Play stupid climate protester games, win stupid prizes

Red Fawn Fallis is the Dakota Access Pipeline protester who, back in 2016, fired a handgun when three police officers tried to arrest her.

The charges against her were the most serious stemming from any conflict during the pipeline protest.

Today a judge sentenced Fallis to more than four years in prison.

Bismark Times reporter Jack Dura was on hand for the sentencing and reported the results on Twitter:

Fallis has been in custody since she was arrested in October 2016. She was initially charged with attempted murder but those charges were later dropped to clear the way for federal charges.

Some of her time was actually spent at a halfway house but that arrangement was rescinded after she failed to show up for an adult learning class she was scheduled to attend.

Today the judge who sentenced her said she would not get credit for time served at the halfway house because of her subsequent arrest.

This January, Fallis pleaded guilty to “civil disorder and gun possession by a convicted felon.”

Despite her plea, and despite the fact that she had a previous record, there are still lots of people on the left who consider her a martyr.

A petition demanding that charges against her be dropped has over 20,000 signatures.

The petition claims “Fallis is innocent of the charges she is facing” but doesn’t spell out what those charges are or why she’s innocent.

As you can see in the video below, Fallis was surrounded by police when the gun went off three times.

It really is miraculous no one was hurt. Even with her time served and the sentences running concurrently, Fallis probably will face another 3 1/2 years behind bars.

After that, she’ll have another 3 years of supervised release.

Here’s the AP story on today’s sentencing.

Red Fawn Fallis, 39, was accused of firing a handgun three times while resisting arrest on Oct. 27, 2016. No one was hurt. Fallis, a member of the Oglala Sioux tribe, denied intentionally trying to injure anyone and claimed not to remember firing the gun after being tackled by police…

Fallis spoke for several minutes when the judge allowed her to comment, saying she regrets what happened and is using it as an impetus to turn around her troubled life.

“I made poor choices once again and it hindered my decision-making,” she said, adding later that “I’m sorry for what the officers had to go through because of my choices.”…

Judge Hovland concluded that “nobody knows what the real purpose was” of Fallis firing the gun but that “at a minimum (she) committed a menacing-type assault on the officers.”

Despite everything, she still has her supporters:


Read more at Hot Air

200 thoughts on “Play stupid climate protester games, win stupid prizes

  1. They need to add 5 years of trash pickup at pipeline protest camps as added punishment so that taxpayers do not pay for this.

    • During the winter following the Dakota protest, it took something like a 100 of those big dumpster trailers to remove the trash, including tents and sleeping bags.
      Leaving the latter two suggests they were not paid-for and owned by the mob but were provided “free”.
      Bob Hoye

      • We get the same problem after the Glastonbury Festival. The attendees buy cheap tents and other equipment and leave them behind for someone else to clear up, as they cannot be bothered to take them down and take them home for disposal.

        • And yet they seemingly claim to all be environmentalists – drop the ‘environ’ perchance? – and against all the things that allow them to act as they do – cheap(ish) energy, plastics, electronics [which use rare earths and plastics, and so forth.

          It does se4em a little, well, hypocritical.


  2. Those police showed incredible restraint. Possibly foolish restraint. That genius protester was very, very, VERY lucky she wasn’t shot dead. The police had every right.

    • I wonder what the restraint level would be like among the Paris Agreement countries, like China.

    • Eustace Cranch

      When I started watching the video, I was amazed at how many armed cops there were. It seemed OTT.

      What amazed me more, and later in the video, was the composure shown when an ‘unarmed’ protester loosed off three shots whilst restrained, yet the idiot with the camera shouts “we are unarmed”.

      All of those cops were the epitome of calm control and deserve everyone’s respect.

      We rarely hear it for the boys who patrol the thin blue line, but give it up for these guys who demonstrate that almost every cop conducts him/herself in the same calm manner.

        • Reply to Marklark .
          Were you there? did you know if any protesters were armed besides this woman?
          and how many people leave enough trash to fill how many dumpsters?.
          There were a lot of protesters who had been told to leave so that contractors could go about there lawful business .Just because the protesters disagree with pipelines they are breaking the law .
          We have idiots like this in New Zealand one that comes to mind is Russel Norman ex leader of the Green Party who took a fossil fueled powered boat over 50 kilometers off the east coast to disrupt an oil survey ship .
          The judge did not throw him in jail and his fine will be paid by Green Peace supporters .

        • Marklark

          So, disarm the cops and allow a lunatic with a 6 shot handgun to rule society.

          Very good.

      • I agree HotScot – these officers deserve our respect for remaining calm and not over-reacting to a very stressful and dangerous situation.

        Not the most successful take-down though – one must assume nobody knew she had a gun, or the first thing they would have done is control both her hands/arms. Very lucky in that crowd that 3 shots somehow did not hit anyone.

        I lived for a 9 months in Houston, where everyone has a gun in their vehicle, and incidents of road rage were certainly much more interesting than here in (unarmed) Canada.

        We have a serious problem here in Calgary with our city cops – they are trigger-happy bully-thugs. Their governing philosophy is shoot first and cover-up later.

        In 2016 there were 10 police shootings of civilians in Calgary, whereas the average for cities our size in Canada was zero. I looked into each of these shootings and concluded that few if any were justified.

        Calgary does not even have a serious crime or gang problem. Our cops spend their time abusing and beating up law-abiding citizens (and occasionally shooting them). I suspect we have a much deeper problem of serious police corruption, and what we see is just the “tip of the iceberg”.

        Here is one example – the cop-murder of young Anthony Heffernan:

        Calgary police were called by a hotel desk clerk when a guest was late checking-out.

        Five cops broke into Anthony’s hotel room – he was alone, drug-addled and confused, and non-threatening. They barked out orders and when Anthony did not immediately comply, they tasered him several times and then shot him multiple times in the face, all within 72 seconds.

        The same cop later shot and killed quadriplegic Dave McQueen in his wheelchair. What a man!

        The killer cop should have been charged with murder and gone to trial as ASIRT (the Alberta Serious Incident Response Team) recommended. However the Crown Prosecutor refused to file charges.

        This case disgraces both the Calgary Police and the Crown Prosecutor’s office. This is one more case of a Police and Crown whitewash of a murder by a trigger-happy Calgary cop.

        Anthony was not threatening to anyone. No mature, professional police officer would have even been afraid in these circumstances, let alone opened fire and killed him.

        This twice-killer-cop was put on a desk job, but the Chief has probably put him back on the street by now.

        • Allan

          An unfortunate series of events.

          But if the situation within the police is as bad as you say, that can’t really be blamed on the cops themselves, that’s a systems failure.

          And bear in mind, the Crown Prosecutor is not absolved in all of this. If he refused to prosecute, there must have been a very good reason not to. Nor do I believe Calgary’s a banana republic, these people answer to someone, even before the public.

          It seems the police are under intense pressure there with gun crime rising and a shortage of cops and training staff.

          And no known reason for the escalation in gun crime.

          • Hi HotScot.

            This is not the forum for this discussion – my apologies for raising it.

            The recent judicial inquiry (below) confirms what I have been saying (and writing) for years about our out-of-control Calgary police. My analysis concluded that deceit and delay are the core practices of our City police – and that the “good” cops cover-up for their brutal and corrupt brothers rather than break ranks.

            The entire police organization and its civilian review board have thus become contaminated. Regrettably, the majority of good cops don’t have the courage to clean up their own shop – everyone has their head down and nothing changes.

            My business experience in the first, second and third-world leads me to suspect that we are only seeing the “tip of the iceberg”. When I saw people acting in aggressive and inexplicable ways, I investigated and often found deeper problems – their aggressive conduct was often a cover-up for petty corruption and theft. Police drug-dealing in steroids is a probability – this has already occurred in nearby Edmonton. Broader drug-dealing and associated illegal activities may be the full story.

            The Crown Prosecutors and federally-appointed Justices are “in bed” with the police and appear to be intimidated or are simply colluding with them. Federal judicial appointments seems to be rewards for service to the political parties, with little regard for competence or ethics. Our Alberta provincially-appointed Judges are generally more competent and more ethical – some are good, but others are far from perfect.

            Regard, Allan

            By Emma McIntosh, StarMetro Calgary
            Tues., May 29, 2018


            CALGARY—An independent probe of the Calgary Police Service’s use of lethal force released Tuesday calls for expansive overhauls to how Alberta regulates police and investigates when officers are accused of shooting civilians.
            The findings outlined a series of recommended reforms for both the city’s police and the province, flagging gaps in training and lambasting systemic delays in the investigations of fatal confrontations with police.

          • Allen

            I can’t debate the subject with you because I have no insight. You are far better informed than me.

            I will say though, from past experience, and I repeat, this seems a systems failure rather than a local failure.

            Police brutality, corruption etc. call it what you want doesn’t emerge from the Police itself, it’s a symptom, not the cause.

            I was involved in a culture change when I joined the police in 1976. I was mentored by cops who were within 5 years of retiring, most of whom had served in WW2 in the forces. They didn’t give a monkeys about political correctness or regulations and wouldn’t bat an eyelid at punching out a senior officer, usually with cause.

            I was mentored by these types who, although demonstrating uncommon humanity, suffered criminality with contempt.

            I won’t go into the details, but I was corrupted, neither wittingly, or to any serious degree, but the change that came when these guys retired was dramatic.

            But the problems with my colleagues and I, who were also influenced by these people, didn’t come from the bottom up, they largely came from the top down, and it was a slow and laborious process for change to manifest itself.

