Nice job Dad, living up to your screen name. Did you coach those 2 lax bro knuckleheads too ?
No big deal, of course they'd been drinking. That makes it ok. Sad.

Did your 2 drunken lax bro proteges throw off 2 cops, punch them, take their weapon & flee.
...& the problem was the cop's attitude ?
I can't believe how casual you all are about Brooks drunk driving. No prob. Call him a cab. He won't do it again.

Rolfe patiently & professionally questioned & tested Brooks. He did not escalate a very difficult, potentially dangerous situation. He gave Brooks every opportunity. Brooks just keep digging his hole deeper. Brooks was a risk who needed to be arrested, removed from the road & his driving privileges revoked before he killed someone on the road, maybe his daughters.

You think Brooks posed no immediate risk ? He was drunk out of his mind. He overcame 2 trained police officers who had the advantage on him, injuring one in the process (Brosnan was limping noticeably & having difficulty pursuing). Rolfe had to make a split second decision. He had no way of knowing what Brooks would do. Would he drag someone out of a car & try to escape or enter someone's home & try to hide. Rolfe had to make an immediate, instinctive decision. He eliminated the threat when he was still within close range, before he got away. In situations like that, you instinctively revert to your tactical training. Hesitation can be deadly. It was an "awful but lawful" split second adrenaline fueled decision Rolfe had to make in an instant. Brooks created the situation which cost him his life.

I’m pretty sure training doesn’t include someone without a legally defined lethal weapon to be shot in the back. If so maybe that’s why the chief of police was forced out. Perhaps some phys Ed would be useful too if two guys got manhandled like you suggest but the drunk guy, and he was drunk. If you’re suggesting drunk driving deserves the death penalty, we’ll then say that and let that play out. It’s choosing who’s life is more important that you are doing and as citizens no one should have the power to do that.

At the end of the day there’s all these people far from Atlanta saying this and that but the guy was fired and probably will be convicted so that “awful but lawful” will be proven untrue. And if one wants to argue that the system was rigged well then it applies to been record for every citizen within that same system including the ones some are so fast to proclaim that the guy was an evil gangbanger because he had a record. Either the system is correct or it isn’t but in the community thus happened even most white people are horrified I can say from people at banks and funds to people I know who work at garages.

I'm saying that Brooks was an immediate threat to innocent lives already, just by getting there in that condition.
There was only one safe outcome -- his immediate incarceration, with adjudication initiated before he had the opportunity to get behind the wheel again. His car was his lethal weapon.
It was a death penalty only because he resisted a lawful arrest & assaulted 2 cops correctly doing their job.
4 Atlanta cops were just fired & 2 charged for using their non-lethal tasers, but it's no big deal if an out of control drunk takes one & turns it on the police.

And you don’t see any difference in one given the authority to do so but expected to be held to a very high standard and a regular citizen?

He wasn’t an immediate danger by getting there. The danger had passed. Literally not the case. 45 minutes of calm discussion as well. So again literally not an immediate danger. Doesn’t absolve his behavior, don’t get stupid and go down that path please, I’m explicitly saying that he deserved to be held accountable. But taking his life and shooting where you risk hitting a innocence bystander (again it can be heard w people saying “to, there’s kids around here when they are shooting”) is in no way commensurate with the violation. It is really that simple. Now the shooter has got to go and his pension should go to the family of the victim. Or my share back in my pocket in a refund.

I don’t see only one outcome, seems like you are using a very narrow view of how to manage this situation. Not very thoughtful or creative to say “only one safe outcome”. You certainly can never prove that is true, it’s impossible and it’s not trying to work very hard to have a better overall outcome. Sounds like applying war like military view to domestic life to me.

The danger had not passed. As soon as he was released he could go home & get behind the wheel of the black Volvo. You think not having his license would stop him ? Rolfe fired while he was still at close range, reducing the risk of an errant shot.

absolutely shoot him in the back.
You've sunk to new lows salty. Weird.

It’s not new. His mask slipped a long time ago.

yeah, but this is a new low.

It’s either really stupid, duplicitous and reflects a person who wants a police state is is ok with citizens being murdered by the state at their most minimal discomfort any of which are awful. Third world dictator non free country mentality stuff.

I'm saying that Brooks was an immediate threat to innocent lives already, just by getting there in that condition.
There was only one safe outcome -- his immediate incarceration, with adjudication initiated before he had the opportunity to get behind the wheel again. His car was his lethal weapon.

old salt wrote: ↑Tue Jun 16, 2020 1:55 am

Farfromgeneva wrote: ↑Tue Jun 16, 2020 1:30 am

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2020 9:03 pm

Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2020 9:03 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2020 8:50 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2020 6:12 pm

Farfromgeneva wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2020 5:32 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2020 5:28 pm

Farfromgeneva wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2020 4:03 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2020 3:42 pm

Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2020 9:51 am The first cop was a decent guy. The cop that shot him was just the type you run across. Already a bad disposition when he arrived. He needed a new job. So the guy tussles with the cops so they can shoot him? Like I said, I know two high school lacrosse players that punched cops and nothing much happened to them. Wrestled to the ground. No weapons drawn. Of course both had been drinking.

Nice job Dad, living up to your screen name. Did you coach those 2 lax bro knuckleheads too ?
No big deal, of course they'd been drinking. That makes it ok. Sad.

Did your 2 drunken lax bro proteges throw off 2 cops, punch them, take their weapon & flee.
...& the problem was the cop's attitude ?
I can't believe how casual you all are about Brooks drunk driving. No prob. Call him a cab. He won't do it again.

Rolfe patiently & professionally questioned & tested Brooks. He did not escalate a very difficult, potentially dangerous situation. He gave Brooks every opportunity. Brooks just keep digging his hole deeper. Brooks was a risk who needed to be arrested, removed from the road & his driving privileges revoked before he killed someone on the road, maybe his daughters.

You think Brooks posed no immediate risk ? He was drunk out of his mind. He overcame 2 trained police officers who had the advantage on him, injuring one in the process (Brosnan was limping noticeably & having difficulty pursuing). Rolfe had to make a split second decision. He had no way of knowing what Brooks would do. Would he drag someone out of a car & try to escape or enter someone's home & try to hide. Rolfe had to make an immediate, instinctive decision. He eliminated the threat when he was still within close range, before he got away. In situations like that, you instinctively revert to your tactical training. Hesitation can be deadly. It was an "awful but lawful" split second adrenaline fueled decision Rolfe had to make in an instant. Brooks created the situation which cost him his life.

I’m pretty sure training doesn’t include someone without a legally defined lethal weapon to be shot in the back. If so maybe that’s why the chief of police was forced out. Perhaps some phys Ed would be useful too if two guys got manhandled like you suggest but the drunk guy, and he was drunk. If you’re suggesting drunk driving deserves the death penalty, we’ll then say that and let that play out. It’s choosing who’s life is more important that you are doing and as citizens no one should have the power to do that.

At the end of the day there’s all these people far from Atlanta saying this and that but the guy was fired and probably will be convicted so that “awful but lawful” will be proven untrue. And if one wants to argue that the system was rigged well then it applies to been record for every citizen within that same system including the ones some are so fast to proclaim that the guy was an evil gangbanger because he had a record. Either the system is correct or it isn’t but in the community thus happened even most white people are horrified I can say from people at banks and funds to people I know who work at garages.

I'm saying that Brooks was an immediate threat to innocent lives already, just by getting there in that condition.
There was only one safe outcome -- his immediate incarceration, with adjudication initiated before he had the opportunity to get behind the wheel again. His car was his lethal weapon.
It was a death penalty only because he resisted a lawful arrest & assaulted 2 cops correctly doing their job.
4 Atlanta cops were just fired & 2 charged for using their non-lethal tasers, but it's no big deal if an out of control drunk takes one & turns it on the police.

And you don’t see any difference in one given the authority to do so but expected to be held to a very high standard and a regular citizen?