            After perhaps five years of influence, I was forced to change, not persuaded or educated, it was a compulsion, and I rebelled because no one explained the reasons for change. In my ninth year in the job I went on a senior constables course and they actually educated me into changing, which I willingly did recognising the error of my, and their ways.

            I left two years later when I realised they expected change from the cops on the ground, but paid no more than lip service to their change. I was supervised by self serving bureaucrats, possibly why I have such a problem with these people now.

            And I always remember a quote from a fellow Constable, a perceptibly stupid man, but I thought him a gifted thinker, who said to me one day “we are operating a Victorian police system in the late 20th Century, no wonder we are failing”. And as stupid as anyone may have considered me, I admire him to this day. He works as a shelf stacker in a Supermarket because he also refused to conform to archaic conditions and policing methods that insulted the public we served, and he left when I did. He is also deliriously happy in his modest job.

            When we meet one day, I’ll recite the whole sorry saga, assuming you’re willing to be bored for several hours. Which makes my experience sound entirely negative, but I met with some of my former colleagues a few years ago, contrite that they had served their 30 years and I was hardly their equal, but was scoffed with the term “You are part of the legend” referring to the imprint of hard work and fun we left in our first years in the job with those demob old hands. And yes, the stories would make your hair curl.

            My point is. None of Calgary’s Policing problems can be addressed by selecting a target, then reforming them. And as much as I hate to use the term ‘holistic’ it describes very well the nature of the problem.

            Demanding change from the top, or the bottom of the institution is futile. Change must be, as business is, a mutually beneficial agreement between the parties. Easy to describe though, difficult to implement. Some of it financial, some of it moral. Some of it compelled, some of it elective.

            The good guys don’t speak out because they are scared to, not because they don’t want to. None of us joined the job to do wrong, but we are often influenced that the wrong way is better and quicker than the right way.

            The governing bodies of your Police needs to understand that as well, and if there is a ‘target’ culture, that needs to be the first thing that goes. Targets have no place in public service, they are a product of commerce.

            Hope it helps mate.

          • Hi HotScot,

            Solvent extraction is not new but has never been found commercial. Google Solvex process. The proposed process is another extraction process that only produces bitumen and does not upgrade it to make a better refinery feedstock.

            Re Opex, I co-wrote the paper that got all-in cost (including upgrading) at Syncrude down to $12/Bbl in the mid-1990’s. Bad management and other factors have now increased that Opex to about $50/Bbl.

    • She said she was sorry. That’s all Hillary had to do in order to avoid jail time regarding her illegal e-mail server.

  3. The mere posession of a handgun gets some folks killed. Props to the officers who didn’t shoot her.

    • She’s beyond incredibly lucky. Not to carry water for any of the “*blank* Lives Matter” movements, but too often the police act with utter disregard for civilian lives and are little more than thugs with badges, panicking at the slightest whiff of a hint of a suspicion that someone is going to pull an RPG on them.

      • I almost posted a response to your comment, but then I re-read it. I disagree with the “thugs with badges” characterization but the sentiment that this protester is lucky to have the chance to turn her life around is most certainly truth.

      • “but too often the police act with utter disregard for civilian lives and are little more than thugs with badges,”

        That’s not the way I see it. Rarely do the police act with utter disregard for civilian lives.

        All the “innocent” people I see getting shot by police, and there’s not that many, were resisting arrest in one form or another. Even if you are not armed, if you resist arrest, then the police may assume you are armed. Don’t make them have to assume you are armed.

        If one doesn’t want to get shot by the police, they should not take threatening actions like disobeying the lawful orders of the police. If you get pulled over, put both your empty hands on the sill of the open car window and comply with the officer’s instructions. If you do that, the officer will not shoot you.

        • blah blah blah, lawful orders of a thug with a badge. Period.
          something some random men wrote on paper, that is immoral and inconsistent with natural moral law, but they will uphold the law because its the law. riiiiiiiiiight. Real heros (rolls eyes).

          this type of hero is all too common to you statists:

          • wouldn’t be any point, would there?
            they won’t show up till after the damage is done.

          • then don’t extort my money for your “protection”
            sound familiar? If I recall correctly, isn’t that how the mafia operates?

          • and for H. sapiens, obedience is death.
            heck- you didn’t need a mind or a choice anyway to be a cabbage.

          • HL: You really are a case, aren’t you. Laws are the rules we live by. And those who disregard the laws that they do not like are often the same ones crying for full enforcement of the laws that they do like. Such as environmental laws that impinge on property ownership. (I recall the poor guy whose tractor accidentally ran over a protected species frog. No mercy for him.)

          • nice sophism there Mark. Sheesh, I hate to burn bridges but this topic is worth it I suppose. I genuinely like most of your stuff but when you distort what I’m saying using logical fallacies, then I take exception.

            All authority isn’t evil, of course not and that is absurd. External authority, bestowed arbitrarily upon others to rule over others is absolutely illegitimate…ALWAYS. Full stop.

            Deferring to authors (experts) in different fields who have spent the time and have displayed sound judgment are worthy of deference, but not submission. Authority exists, but in reality only you own your mind, body, actions, and property. So you own your thoughts, your emotions, your actions, and the product of those actions. Do you not? Then you have sole authority, or dominion over all that is you and what you produce. If not, then that makes you a slave to external authority no? someone excercising authorship over your dominion. In this case a dominator, or a cop, who has taken stolen money to be part of a mafia excercising sole “authority” over you and your property, because of…laws. Pieces of paper. If you feel the need to defend subjugation maybe Islam is the religion for you

          • So the only authority you recognize is one that is telling you to do what you were already planning on doing anyway.

            Your anarchy can work in a world where everyone is an angel. In the real world it could never work and would always devolve into the biggest and most brutal gang ruling over everyone.

          • WTF is “natural moral law?” Whatever you say it is?

            This type of hero is all too common to you:

          • honest liberty

            When you have the balls to join the job, then pass comment. You can shut your eyes at night thanks to these guys.

          • you rely on somebody to protect you and talk about balls.
            i don’t think you get the concept.

          • Gnomish, you’re a fool. IIRC, hotscot was a cop. Yeesh it’s so easy being bold and brave behind a keyboard.

          • see how you want a pissing contest so badly? how piggish is that?
            productive labor seems to have escaped your acquaintance, too.

          • gnomish never had any respect. He just tries to baffle people with bs, which he is full of.

          • gnomish

            Still not told me what you do for a living, so I win the pissing contest, by your definition.

          • no, I shut my eyes at night because I have a secure domocile and live in a decent neighborhood, know my neighbors, and lock up my stuff quite securely. I also know how to use firearms and have them at the ready in case of emergency.

            I like your attempt to pass the buck but maybe that is what makes other people feel safe.

            So, then, are you claiming that if a burglar sneaks past my security and makes their way into my bedroom that a call to the cop is going to save me? or that I will have any time other than to grab my firearm?

            Typically I’m more impressed with your logic.

          • honest liberty

            The police largely ensure you will never need to use a firearm.

            The police also ensure your neighbourhood is peaceful.

            You feel the need for a firearm in the case of emergency. The lack of a police force would make that emergency an everyday occurrence.

            And whilst a cop might not save you, which I don’t think I claimed, they may catch the perpetrator, who might have gone on to commit other crimes.

            Not sure how I passed the buck though.

          • The so-called “anarchist” lives in a “decent” neighborhood. Was that brought to you by anarchy? No. And your guns. Make them yourself from scratch? Probably not. They also were not brought to you by “anarchy”.

            You wouldn’t have a problem with someone more adept with firearms coming in and taking your stuff, your spouse, your daughter. Right? That’s anarchy, after all.

          • and hot… I’m not a dominator. I don’t desire to control others so I have no interst in joining the police force. I never was a frat guy so I don’t need the false fraternity either. no thanks.

            BTW, I have a great question for you.
            Did the cops prevent a thug in a stolen minivan from slamming into me head on at 56mph at 3pm in downtown denver, while I was waiting for the green turn signal? I looked up and that was it. Lucky, because of a change in values I chose to purchase and drive my first full size dodge ram 1500 with a hemi, so I walked away with minor permanent injury.

            Did the police prevent that crime as well? It is illegal to steal vehicles and run redlights and drive into oncoming traffic. hmmm. looks like you are 0 for 2.

            What about all those cartel and gang bangers illegally obtaining firearms and wreaking havoc? or those blacks murdering blacks throughout major cities? or those 4 black 20 year olds that kidnapped and tortured a retarded white kid while screaming “F trump!” F White people!”
            Aren’t their laws against that? Where were the police?”

            Oh, they can’t be everywhere at once? Exactly. So they don’t actually protect a daggone thing, they respond after the fact to crimes already in progress and then shut down children run lemonade stands or point guns at children:
            which, by the way if you or I did that, would be felony menacing and carries a very hefty sentence.
            or arrest independent journalists:

            The list is literally endless. these people are not heroes. Heroes are moral and upright people who put themselves in harms way to save people. You can’t take stolen money and be the only game in town granted “authority” to use force and pretend you are moral.

          • honest liberty

            Why don’t you move to Russia, or China? They have really good police forces which controls all sorts of things.

            As I said elsewhere, the police in the civilised western world are advocates for those who cant advocate for themselves.

            If you’re so independent of the police, how on earth did you allow yourself to suffer a permanent injury from a car crash when you could have shot the bugger?

            As for illegally obtaining firearms, it’s barely necessary to illegally obtain firearms in many US states I believe, they are readily available.