He wasn’t an immediate danger by getting there. The danger had passed. Literally not the case. 45 minutes of calm discussion as well. So again literally not an immediate danger. Doesn’t absolve his behavior, don’t get stupid and go down that path please, I’m explicitly saying that he deserved to be held accountable. But taking his life and shooting where you risk hitting a innocence bystander (again it can be heard w people saying “to, there’s kids around here when they are shooting”) is in no way commensurate with the violation. It is really that simple. Now the shooter has got to go and his pension should go to the family of the victim. Or my share back in my pocket in a refund.

I don’t see only one outcome, seems like you are using a very narrow view of how to manage this situation. Not very thoughtful or creative to say “only one safe outcome”. You certainly can never prove that is true, it’s impossible and it’s not trying to work very hard to have a better overall outcome. Sounds like applying war like military view to domestic life to me.

The danger had not passed. As soon as he was released he could go home & get behind the wheel of the black Volvo. You think not having his license would stop him ? Rolfe fired while he was still at close range, reducing the risk of an errant shot.

absolutely shoot him in the back.
You've sunk to new lows salty. Weird.

It’s not new. His mask slipped a long time ago.

yeah, but this is a new low.

It’s either really stupid, duplicitous and reflects a person who wants a police state is is ok with citizens being murdered by the state at their most minimal discomfort any of which are awful. Third world dictator non free country mentality stuff.

So says the Woke Lynch Mob. Enjoy Hotlanta, as it burns.
Watching the video, the Mayor was saying -- "just let him go "
Go punch a cop for Rayshard. Let the Mob rule.

Farfromgeneva wrote: ↑Tue Jun 16, 2020 3:20 am

old salt wrote: ↑Tue Jun 16, 2020 1:55 am

Farfromgeneva wrote: ↑Tue Jun 16, 2020 1:30 am

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2020 9:03 pm

Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2020 9:03 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2020 8:50 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2020 6:12 pm

Farfromgeneva wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2020 5:32 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2020 5:28 pm

Farfromgeneva wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2020 4:03 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2020 3:42 pm

Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2020 9:51 am The first cop was a decent guy. The cop that shot him was just the type you run across. Already a bad disposition when he arrived. He needed a new job. So the guy tussles with the cops so they can shoot him? Like I said, I know two high school lacrosse players that punched cops and nothing much happened to them. Wrestled to the ground. No weapons drawn. Of course both had been drinking.

Nice job Dad, living up to your screen name. Did you coach those 2 lax bro knuckleheads too ?
No big deal, of course they'd been drinking. That makes it ok. Sad.

Did your 2 drunken lax bro proteges throw off 2 cops, punch them, take their weapon & flee.
...& the problem was the cop's attitude ?
I can't believe how casual you all are about Brooks drunk driving. No prob. Call him a cab. He won't do it again.

Rolfe patiently & professionally questioned & tested Brooks. He did not escalate a very difficult, potentially dangerous situation. He gave Brooks every opportunity. Brooks just keep digging his hole deeper. Brooks was a risk who needed to be arrested, removed from the road & his driving privileges revoked before he killed someone on the road, maybe his daughters.

You think Brooks posed no immediate risk ? He was drunk out of his mind. He overcame 2 trained police officers who had the advantage on him, injuring one in the process (Brosnan was limping noticeably & having difficulty pursuing). Rolfe had to make a split second decision. He had no way of knowing what Brooks would do. Would he drag someone out of a car & try to escape or enter someone's home & try to hide. Rolfe had to make an immediate, instinctive decision. He eliminated the threat when he was still within close range, before he got away. In situations like that, you instinctively revert to your tactical training. Hesitation can be deadly. It was an "awful but lawful" split second adrenaline fueled decision Rolfe had to make in an instant. Brooks created the situation which cost him his life.

I’m pretty sure training doesn’t include someone without a legally defined lethal weapon to be shot in the back. If so maybe that’s why the chief of police was forced out. Perhaps some phys Ed would be useful too if two guys got manhandled like you suggest but the drunk guy, and he was drunk. If you’re suggesting drunk driving deserves the death penalty, we’ll then say that and let that play out. It’s choosing who’s life is more important that you are doing and as citizens no one should have the power to do that.

At the end of the day there’s all these people far from Atlanta saying this and that but the guy was fired and probably will be convicted so that “awful but lawful” will be proven untrue. And if one wants to argue that the system was rigged well then it applies to been record for every citizen within that same system including the ones some are so fast to proclaim that the guy was an evil gangbanger because he had a record. Either the system is correct or it isn’t but in the community thus happened even most white people are horrified I can say from people at banks and funds to people I know who work at garages.

I'm saying that Brooks was an immediate threat to innocent lives already, just by getting there in that condition.
There was only one safe outcome -- his immediate incarceration, with adjudication initiated before he had the opportunity to get behind the wheel again. His car was his lethal weapon.
It was a death penalty only because he resisted a lawful arrest & assaulted 2 cops correctly doing their job.
4 Atlanta cops were just fired & 2 charged for using their non-lethal tasers, but it's no big deal if an out of control drunk takes one & turns it on the police.

And you don’t see any difference in one given the authority to do so but expected to be held to a very high standard and a regular citizen?

He wasn’t an immediate danger by getting there. The danger had passed. Literally not the case. 45 minutes of calm discussion as well. So again literally not an immediate danger. Doesn’t absolve his behavior, don’t get stupid and go down that path please, I’m explicitly saying that he deserved to be held accountable. But taking his life and shooting where you risk hitting a innocence bystander (again it can be heard w people saying “to, there’s kids around here when they are shooting”) is in no way commensurate with the violation. It is really that simple. Now the shooter has got to go and his pension should go to the family of the victim. Or my share back in my pocket in a refund.

I don’t see only one outcome, seems like you are using a very narrow view of how to manage this situation. Not very thoughtful or creative to say “only one safe outcome”. You certainly can never prove that is true, it’s impossible and it’s not trying to work very hard to have a better overall outcome. Sounds like applying war like military view to domestic life to me.

The danger had not passed. As soon as he was released he could go home & get behind the wheel of the black Volvo. You think not having his license would stop him ? Rolfe fired while he was still at close range, reducing the risk of an errant shot.

absolutely shoot him in the back.
You've sunk to new lows salty. Weird.

It’s not new. His mask slipped a long time ago.

yeah, but this is a new low.

It’s either really stupid, duplicitous and reflects a person who wants a police state is is ok with citizens being murdered by the state at their most minimal discomfort any of which are awful. Third world dictator non free country mentality stuff.

So says the Woke Lynch Mob. Enjoy Hotlanta, as it burns.
Watching the video, the Mayor was saying -- "just let him go "
Go punch a cop for Rayshard. Let the Mob rule.

Now you’re just being a little baby. I enjoy plenty in Atlanta, which no one in the city calls Hotlanta, only tools that don’t know better.

It’s a better city not having awful militaristic murder justifying folks like you there I have no doubt. Hope you don’t ever come, can’t imagine you’d contribute anything positive to my city and only make it worse on the margin in your minuscule largely irrelevant way.

Woke Lynch Mob. What a clown useless contribution. I think I’d rather punch someone else right now if given the chance. I guess since we’re calling names the appropriate one for you is POS. Defending murder and the taking of life for a uniform. Real scumbaggery.

cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Tue Jun 16, 2020 7:16 am https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/sh ... g-n1231142

So this is how some folks get their "payback" against the police? Some stupid F**K will now probably wind up with 3 counts of attempted murder on a police officer. If convicted that person will probably spend a good portion of the rest of their lives in jail. They sure taught those "pigs" a lesson didn't they? I'm waiting to see how long it takes some of the knuckleheads on this forum to use the public anger against the police to justify murdering cops? I am betting it will not take very long.

cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Tue Jun 16, 2020 7:16 am https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/sh ... g-n1231142