            Correct, the police can’t be everywhere at once. Well, actually, that’s not true. They could be, you could have your own personal police bodyguard, but would you pay for it?

            Ever considered your YouTube video’s might be left wing clips of events? Probably not.

            Where did I say cops were heroes?

            Don’t include me in your deranged rhetoric.

          • I’m having problems taking so much of this discussion seriously. Without an organized local constabulary, our lives would be hell. There are just too many predators around to even think we could live in bliss without the cops. Anarchy is not, ever, something to be desired. Yes, If all people were upright and moral, then possibly.

            And this is the problem the left has always had. They are Utopians, where everything is rosy, and we all live doing kumbaya or whatever. Societies in general do not adhere very well to that even in smaller locales.

            Look, the cops didn’t hit you in the mimivan. I’m sorry that they couldn’t do what you seem to have expected them to. It’s true in many cases, that sometimes the cops are only there to organize the pieces after the SHTF. But in reality, there aren’t any good alternatives.

            Let’s take a (very) long look back. In the Roman Republic (which preceded the “empire”), there was no established constabulary in Rome. The whole idea being that the people were moral and had Rome’s best interest at heart. By the end (the last 100 years), the thugs and the gangs (most paid for) were running the streets. Things really went south when a general back from conquests parked his army outside the gates and demanded things from the senate with the threat of his army hanging there. Even the first Caesar did this. Needless to say, this was no way to run a republic. The first Caesar (Julius) ended up being the last consul of Rome and the first emperor of what was to become the Roman Empire (he actually was killed before that came to pass).

            Could a legitimate police force have changed that? Perhaps not, but I am pretty sure that the citizens of Rome would have been a lot better off in the years leading up to the fall of the Republic had they had a police force.

            No, cops cannot on their own prevent crime and evil – that we will always have – but they do act as the body that will stand in when called. Without the local constabulary, life for almost everyone would be much more dangerous. I can’t even believe we’re having this argument.

            I’m a small “L” libertarian, but a couple of you are sounding like anarchists. And that’s never a good thing.

          • Are you certain you aren’t piggybacking on the moral framework created and maintained over centuries by the very systems of authority you wish to reject?

          • What do you plan on doing when it isn’t a single burglar, but 10 or 15 of them?
            When you can answer for yourself why there aren’t armed bands of predators roaming the night, then you will know why the police are useful.

          • oh my. the countryside is simply teeming with burglars in markyworld.
            is it really so much fun to scare yourself silly?
            does it send frissons up and down your back looking for a spine?
            what would you do? huddle in the dark and pray?
            eat more soy!

          • natural moral law

            That’s where the strong beat the snot out of the weak and take what they want, isn’t it?

          • fear of the law is the only reason you aren’t out raping and killing- is that what you are trying to say?
            do you perceive any distinction at all between men and beasts?

        • ima disobey the hell out of you- how threatened do you feel?
          flee to your safe space, then, snowflake.

          • gnomish, are you talking to me?
            I’m certainly not a snowflake and I certainly know how to defend myself- I don’t need extorted services for that.

          • my bad, my phone wasn’t keeping up.
            I’m in agreement with you gnomish, at least on this one.
            dang it is fun not being on the left. Ya see, I oppose the idea of a monopoly of force to rule over others beacuse of some paper laws written by unnacountable strangers, but that doesn’t mean I want harm to come to these people, nor do I want them to suffer. and even more, I agree with nearly everything hotscot says. I just don’t support his decision to be a part of that fraternity of controllers. I certainly wouldn’t want to be dealing with the lowest common denominator all day, which is why I work for private industry where I’m not involved in theft.

            That is how I sleep at night. quite well too.

          • i don’t know where you live, but if you really have predators coming out of the woodwork, it would make sense to move, especially if you are scared all the time and don’t know what to do except be needy and quaking.
            or maybe the predators are mainly in your dreams?

          • I’m not scared at all. I rely on the police to keep the numbers of criminals down to a manageable level.
            I rely on my shotgun and sidearm to make sure those who get through the blue line can’t hurt me or mine.

          • how could i be talking to you if you don’t think failure to obey you is threatening? shoe don’t fit you.

          • right, my bad. my phone was delayed so the full comment stream didn’t display. I had to edit the response actually because I misunderstood (limited information)

        • Absolutely.

          Look, in my younger days I wasn’t always the best….behaved. I had a few, very few, scrapes with the law.

          They all ended up quite amicably, even the time when I was tackled by the police over a misunderstanding (As a joke In Mexico I asked a fat Mexican police officer to pretend to arrest me. I thought I would send the picture to my mother. Some other cops saw me and decided I needed to be…ahem…better subdued. for example, cuffed on the ground with three guys on top of me. We hugged it out).

          How not to have trouble with the law: Comply with the orders and don’t mouth off. Answer honestly. Smile. Don’t be a smart ass. Don’t swear. Be polite.

          The cop, generally, DOESN’T want to arrest you, or even mess with you. Seriously – doing so puts his life and career in jeopardy. Plus paperwork. If he can let you off with a warning he will. Just to avoid a hassle. Give him a reason to do just that.

          And once he cuts you loose – thank him, and vacate the area and do not go back. he catches you a second time and it is lights out.

          If a cop thinks that it is choice between him going home tonight or you – better believe he will shoot you dead.

          • “Plus paperwork. If he can let you off with a warning he will.”

            Rubbish. They have a quota to fill, revenue to make, KPI’s to fill.
            If your a soft target they’ll go the harder on you because it’s less paper work, they get the catch quota up with minimum hassle, and they get to feel smug about themselves.

            They are school yard bullies who found their perfect job in life. Bully people all day long and get paid for it. It’s a personality thing.

          • Reminds me of my wife getting stopped while going going through a 25 mph neighborhood at 44 mph. (I was passenger – navigating.) Caught us dead to rights. We had argued about her speeding through that area.
            Cop took her D/L, registration and insurance card. Spent time on his motorcycle verifying it.
            Came back to the car, told my wife the neighbors were sure she’d just gotten a ticket – so they were happy. She wasn’t getting a ticket, so she should be happy. He was getting paid anyway to ensure safety – so he was happy.
            But if he caught her again – he’d throw the book at her.
            No paperwork at all. Cops are not all bad. My wife is cute – but we were in our 50’s then.
            Try doing a ride-around with a cop sometime. I got to go with a neighbor who by his opinion and his wife’s was a badass cop. I was shocked by his actions all day. Set up a site to catch speeders – but only interested in those going 20+ mph over the limit – in a 45 mph zone. And still only ticketing them for 19 over, because he would have to run them in for anything over that. Just one event out of 20+ that day.
            Most of them are quite human. Yes, he was big and gruff and commanding – and a pussycat. He was only interested in taking down bad guys. So was that Nevada cop who pulled over my wife.
            Talk decent to them – and you’ll usually get pretty fair – or better -treatment.
            I’m in my mid-60s. Lots of interactions with cops. I used to believe 10% were crooked – just the bell curve. Now I only suspect that in the big cities – where liberals tend to concentrate. What do you expect in that environment?

          • They say a liberal is a conservative who has been arrested, and a conservative is a liberal who has been burgled.

          • “If a cop thinks that it is choice between him going home tonight or you – better believe he will shoot you dead.”
            and there is the evidence of your primal mentality. It is disgusting.
            So, does that cop have more of a right to life than I do? Becuase let me make this clear to you or anyone who thinks they can keep me from getting home to my son: I don’t care how shiny your fancy badge is, or how ornate your costume… I have a duty to protect my wife and children and I will end anyone who attempts to prevent that. Oh, and I have EVERY RIGHT to do so.

          • you statists are such a despicable group of hypocrites. Elevating some humans over others because they have “authority”.
            That worked out really well for heretics of the Catholic Church during the times of the spanish inquisition, women during salem, or the jews/gays/elderly/imfirm/catholics in Germany, or the educated in Cambodia…etc etc.
            Who is the party guilty for massive, constant genocide? Cops and military, who follow orders. Goodness you folks are dense.
            They are order followers. They are collectively the judas of the bible who sold their souls for a measely 30 pieces of silver. They betray humanity just like judas betrayed jesus. unfortunately most of you can’t comprehend the esoteric wisdom hidden through those stories but actually believe them like children in santa.

            It isn’t called a banker state, or a poiltician state, or a judge state…
            ITS A POLICE STATE. That is the party throughout history who has done the bidding of the elite against the population. It will always go there; it is an immutable law of our existence. For as technical and literate as you people are here, you surely have a short memory or no true comprehension of history and humanity.

          • In your mind, there are freedom lovers such as yourself and everyone else is some form of evil statist.

            As to morality, you have stated that first use of force is immoral.
            What if someone else believes that allowing one person to have more than someone else is the ultimate evil, and first use of force is justified to rectify the first evil?

            Why should your morality take precedence over the other persons?

          • what a fellatious question.
            you ‘allow somebody to have’ stuff? god complex much?
            you equate the morals of a thief with the morals of an honest man?
            no wonder you are so impotent and fearful- you can’t tell right from wrong. you crave a master to sort it all for you.
            serfhood- it’s not for humans. so what are you?

          • Serfhood is for many humans. They are liberals, and they want to impose it on everyone else. Many even want it imposed on themselves.
            Not everyone is raised to be free – and to keep their fingers out of everyone else’s purse.
            Seen too many examples – like the journalist who was against private ownership of firearms. Shot a kid who was swimming in his pool late one night. (late ’80s, Washington DC.) Turns out, he just didn’t think gun ownership was good for anyone else. He, however, was a “responsible” gun owner. Who shot a kid for swimming in his pool.

      • While there are some bad apples, just like every other profession, the vast majority of officers do not match the description you give here.

        • I never said they did. That isn’t the point. The point is they use stolen tax money to provide a service that they won’t permit the benefactor to shop around for, or choose not to and suffer the consequence of no tardy assistance.
          They are the mafia. Why can’t you recognize that?

          Can you say no to paying for the only entity that has been granted “authority” to initiate force? No.
          Do they have a monopoly on initiation of force? Yes.
          Do they follow orders, regardless of whether the orders are moral? Yes.

          • Do they follow orders, regardless of whether the orders are moral? Yes.

            Who decides what is moral?

            What would happen if a policeman ignored a woman being raped on the grounds that walking out alone at night in a short skirt was basically asking for it?

            There is no ‘natural’ morality.

            That is WHY we have the Law.

          • When each person follows his own morality, then the only real morality is might makes right.

          • and if i ask you to define morality will i find out you really have no idea what it is?
            the skeptic in me doubts that you are able to do it.
            that means you are just way out of pocket trying to discuss it.

          • you wouldn’t know morality because you have failed to conceive a standard of values. you are not competent to judge.
            so don’t try.

          • I love the way you decide that all cops are immoral monsters who only follow orders.

            Seems like you are the one who is suffering from delusions.

          • honest liberty

            Taxes to pay the police are willingly given by most of the law abiding public.

            The alternative is to move to, say, Monaco where I don’t believe income tax is levied.

            It’s your choice to live in a society that agrees taxes are necessary. If you don’t like it, you are also at liberty to form your own political party that advocates a tax free environment.

            Simply bitching about how your taxes are spent is an exercise in futility.

      • Well, easy to say when it isn’t your life on the line, eh?

        Bet you sit around wondering why the cops don’t just shoot the guns out of the bad guy’s hands, wild west style. Pow pow!

        In retrospect many situations could be better. Cops are people too – they panic, get confused, overreact, etc.

      • D. J. Hawkins

        I’m an ex cop. I resent your statement that “too often the police act with utter disregard for civilian lives and are little more than thugs with badges”

        My observational, and practical experience is that even the worst of cops do more good than harm. I only met two ‘thugs’ in the 11 years I spent in the job, and they were sacked. But they still did more good than harm.

        What you don’t see is the day to day tedium of dealing with lost kids, stolen cars, raped women, and murder victims. Investigations into fires, car crashes, domestic violence and lost dogs. The early morning raids to execute arrest warrants, the risk of contamination during drug raids, the presence at civic BBQ’s, and enduring mob violence during sporting events.

        None of this means anything to you because you focus on the media spectacle of a few indiscretions, despite the millions of hours of exemplary policing that goes on every day, and night, whilst you sleep, secure in the knowledge there are cops patrolling your streets, keeping you safe.

        How about I condemn your profession because there’s an apple with a rotten bit amongst you. Not rotten to the core, just the fallibility we all carry.

        And when faced with the incredibly complicated situations most cops see as day to day activities, I defy you not to panic.

        • It seems to me that police work polarizes people. I have known some amazing human beings who were cops. I have also known some amazingly unhappy cops. Somehow the mushy middle doesn’t seem to be an option.

          • commieBob

            I have met the same polarisation of individuals within the job.

            But the proof of the pudding is in the eating. I have never met a cop who let his misery, or exuberance, overcome his professionalism when faced with a life threatening situation.

            Cops you meet in civvy life are not the ones who operate as public servants. What people forget is that as a uniformed force, unique amongst their brethren forces (Army, Marines, Navy, Air etc.) the police must interact with the public on a day to day basis.

            It is not an easy job juggling the ultimate authority of denying someone their right to liberty, or liberating one intent on harm. Sometimes it goes wrong, that’s human nature. But the mushy middle doesn’t exist when the uniform goes on.

            What cops have is a unique comradeship, borne of that conundrum. Living amongst society, whilst being vigilant of societies indiscretions.

          • simple question:
            who is responsible for the vast genocides through history? More explicitly, what party has carried out those actions?

            Or Police/Military.

            I’ll let you chew on that because that is reality and no sophism or denial can change the reality of that answer. I rest my case. good night everyone, although I disagree strongly, I still appreciate all of you

          • Oh boy Leo, that is just hilarious. I mean, literally, I spit out my coffee laughing so hard. Good grief you are either extremely ignorant or such a liar, you should be embarrassed.
            Seriously, get it together and start being honest with yourself. Life gets much better when you stop lying to yourself

          • honest liberty

            Damn, that’s a hard one, let me think for a nanosecond.

            Stalin? Anything up to 60 Million people.
            Mao? Up to 100 Million people.
            N. Korea?: Unknown really.
            Castro?: Largely unknown.
            Pol Pot?: 2 Million.
            Hitler?: 7 Million.

            So that’ll be communism, the far left of socialism, and socialism itself.

            So, if you’re trying to make the pathetic case that Police/Military were responsible, sadly, you and I probably wouldn’t be here were it not for them. Europe would be a Nazi state, and America would be worshipping the rising sun. Are you seriously suggesting the world can do without the Police and the Military?

            Oh, and by the way, Many killed by Mao and Stalin were due to starvation.

            “Chinese journalist Yang Jisheng concluded there were 36 million deaths due to starvation, [during the three bitter years] while another 40 million others failed to be born, so that “China’s total population loss during the Great Famine then comes to 76 million.”

            That was politics, pure and simple, little physical intervention required.

        • how many times is not too often? have you heard of Popper?
          have you heard of MacGregor’s goat?
          your attempt at a self justifying apologetic is rather revealing.
          you seem to think you are braver, bolder and more meaningful than ordinary humans
          you cost way too much, you show up way to late, you cause immeasurable harm imposing your will on people against whom you have no claim whatsoever – except the claim that a legal monopoly on force somehow grants you license to violate rights on a daily basis.

          • gnomish

            Yea, Popper and McGregor, they were on my shift in Glasgow in the 80’s. Knew fork all about policing, but nice guys.

            And your assertion that I’m braver, bolder and more meaningful than ordinary humans couldn’t be further from the truth.

            What you fail to appreciate is that cops are advocates for those who struggle to advocate for themselves. They don’t impose societies will unless it’s absolutely necessary. The objective is to act on behalf of the society they work in, and the vast majority of the time, that’s what they achieve.

            “You show up way too late” possibly because you’re bitching about a broken window, when cops are dealing with someone else’s bereavement.

            “You cause immeasurable harm” Try measuring all the good policing does relative to the minuscule harm it does.

            “imposing your will on people against whom you have no claim whatsoever” Cops don’t impose their personal will, they impose societies will. You’re statement condemns your peers.

            “except the claim that a legal monopoly on force somehow grants you license to violate rights on a daily basis.” I’ll refer you to my last statement, if you have a beef with police powers, take it up with your President or Prime Minister.

            Cops don’t make the laws, they are however, duty bound to enforce them. Those laws are made by you, for you. As I said, cops advocate on your behalf, even when you’re not there.

            Try living without a police force, you might find it fun. Or, even more fun, try living with an emasculated police force; you’re getting raped and they can’t intervene because you have denied them the right to.

            And you might want to adjust your tense relative to my police activities. I left the job in 1987. I’m not “You”.

          • “Try living without a police force, you might find it fun. Or, even more fun, try living with an emasculated police force; you’re getting raped and they can’t intervene because you have denied them the right to.”


            The Liability of Liberalism: Anarchy and Lawlessness

            In 2016 I did some informal research on the top 10 most dangerous cities in the United States as of August of that year. They were currently or had been run for decades by Statist Progressives.

            It would appear there’s some confusion here as to who and what are truly philosophical Statists, and who are in favor of peace through strength.

            Honest Liberty can’t be logically derived from Deliberate Chaos – but misery, pain and death certainly may be, and I can prove it.


          • “Anarchists did not try to carry out genocide against the Armenians in Turkey; they did not deliberately starve millions of Ukrainians; they did not create a system of death camps to kill Jews, gypsies, and Slavs in Europe; they did not fire-bomb scores of large German and Japanese cities and drop nuclear bombs on two of them; they did not carry out a ‘Great Leap Forward’ that killed scores of millions of Chinese; they did not attempt to kill everybody with any appreciable education in Cambodia; they did not launch one aggressive war after another; they did not implement trade sanctions that killed perhaps 500,000 Iraqi children.

            In debates between anarchists and statists, the burden of proof clearly should rest on those who place their trust in the state. Anarchy’s mayhem is wholly conjectural; the state’s mayhem is undeniably, factually horrendous.”
            ― Robert Higgs

            and I’ll copy my previous post that was supposed to be my last but I got pulled back:

            simple question:
            who is responsible for the vast genocides through history? More explicitly, what party has carried out those actions?

            Or Police/Military.

            I’ll let you chew on that because that is reality and no sophism or denial can change the reality of that answer. I rest my case. good night everyone, although I disagree strongly, I still appreciate all of you

          • you said:
            ““Try living without a police force, you might find it fun. Or, even more fun, try living with an emasculated police force; you’re getting raped and they can’t intervene because you have denied them the right to.””

            but would you deny the right of victim to self defense? what’s your problem with that?

            the idea of a ‘dog eat dog’ world is valid only for dogs.
            so i suspect your estimate of human nature is a projection based on your own knowledge of yourself.

          • gnomish

            “but would you deny the right of victim to self defense? what’s your problem with that?”

            Where did I even suggest I would deny anyone the right to self defence?