So this is how some folks get their "payback" against the police? Some stupid F**K will now probably wind up with 3 counts of attempted murder on a police officer. If convicted that person will probably spend a good portion of the rest of their lives in jail. They sure taught those "pigs" a lesson didn't they? I'm waiting to see how long it takes some of the knuckleheads on this forum to use the public anger against the police to justify murdering cops? I am betting it will not take very long.

cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Tue Jun 16, 2020 7:32 am I understand the symbolic message. Why would people want to burn the Wendys down? What did that accomplish but put a bunch of people out of work and create hardship in their lives. I must be too old, i just don't get it.

dislaxxic wrote: ↑Tue Jun 16, 2020 8:46 am

cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Tue Jun 16, 2020 7:32 am I understand the symbolic message. Why would people want to burn the Wendys down? What did that accomplish but put a bunch of people out of work and create hardship in their lives. I must be too old, i just don't get it.

Agree, Cranky...just flat dumb. Someone from the restaurant called to say someone had passed out right in the drive-thru line. Totally reasonable call, let's get the vehicle out of the way at least. What happened after that with the car and its driver clearly went off the rails. Burning the fast food joint was criminal.

..

Kismet wrote: ↑Tue Jun 16, 2020 8:44 am

cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Tue Jun 16, 2020 7:16 am https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/sh ... g-n1231142

So this is how some folks get their "payback" against the police? Some stupid F**K will now probably wind up with 3 counts of attempted murder on a police officer. If convicted that person will probably spend a good portion of the rest of their lives in jail. They sure taught those "pigs" a lesson didn't they? I'm waiting to see how long it takes some of the knuckleheads on this forum to use the public anger against the police to justify murdering cops? I am betting it will not take very long.

NBC NEWS UPDATE: NYPD Chief of Detectives Rodney Harrison says, "After a thorough investigation by the NYPD’s Manhattan South investigators, it has been determined that there was no criminality by shake shack’s employees."

cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Tue Jun 16, 2020 7:32 am https://waok.radio.com/articles/news/we ... -in-flames

I understand the symbolic message. Why would people want to burn the Wendys down? What did that accomplish but put a bunch of people out of work and create hardship in their lives. I must be too old, i just don't get it.

Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Tue Jun 16, 2020 8:51 am

dislaxxic wrote: ↑Tue Jun 16, 2020 8:46 am

cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Tue Jun 16, 2020 7:32 am I understand the symbolic message. Why would people want to burn the Wendys down? What did that accomplish but put a bunch of people out of work and create hardship in their lives. I must be too old, i just don't get it.

Agree, Cranky...just flat dumb. Someone from the restaurant called to say someone had passed out right in the drive-thru line. Totally reasonable call, let's get the vehicle out of the way at least. What happened after that with the car and its driver clearly went off the rails. Burning the fast food joint was criminal.

..

My guess is that the guy that started the fire wasn’t on break from Williams. The police will find him soon enough. I saw that they are on the lookout for the arsonist.

Peter Brown wrote: ↑Tue Jun 16, 2020 8:55 am

Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Tue Jun 16, 2020 8:51 am

dislaxxic wrote: ↑Tue Jun 16, 2020 8:46 am

cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Tue Jun 16, 2020 7:32 am I understand the symbolic message. Why would people want to burn the Wendys down? What did that accomplish but put a bunch of people out of work and create hardship in their lives. I must be too old, i just don't get it.

Agree, Cranky...just flat dumb. Someone from the restaurant called to say someone had passed out right in the drive-thru line. Totally reasonable call, let's get the vehicle out of the way at least. What happened after that with the car and its driver clearly went off the rails. Burning the fast food joint was criminal.

..

My guess is that the guy that started the fire wasn’t on break from Williams. The police will find him soon enough. I saw that they are on the lookout for the arsonist.