          • from the context, i.e., the quotation to which i was responding, you should be able to tell it wasn’t addressed to you.
            but maybe you thought it did because your concern with the inutility of ordinary people without special powers ‘of arrest’ ?

          • Gnomish, you nailed it on the head. They are broken people who view humanity as more evil than good, even though percentages of dangerous people have always been well below 1%, and that hasn’t changed because of police. They think somehow they are responsible for polite society yet I still see tons of criminals everyday making the news, and oh by the way, not getting caught or police causing more damage by pursuing the perps.

            Sorry there Scot, but regardless of the government since they are all opposed to individual freedom and differ only in magnitudes of oppression, are all carried out by the goons, yes, hired goons to do the bidding of those laws.

            You are a group identity type, which is why you can’t put aside your ego and look at reality. That’s fine. I’m not going to win an argument with religious types. You certainly have a religion in this matter while I rely on factually probably reality devoid of bias.
            Cops and military are the agents of action that historically carry out genocide, not civilians.

          • seriously? society has a will? i guess that pretty much eliminates individual responsibility, eh? sounds extremely progressive to me.

            murder victims are not broken windows
            robberies and rapes are not trivial matters that somehow benefit from your appearance to celebrate the bereavement after the fact.

            and then, the ‘just following orders’ defense?

            i’ve lived in the very home of ‘cops’ – and smoked pot with them and watched them do coke with the cop groupies.

            the last time i had a conflict, the cop paid me 10,000$ to leave town.

            you have no frikn idea what i know that you are trying to cover over with a delightful fantasy. but i know better.\

            but i’m not being personal- i don’t know you and you may be ok as a neighbor. since i’m not paying your generous pension that allows you to take for the rest of your life without producing a thing, i won’t complain about that either.

            but nobody does harm like the guy with the gun imposing the will of others for the sake of obedience with self righteous entitlement cuz ‘he’s gonna save the planet’ or any part of it.
            lawyers don’t click the cuffs. judges don’t raid people’s homes and take their property. politicians are just talk.
            the responsibility lies on him. the protection racket doesn’t protect.
            it doesn’t stop crime- it adds to the cost at every turn.
            it divorces the true claimant from his right to obtain redress and it deprives him of compensation- indeed- it costs him more now because he will be required to support the perp and the perp’s family and the guards and cops and wardens, etc under penalty of … law.
            something that costs 10X more than it’s worth is not a benefit- it is a sacrifice. it’s not 10% good, it’s 90% overpriced.

          • gnomish, I greatly appreciate your insight and perspective. Know that you have at least one ally in this particular field of thought on this site.

          • gnomish

            “i’ve lived in the very home of ‘cops’ – and smoked pot with them and watched them do coke with the cop groupies.

            the last time i had a conflict, the cop paid me 10,000$ to leave town.”

            And you suggest I’m talking fantasy?

            Were your statements even true, it exposes you as a criminal. You aided and abetted the commission of a crime and failed to report it. You accepted a bribe and evaded justice.

            You are the very type of person society want’s locked up. And society is the collective will of the individual, so yes, society has a will, it’s called the ballot box in democratic societies.

            The police don’t raid the homes of the innocent, they click the cuffs on those suspected of a crime. Do you imagine prisons are full of innocent people? And all of those incarcerated aren’t committing crimes whilst locked up, so yes, justice, the police and prison warders do prevent crime.

            As for your contention that victims of crime go uncompensated, in the UK we have the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority:

            “You might be able to claim compensation if you were the victim of a violent crime. This includes if:

            you were injured
            a close relative died
            you saw the crime happen to a loved one (or were there immediately afterwards)
            you paid for the funeral of a person who died”

            Prisons are a cost of crime, not a cost of law.

            In a UK survey titled “Estimated total cost of crimes committed in 2003/2004 against individuals and households.” it was found that The cost of crime to society is approximately 79% of the total cost, with the Criminal Justice System costing just 20%.

            And were there no crime, there would be no need for a CJS.

            So crime is the cost in this debate, not your fantasy of an oppressive state devoting time and resources to spoiling your concept of pleasure, in other words, doing precisely what you want with no repercussions whatsoever.

          • yup.
            i may very well commit 3 felonies before breakfast, most days.
            but that’ just because there are so many laws i don’t bother to even know about or care to.
            i don’t have to.
            you can only try to kill me a little or a lot but you can’t make me anything.
            so sad if you think that’s your mission.

            the idea that you can do some mentalist act and know what i want and weigh your decision to approve or condemn is your personal problem, too- as you see. you have no idea of my skills, resources, needs or desires. howbow mind your own business?

            precisely what i want to do with no interference whatsoever is mind my own damn business.
            if you have a problem with that, you are the problem. trespassers get no special dispensation for pomposity.
            nor do i cut you any slack for the creative accounting in your scheme to redistribute other people’s resources to indulge your obsessions and compulsions.

          • gnomish

            Ignorance of the law is no excuse in the eyes of the law. Now, I have a problem with that because statute laws are so numerous it takes a law degree to gain meaningful expertise in certain areas of it.

            However, that’s how it is and it’s up to the more intelligent amongst us to establish the ground rules, or consult someone who knows before embarking on a course of action.

            I neither want to know, or care to understand your want’s, desires and needs. Even when I was a Cop, that wasn’t my area of expertise, so I didn’t go there.

            I was happy to mind my own business, until someone decided to mind someone else’s business, and the victim called me to help them because they couldn’t help themselves. If the result meant denying a perpetrator their liberty with the evidence I had to hand at the time, I was happy to do that also.

            But your problem is that you see the Cops as the problem, whereas I see criminals as the problem.

            I assume from your tone you have a personal problem with the Police. I assume you have been arrested, convicted, or even done time perhaps.

            It would explain a lot.

          • I am going through exactly that now. Paying a fortune to defend myself against police allegations. It’s not a small penny either. All because their ego is 10x bigger than their brain.

        • Hotscot how many times have you witnessed excessive force by another officer? How many times did you report it? If you can’t answer the same number to both questions then you are a bad apple. Having a badge in the US is a license to speed and break the law. This is a fact. Speed trap in Washington state during a police conference resulted in multiple officers getting stopped with NO tickets, yet everyone else got tickets. When audio recorded by citizen with scanner released did they ticket cops nope.
          I’ve seen too many videos of “bad apples” committing crimes with multiple police witnesses and only AFTER video was made public was anything done. So, I am sorry but your few bad apples mantra is refuted by video evidence.
          I’ve been told personally by Sheriff it didn’t matter how many witnesses I had officer lied on report (one being a cop) he would always back up his officer.
          When I start hearing stories of cops reporting bad apples then I will support them until then they do not have my respect. I’ve worked in a police dept. so I know not all are same. I have also witnessed the I am God attitude. If you really were a cop you know what I am talking about.

          • ironargonaut

            Believe it or not, modern police forces are far more sophisticated than you obviously comprehend.

            Certainly in the UK, police reports are written independently, from the perspective of each officer involved. They are compared to witness statements and to the complaint of anyone claiming excessive force.

            The question of excessive force is removed from the individual police officer, it is independently assessed, so even when I did report excessive force (which I did) I was considered merely a witness. My direct involvement in a situation was judged, taking into account the level of threat involved, the location, the circumstances, even the time it happened during my shift (had I eaten, was I tired etc.) weather, traffic etc.

            I only once had a complaint made about me by someone I arrested. I didn’t know the complaint had been made until I received notice that I was absolved of all responsibility. The case was scrutinised by the complainants lawyers and no appeal was lodged.

            You are another citing situations you are not qualified to judge because you are not in possession of the full facts. Your anecdote about speeding is clouded by the fact that no one is obliged to announce whether they have received a ticket or not. I somehow doubt there was a responsible individual interrogating motorists and recording precise details of their offence and subsequent ticket.

            Videos shot by concerned bystanders are subject to considerable scrutiny as they are easily faked. If they do form credible evidence, and are presented late in an investigation, of course they can change its direction. But those posted online as an exposé of ‘police brutality’ are more likely to contaminate an investigation than assist it as they are a moment in time and rarely include mitigating circumstances.

            Every perpetrator of a crime says the police are lying in their reports, so join the queue.

            Please define your term “I am God attitude”.

        • I remember a study years ago evaluating the success of different groups of people at paintball shootouts.
          Cops were dead last. They were too well trained to identify their target before shooting. That split-second was deadly.
          Unlike school teachers, who shot at anything that moved – including friendlies.

      • “too often”, that’s the phrase. You could argue that one is too many.

        The problem is not just with the few cops who actually kill someone. They are seldom charged and almost never convicted. The thing is, juries will rule the same way even if the shooter isn’t a cop. example If you sincerely believe your life is in danger, you can shoot someone, even if the danger wasn’t real, even if you’re not a cop. In the example it helped to have been in the army so you could claim that your military training kicked in.

        We don’t hear about the people who go out of their way to get shot by the cops and don’t succeed. example Attempted suicide by cop, it happens a lot.

        There’s probably a way to decrease the number of unnecessary police shootings but I don’t know what it is.

        • don’t have a forced theft (taxation) to support a monopoly of the initation of force. that is the answer.
          Like everything else, the free market can solve these issues. The absense of that is tyranny, and that is why we live in a police state.

          Now granted, they definitely do a bunch of good, but it is mainly acheived through fear of reprisal (which I oppose), and granted, most of us on this site are wise enough and good natured enough to likely never encounter an officer in such a way that would end with our demise or jail. That is beside the point though. It isn’t the fear of jail that sets my morals and keeps me in line, it is my adherence and alignment with natural moral law (and my desire to eliminate suffering for myself and others).
          although, I do have work to do with being more polite. The east coast in me is strong.

          • Like everything else, the free market can solve these issues.

            That was tried with the fire brigades. link It didn’t work out so well.

          • honest liberty

            “don’t have a forced theft (taxation) to support a monopoly of the initation of force. that is the answer. Like everything else, the free market can solve these issues.”

            The free market which undergoes the scrutiny of the police, the courts and (in the US as I understand) the FBI to ensure it follows even basic laws of honest trading, nationally and internationally. Going down your route would have the USA swamped with unscrupulous businesses from overseas with their own concept of conducting honest business.

            Wouldn’t free market law enforcement create a massive conflict of interests? Indeed, encourage the conditions endured under prohibition with ‘free market’ gangs resorting to routine violence to protect their profits.

            Nor do you live in a police state. N. Korea is probably the nearest to a complete police state, and it bears no resemblance whatsoever to free western democracy.

            The US retains the right to free expression, the right to keep and bear arms, the right to vote, and form a political party, the right to free movement for citizens etc. All society asks is that one exercises those rights responsibly, and if not, there is a price to be paid.

            And it’s self evident it works as there are vastly more people outside the Criminal Justice System than inside.

            I’m all for Libertarianism (note, not liberalism) but that concept of individual freedom includes the rule of law, indeed, it’s one of the foundations it’s built on.

            Frankly, I think you insult your government and your peers to suggest you live in a police state. Assuming you do live in a democratic country.

          • 1. Of course I insult the government, but it is not my government. No, it is the current oppressive force employing coercive tactics to eliminate my fair competition against it’s tyranny.

            By the way, this is why Peel’s method of patrol policing originated:

            You can wiggle around your self deception and bloated self worth, just like all the echo chamber support you get, but that doesn’t change the fact that American police force as we know it originated to combat slave rebellion.

            Since this model was adopted from Britain, I could see that being adopted in Scotland from Britain. I don’t know, I don’t care. Modern policing is a relatively new phenomena.

            Again, answer me about murder, theft, and oppression. Be honest now. Throughout history you know daggum well the police and military were the primary agents of action for those atrocities, not civilians. And this refusal to align yourselves with reality is why sometimes the left are correct and you are wrong, but most of you seem to have barricaded yourselves in this fantasy that only your perceptions and biases are accurate and therefore worthy of consideration.

            It’s about balance, and dominators suffer from a satanic worldview that humans are evil and need patrolling. It’s a brain imbalance that causes someone to want to patrol other humans like cattle. Mental psychopathy, just like socialists who want to eliminate free speech, or the zealots who want to prevent free association because of misaligned morals from some book that they don’t even truly understand, or restrict substances from being legally ingested, or require permission to leave the arbitrary boundaries, or use violence to steal money from other people to pay their own inflated salary, or the brain imbalance that lives only in meditation and la la land claiming no morality and it doesn’t matter what happens here in the physical existence, etc, etc, etc. All of this is simple brain imbalance that is borderline psychopathic. Genuine, average, decent humans of healthy mind have no desire to control and dominate others, for any reason.

            Justification is just that, a means to ease your conscience because you know deep down what you do is immoral (hey, I was just following orders, I didn’t write the law). Yes, a dominators favorite excuse. Don’t blame me, the guy with the gun pointed at you, I’m just doing it because the paper says so. What twisted, satanic weakness. The most fearful, anxious, hateful people I’ve met have been cops and military. You are weak spiritually so you hide behind your badge and your gun, and the power you get from your fraternity of egocentric, malthusian dominators. Where is respect to be earned? Just the opposite is what is earned. But you can’t admit it because you people refuse to dig to the foundation and inspect your worldview. It’s built on sand.

            Sadly, many cops claim to be Christian. Ha! what a tragic hypocrisy, completely obtuse.
            You think Jesus would go around with a gun and force people to submit?

          • And the typical response, emotionally, is that you who disagree with my strong language want to initiate force upon me to prove your point, your animalistic baseline response is to gravitate towards violence. “How dare he speak to me that way, I’ll show that computer typing punk who’s boss!”

            The difference is I can admit when I’m thinking that way and actively engage in positive methods to transcend that primal urge. And it ain’t because of fear of retribution from police; I could easily entertain an assortment of violent acts to get what I want against those I dislike. It’s a natural non verbal response that evidenced a losing position. Can’t accept or win with facts, or reason… I’ll just beat the snot out of him.

            Respect my authority!

          • Jumping in a little late here, but…

            Honest Liberty, you are absolutely correct in your underlying premise that the government’s authority, ultimately, relies on the threat of force. That’s a philosophical point agreed-to by most honest scholars…and your examples demonstrate the truth of it.

            But, really, the “system” we’ve attempted to construct tries to ensure that when individuals behave according to your description of normal, well-adjusted people, they never (or rarely) encounter the barriers of that system. And because we, as a society, have decided this is a public good, the cost of this system is spread throughout the beneficiaries in the form of a tax.

            Regarding your point that most humans fall into the normal, well-adjusted category who don’t want to dominate and control others, on this I doubt anyone seriously disagrees. But, this is one of those “true, but trivial” points. Humanity is like every other normally distributed curve, and the fact that most of us are in the middle of the curve (with regards to sanity and “normal-ness”) is completely irrelevant. The system is put into place to protect us from those on the fringes of the curve. And while there may be a small percentage of people aberrant enough to be on the edge of the distribution, that’s still a significant number of individuals.

            So, regardless of the strength of your emotions on this point, the overwhelming majority of your fellow citizens have agreed that this is how we want our society to be organized and governed. And yes, if you disagree, rant and rave all you want, but it will be enforced through violence if necessary. I mean, I feel ya’ and all, cause I share a similar distaste and abhorrence for bureaucracy, but neither my, nor your, emotional fervor is meaningful. Because, again, this is how the overwhelming majority of our fellow citizens have decided it should be.

            And again (I’m belaboring this point for a reason), we are forced to comply through, ultimately, the threat of violence. If you refuse to submit to this form of governance, your options are, actually, quite limited. You can buck up and try to fight the power…until they decide to take you down for whatever infraction you’ve committed. You can piss on it all and move to middle of nowhere, removing yourself entirely from civilized life (I’m thinking Alaska wilderness or something) and honestly, you could probably do whatever you wanted because it just wouldn’t be worth bothering you if you’re not bothering anyone else.

            Finally, you could just suck it up, and decide that since the alternatives are usually so much worse, you’re just going accept the cost (taxes) and try to enjoy the things that matter.

            Also, just want point out that your statement about military/police vs citizens is as meaningful as saying something like,100% of parents have kids. The fact that bad men have used groups of humans armed with weapons to do bad things adds no insight into conversation. Try drawing a more meaningful box around this idea.


          • Honest liberty

            Oh dear.

            “Of course I insult the government”. No mention of your peers though.

            And I’ll make a couple of little points to demonstrate your profound ignorance here.

            The site you link to is factually wrong. The worlds first organised Police Force was The City of Glasgow Police in 1800, Not Peel’s London Metropolitan Police some 30 years later. It took legal enforcement to stop the Met Police from perpetuating this claim, and they gave a formal, written undertaking to never repeat it.

            “Since this model was adopted from Britain, I could see that being adopted in Scotland from Britain. I don’t know, I don’t care. Modern policing is a relatively new phenomena.”

            No, you don’t care enough to establish the details. Great Britain is the collective name for the three countries of England, Scotland and Wales. It came into being when England and Scotland became a single kingdom under King James VI of Scotland who also became King James I of England, after the death of Queen Elizabeth I in 1603.

            The City of Glasgow Police is in Scotland, the Metropolitan Police in London, England, not Britain.

            Peel’s method of Policing had nothing to do with slave patrols as you initially imply, it was in fact perverted by some (unnamed in your link) Southern States of America into slave patrols to stop slaves fleeing to Northern States where freedom beckoned. No mention though, of the Police forces in the Northern states, I also note. So did Policing really emerge from Southern State slave patrols, or was there a more productive Northern state Police force emerging simultaneously?

            Kindly do not tarnish the reputation of two of the finest Police forces the world has known with the suggestion that they had anything to do with the American slave trade.

            I was a Cop in Glasgow and it was a pleasure to serve a community in every way I could. I helped the elderly across roads, was welcomed into the homes of people who didn’t need me. I witnessed the aftermath of the sudden death of a school friend from glue inhalation, I comforted mothers who had lost their babies to sudden cot death syndrome, cut suicide victims down from tree’s after they hung themselves, collected the remains of the mentally disturbed from a local asylum who regularly threw themselves in front of trains, cradled people dying from road crashes in my arms, fished children from rivers and lakes, some dead, some alive. I walked the streets at night, in all weathers, checking every lock on every premiss on my beat, every night, to ensure property was safe.

            “It’s about balance, and dominators suffer from a satanic worldview that humans are evil and need patrolling.”

            Yea, right.

            “It’s a brain imbalance that causes someone to want to patrol other humans like cattle.”

            No, it’s the desire to serve a community. But as you have clearly never done that, you couldn’t possibly understand that desire.

            “Mental psychopathy, just like socialists who want to eliminate free speech, or the zealots who want to prevent free association……”

            Police forces enable free speech, as did the armed forces through two world wars. Where would we be today had millions not died to defend your right to tap out rubbish on your PC? You not only insult your government, you insult your peers, you insult your ancestors and, of course, almost every right minded individual on this blog who values the democracy you would seek to overturn, without a solution of course.