It was a white female.

https://www.cbs46.com/news/10-000-rewar ... ac7d1.html

I hope they get her and do things to to her in prison. No kidding. When you force 40 employees to lose their income, no pity.

tech37 wrote: ↑Tue Jun 16, 2020 8:52 am

Kismet wrote: ↑Tue Jun 16, 2020 8:44 am

cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Tue Jun 16, 2020 7:16 am https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/sh ... g-n1231142

So this is how some folks get their "payback" against the police? Some stupid F**K will now probably wind up with 3 counts of attempted murder on a police officer. If convicted that person will probably spend a good portion of the rest of their lives in jail. They sure taught those "pigs" a lesson didn't they? I'm waiting to see how long it takes some of the knuckleheads on this forum to use the public anger against the police to justify murdering cops? I am betting it will not take very long.

NBC NEWS UPDATE: NYPD Chief of Detectives Rodney Harrison says, "After a thorough investigation by the NYPD’s Manhattan South investigators, it has been determined that there was no criminality by shake shack’s employees."

Unless other customers were also poisoned, don't count on the update to stick

Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Tue Jun 16, 2020 8:59 am

Peter Brown wrote: ↑Tue Jun 16, 2020 8:55 am

Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Tue Jun 16, 2020 8:51 am

dislaxxic wrote: ↑Tue Jun 16, 2020 8:46 am

cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Tue Jun 16, 2020 7:32 am I understand the symbolic message. Why would people want to burn the Wendys down? What did that accomplish but put a bunch of people out of work and create hardship in their lives. I must be too old, i just don't get it.

Agree, Cranky...just flat dumb. Someone from the restaurant called to say someone had passed out right in the drive-thru line. Totally reasonable call, let's get the vehicle out of the way at least. What happened after that with the car and its driver clearly went off the rails. Burning the fast food joint was criminal.

..

My guess is that the guy that started the fire wasn’t on break from Williams. The police will find him soon enough. I saw that they are on the lookout for the arsonist.

It was a white female.

https://www.cbs46.com/news/10-000-rewar ... ac7d1.html

I hope they get her and do things to to her in prison. No kidding. When you force 40 employees to lose their income, no pity.

Was she on break from Smith?

Peter Brown wrote: ↑Tue Jun 16, 2020 8:55 am

Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Tue Jun 16, 2020 8:51 am

dislaxxic wrote: ↑Tue Jun 16, 2020 8:46 am

cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Tue Jun 16, 2020 7:32 am I understand the symbolic message. Why would people want to burn the Wendys down? What did that accomplish but put a bunch of people out of work and create hardship in their lives. I must be too old, i just don't get it.

Agree, Cranky...just flat dumb. Someone from the restaurant called to say someone had passed out right in the drive-thru line. Totally reasonable call, let's get the vehicle out of the way at least. What happened after that with the car and its driver clearly went off the rails. Burning the fast food joint was criminal.

..

My guess is that the guy that started the fire wasn’t on break from Williams. The police will find him soon enough. I saw that they are on the lookout for the arsonist.

It was a white female.

https://www.cbs46.com/news/10-000-rewar ... ac7d1.html

I hope they get her and do things to to her in prison. No kidding. When you force 40 employees to lose their income, no pity.

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Tue Jun 16, 2020 9:07 am

Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Tue Jun 16, 2020 8:59 am

Peter Brown wrote: ↑Tue Jun 16, 2020 8:55 am

Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Tue Jun 16, 2020 8:51 am

dislaxxic wrote: ↑Tue Jun 16, 2020 8:46 am

cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Tue Jun 16, 2020 7:32 am I understand the symbolic message. Why would people want to burn the Wendys down? What did that accomplish but put a bunch of people out of work and create hardship in their lives. I must be too old, i just don't get it.

Agree, Cranky...just flat dumb. Someone from the restaurant called to say someone had passed out right in the drive-thru line. Totally reasonable call, let's get the vehicle out of the way at least. What happened after that with the car and its driver clearly went off the rails. Burning the fast food joint was criminal.

..

My guess is that the guy that started the fire wasn’t on break from Williams. The police will find him soon enough. I saw that they are on the lookout for the arsonist.

It was a white female.

https://www.cbs46.com/news/10-000-rewar ... ac7d1.html

I hope they get her and do things to to her in prison. No kidding. When you force 40 employees to lose their income, no pity.

Was she on break from Smith?

They should shoot her in the back twice too.