            I could go on, but I fail to understand where the bullying, oppression and tyranny occurred on my watch. Sure we were tough on suspected criminals, not to the point of brutality, although on occasions a few went too far, but we dealt with those individuals ourselves, occasionally brutally, to help them understand what it felt like.

            Nor do I believe for a moment that Policing in any civilised western nation is any different to my experience. A bit like an iceberg, 90% of day to day activity is under the water line. An innocent like you doesn’t need to see what goes on, the Cops themselves carry that burden, frequently individually, often painfully. You judge an entire community on the 10% you can see above the water line, of which, a tiny proportion don’t conduct themselves well.

            But you contrive to judge, based on inaccurate information you find on a random website, whilst you don’t understand where Policing came from in the first place. The link you provide is, in itself, not only inaccurate, it is misleading, manipulative, and so full of holes you could drive a bus through it.

            So onto the rest of your rant.

            It’s easy to insult a government, most of us do it by grumbling about creeping bureaucracy, or stealth taxes etc. But most of us leave it at that. You on the other hand, see the government as your enemy. So do something about it. All I have seen from you is bitching. Not a single constructive suggestion. That’s the road to tyranny. All these left wingers roaming the streets protesting with banners and chants, but not one of them with a meaningful constructive alternative. Destroy what we have first, then think about the solutions afterwards.

            That’s precisely what you’re proposing. Anarchy first, then a peaceful society once the establishment has been booted out. That didn’t go so well for Russia or China, now did it?

            Show us all some courage and set up your own political party, with a manifesto to change everything, then we might not think of you as a big mouthed whiner. Just another barrack room lawyer.

            You visit an evidence based blog, and the evidence is in. Democratic Capitalism is the most successful political and financial condition of the last 150 years, probably of all human history. But that’s not good enough for you. The rest of us accept it’s not perfect but on the balance of probabilities, even fiddling with communism or socialism, they can never provide the level of freedom and wealth we in the democratic west enjoy. Yet you call it tyrannical. I was born in the Far East, Hong Kong to be precise, and the refugee crisis from Mao’s failed policies was utterly tragic to witness. And it continued long after the three years it endured. That’s tyranny, when starving, emaciated adults who have lost their entire families are risking their lives for a single bowl of rice.

            You have grand designs on fighting for your family with all the weaponry and resources readily available to you when the Police and Armed forces are eliminated from your utopia. These people were no less determined to survive, yet genuine tyranny robbed them of everything, their land, earnings, family, even the clothes on their back.

            You simply have no idea what suffering is beyond the confines of your own little world. Yet you condemn those seeking to alleviate that suffering by dealing with the criminal fraternity you are too scared to deal with yourself. And at least 99% of the time, they do it within the law.

            “Justification is just that, a means to ease your conscience because you know deep down what you do is immoral (hey, I was just following orders, I didn’t write the law). Yes, a dominators favorite excuse.”

            You bandy the term dominator about with gay abandon, with no concept of the meaning. Every Cop, at least in the UK, has the responsibility to report wrongdoing within the ranks.

            Helping people is what Cops do, but you only have one dogmatic perception, that criminality is right, and Policing is wrong.

            That is mentally unhinged. You need to see someone.

          • “The worlds first organised Police Force was The City of Glasgow Police in 1800, Not Peel’s London Metropolitan Police some 30 years later.”

            Just the for the sake of historical accuracy:


            Note this police force was established exactly because certain nefarious individuals in Rome didn’t buy into either Roman or “natural” law. For example, they thought that which was someone else’s was theirs instead. Go figure that…

          • sycomputing

            Perhaps I should have made it plainer that we are talking modern policing here, that which still exists largely in it’s original form today.

            Ancient Rome did have a police force, I’m not sure it was comparable to modern policing, but it didn’t continue in it’s original form as a civilian, and publicly funded organisation.

            In much the same way, our current Police methods may be superseded by technological developments, Minority Report perhaps?

        • commieBob

          “The problem is not just with the few cops who actually kill someone. They are seldom charged and almost never convicted.”

          That might suggest it’s because their actions were considered lawful. Any killing (at least in the UK) is referred to the CJS for investigation. The police also undertake their own, internal investigations. So whilst a common criminal might undergo a single examination of his/her case by the CJS, cops undergo at least two independent investigations. Then there are civil courts where the public are at liberty to present a case.

          And what’s never mentioned is that cops themselves don’t want a loose cannon in their midst, they might be the next victim.

          The answer to police shootings in the USA is obvious, take everyone’s guns away then there would be less need for armed police. Unfortunately, that’s far too late now and the second amendment is probably more needed now than it ever was.

          It’s also interesting to note that: “Constitutions which historically guaranteed a right to bear arms are those of Bolivia, Colombia, Costa Rica, Guatemala, Honduras, Liberia, Mexico, Nicaragua and the United States of America. Nearly all of the Latin American examples were modelled on that of the United States. At present, out of the world’s nearly 200 constitutions, three still include a right to bear arms: Guatemala, Mexico, and the United States; of these three, only the last does not include explicit restrictive conditions.”

          Nor do I claim Wikipedia to be an accurate arbiter of fact, but as a thumbnail sketch, it’s useful.

          • That might suggest it’s because their actions were considered lawful.

            Exactly so. Even when cops are charged and tried, juries seldom convict. Not only that but even when it’s not a cop doing the killing, given similar circumstances, juries still acquit. It is lawful to defend your own life even if you are wrong about the extent of the danger.

            For some reason, the following comes to mind:

            I’d rather be judged by twelve than carried by six.

  4. The police risked their lives subduing an armed suspect who was willing to fire a weapon in order to resist arrest, putting everyone’s lives at risk. The police deserve our support and commendation. The convicted felon deserves the sentence and should consider herself fortunate not to have been injured or killed during the arrest by officers who showed admirable restraint when confronted with a loaded weapon and a suspect willing to use it.

    • Bullets that go up come down again, somewhere.
      While rare, people have been killed by these kinds of falling bullets.

      • In the video, it appeared that she fired into the ground though at a slight angle. The ground puffed dirt at the first two reports.

        • Bryan A

          It was by sheer good luck that someone wasn’t standing in front of her weapon as it was discharged. Irrespective of the puffs of dirt, any one of those bullets could have killed or seriously injured someone.

          As an ex cop, I have such respect for those guys, they must have ice water in their veins.

      • Ummm no, people haven’t been killed by falling bullets that is an urban legend. I remember a story about a man who fired gun into air to scare off someone breaking into his car. Cops arrested him for reckless discharge in city limits, they claimed same thing until the physics and statistics were brought up by experts.
        Does not excuse her behavior or mean it wasn’t dangerous.

        • Last week was the one year mark for a 5 or 6 yr old in the Richmond, VA area that was killed by a FALLING bullet. He was holding his father’s hand crossing a parking lot. It happens.

    • Sure, should I come to where you work and commend you when you do a good job for what you’re paid, for what you signed up to do?
      You want a cookie?

      What if it was regular citizens who did this? Wouldn’t that be genuinely commendable since they didn’t get paid to do a job, but instead acted out of good nature to protect others?
      Or would you condemn them for risking others safety

      • they get sentences. ‘taking the law into your own hands’ is a special crime.
        rarely does a man get away with that!

      • Honest liberty

        Anyone who turned up as a regular citizen in these circumstances would have been entirely useless as they don’t have the power of arrest.

        The restraint of the police is commendable because of the calm manner they dealt with the situation, whilst gunshots were in close proximity, and a crowd of sympathetic demonstrators was in their face.

        Like it or not, those guys dealt with a situation that would have had you crapping your pants and running for Mummy.

        They conducted themselves calmly, they dealt with a violent individual appropriately, and they diffused a potentially lethal situation.

        What more do you want from cops?

        • “Anyone who turned up as a regular citizen in these circumstances would have been entirely useless as they don’t have the power of arrest.”
          Pure sophistry. Who grants them authority to arrest? Another arbitrary authority chosen through arbitrary means via violence (voting). When you vote, and you play the game, by checking that magic box you are abdicating your own personal responsiblity, and simultaneously, involuntarily that of others who do not agree or consent.

          So if you win, YAY! you get to get your guy to make laws that people like you, who have magic badges, get to then go and enforce because….laws. But if you lose, the opposite is true and you must consent to living under another’s vision of life OR ELSE. but that is where you step in because your bread is buttered on both sides, because after all, you have SPECIAL PRIVELEDGES. It is all violence.

          what I want from cops is to stop pretending they have legitimate authority to rule over anyone other than themselves and stop taking stolen money to do so, while pretending they are heroes. Goodness gracious. Is it courageous? Certainly, and I wouldn’t claim otherwise, but that doesn’t make it moral or hero work. It is mercenary work under the guise of stewardship. It is classism, clearly, based on the priveledges bestowed upon you because of your magical badge and costume. Nothing else.

          • circumstancially courageous, btw. the daily mundane stuff isn’t, but responding to domestic violence events, car crash incidents where you have to witness such carnage, violent actors and special circumstances. yes, I certainly appreciate the good you do. I’m not a complete jackwad about it, but it is the foundation upon which that assistance is derived that I strongly and morally oppose.

            There is much that cops do that I very much appreciate; I haven’t made that clear, so I want to make it so. I genuinely do appreciate much of what is done, just not the way it is founded nor the way the general populace perceives the whole system.

          • honest liberty

            First, let me make it clear, I’m an ex Cop.

            “what I want from cops is to stop pretending they have legitimate authority to rule over anyone other than themselves and stop taking stolen money to do so, while pretending they are heroes.”

            The only, single differentiator between the police and the public is that the police are authorised to deprive a suspected criminal of his liberty, temporarily, before handing him/her over to the CJS. At least in the UK, and I suspect in the US and every other civilised democracy.

            That is considered a burdensome responsibility in the UK. It’s importance is understood by every British Cop. Execute it incorrectly and democracy is undermined.

            That’s the very democracy which allows us all to pay taxes equitably. None of us like it, of course not, but somewhere along the line, be it by purchase taxes or income tax, someone must pay for national and civil defence, and in the UK, our National Health Service, as well as the infrastructure of the country.

            And by and large it works. Thankfully, the ability to deprive someone of their liberty is restricted to a small number of people, vetted and trained to use it responsibly and legally.

            The Police in the UK are badly paid, undertaking a thankless task. The trade off is that they are provided an occupational pension, into which they contribute, and they are expected to retire on a full pension at around 50 years old. That’s only around 30 years of contributions, so the pension is modest.

            Now, if you have an alternative to taxing society equitably, and distributing those taxes for essential services, I’m sure we would all love to hear it.

          • “Now, if you have an alternative to taxing society equitably, and distributing those taxes for essential services, I’m sure we would all love to hear it.”

            I’d just be interested in understanding how a simple transaction for real property would take place. Are there deeds in Anarchistan? Are there contracts for transactions? If so, who enforces them on behalf of the involved parties? If anyone does, doesn’t this contradict the first premise of anarchy?

  5. Ecoterrorists, get her group on the domestic terrorist list for the US. I believe the group is called Democrats.

  6. She is amazingly lucky the police did not deal with some yahoo shooting at them in the usual manner, returning fire.

    • I don’t agree with some of these trials…this is one
      She could have just as easily killed three people…and because she’s a bad off with less than murder

    • I haven’t seen any pictures of the actual incident, but I wouldn’t be surprised if there weren’t a lot of other demonstrators behind her. Police are usually very reluctant to engage in a firefight in that kind of situation.

      • … I wouldn’t be surprised if there weren’t a lot of other demonstrators behind her.

        Watch the video. It was taken by “others” as they watched. Many of the police are facing these others as several officers attempt to restrain her. As they do, she fires the handgun — she should not have had.
        Note the man with the dark Crazy Horse Ride shirt and the red bandanna. He gets between the other demonstrators and the police. Give that man applause.

        Seems like she was trying for a Darwin Award.

  7. O this is sweet!
    Rat chews though wire to plunge into darkness Adelaide ballet performance of Sleeping Beauty:

    Gotta be worthy of a Josh cartoon surely?

    Any suggestions for the quote caption for the rat?

    “Small bite for a rat, giant leap for the Ozzy green agenda!”

    [We assume there was an arc or spark when the cable parted. The mods ask, “Was the rat okay after this tragic accident caused by man-made local warming?” .mod]

    • and soooo appropriate it happened in Adelaide given the lunatic eco posturing of the previous Labor ‘government’.

      A rat chewing through a wire. What a perfect metaphor for the precarious state those imbeciles left the South Australian electricity supply in. Eelctrickery is about what they relied on.

      • Komrade Kuma and Phil Salmon, I hope you’re joking. This has nothing to do with the type of power generation. Even if running on coal you don’t just reconnect an 11KV supply without first locating and rectifying the fault, unless you want to end up like the rat.

        And BTW, that rat was a descendant of his first fleet ancestors. Sadly, mods, he couldn’t be revived. He will be sorely missed.

    • The mods ask, “Was the rat okay after this tragic accident caused by man-made local warming?” .mod

      The BBC article concludes by suggesting that it ended badly for the rat. But no evidence – no smoking rat apparently. Global warning has made rats evolve to survive electric shocks!

  8. Red Fawn Fallis — the name says it all, except it should be “Red Fawn Fallacy”

    And I’m not being insensitive. If you can disgrace your name with stupidity, then how does your name gain any further respect?

    • Could be the mother of future president Dwayne Elizondo Mountain Dew Herbert Camacho.

    • Summary,

      Fallis had been held for about 20 months, but Fallis violated some such thing or the other, so Fallis won’t get the benefit of being held for 3 months of that time. So Fallis will be now need to be held in Federal prison for another 57 months.

      A Mr. Little Turtlehead proclaims that Fallis was treated unfairly, essentially molested, and then framed. The Little Turtlehead video shows it all … with slow motion and close-ups. Fallis was treated very roughly by that group of lawmen.

      According to the Bismark Tribune, “Fallis’ attorneys questioned neurophysiologist Roger Enoka about “unintentional discharge” … playing a role in Fallis’ case.” The prosecuting attorney, disputed the such an idea; he claimed that, based on Fallis’ position at the time of the discharge and the pressure needed to trigger the discharge, it had to have been an intentional act.

  9. Hmm, if she were male she would probably have been shot. #Womanprivilege — because sometimes it’s fun to watch leftist head’s explode.

  10. There is a lot of info out there these days, a lot of knowledge and all like that in this times of smart phones, but I still think humanity does not actually understand it’s history, it’s past history…it happens to be addressed in a very much watered down version, with no real means to understand it properly…
    therefor bound to be repeated…with all it’s pains;

    and human history is counted in millennia not simply decades or centuries. Same old affairs in principle…
    regardless of the blindness…


  11. Well, unlike the lynch mob here, I actually feel sorry for the woman. She’s certainly no “martyr”, but neither is she a demon.

        • And thus in violation of all the Gun Control Laws the Left keeps screaming for.
          The judge should have thrown the book at her for that.

          • When the problem is criminals not obeying the laws already on the books, the answer is not more laws.

    • hmmmm not sure I understand your reasoning Bruce, she was a “FELON” which means she had a previous FELONY conviction, and she was carrying a loaded gun which she fired 3 times at least “recklessly” in the presence of not only many people but many Law Enforcement Officers. To add to that she was shown some leniency and served some of her time in a “half-way” house which she did not uphold her end of that privilege and was remanded to custody until trial. I agree she is not a demon but surely she should be held responsible for her multiple failures to adhere to the laws of our society, how many chances does one get with no consequences or extra leniency? Her current predicament is entirely of her own making and would have been much more lenient if she had just obeyed the rules/conditions of the “halfway” house stay. Unlike your characterization I didn’t read any “lynch mob” comments….. perhaps you could help my understanding by citing specifically which comments made you consider to be “lynch mob.”



    • Nope – just an idiot lucky to be still breathing. I feel sorry she has to live a life filled with sadness and anxiety, and that most of that is because of her own dumb choices. If she wants to change her life, she should start by sending flowers to the police offices that didn’t shoot her dead.

    • Bruce Cobb

      She discharged a handgun 3 times in the proximity of law enforcement officers.

      No, she’s not a martyr, she would have shot herself if that were the case.

      She is, however, a demon for risking the lives of the people who keep us all safe, including her.

    • Noting that the woman was lucky to get as light a sentence as she did is a lynch mob?
      Pointing out that people who discharge firearms after being told by the cops to put down their weapons sometimes get shot is a lynch mob?

      She’s an idiot who did a very dangerous thing and is very lucky that she didn’t injure anyone.

  12. indictment filed Jan. 5 charges her with felony counts of civil disorder and discharging a firearm in relation to a felony crime of violence — which, in this case, is civil disorder. These charges are in addition to an earlier charge of possession of a firearm by a convicted felon.
    and all the fed charges combined had nowhere near the possible punishment of the states attempted murder charge.

  13. Frankly she is lucky she was not riddled with bullets. What kind of imbecile brings a gun to a ‘peaceful’ protest. Protesting against the pipeline is one thing, that’s just exercising a Constitutional right but turning up armed to do so is just a tad over the line.

    • Komrade Kuma

      Meanwhile, the dickhead with the camera is chanting ‘we’re unarmed, put down your weapons’.

      Yea right!

  14. And of course that youtube video has comments disabled. But it was satisfying to be one of the few thumbs down’ers..

  15. In another version of reality this incident involving less trained law enforcement might have become the Kent State of the climate movement.

  16. I can only guess as to the intentions of the weapon firing. Though, given the actions and verbiage used by the remaining protestors, I would hasten to guess that it was intentional, planned and executed to illicit a response from law enforcement. Likely the entire crowd of protesters knew about the weapon and planned that Red Fawn would be separated and arrested so that it “Could go off” and the crowd could claim, on video, that law enforcement was firing live rounds in proximity to a peaceful unarmed crowd.

    Kudos to Law Enforcement for not returning fire and escalating the tense situation.

    • honest, I can’t remember a case where a suspect got off 3 shots…and the police didn’t take them out..I would have….there’s no way of knowing if 3 is it…that 4th one might get you

      • Latitude

        Credit to the cops. They seem to have her restrained without risking their lives.

        Bryan has a point though. She seems to have enough mental issues that she might consider martyrdom as a noble quest, unfortunately, the cops are well trained these days.

        And whilst it might seem tempting to shoot someone, shooting at you. The cops had her controlled, she was nothing more to them than a pathetic idiot. Nor do I believe she actually wanted to shoot someone, if so, she would have done it from amongst the crowd.

        It”s the old story. If you threaten to punch someone, you have already lost the fight. If you punch someone without threatening them, there was no fight.

        The rest of the crowd might have been hoping she made a martyr of herself, but she’s not that daft.

  17. Judge: Red Fawn Fallis, you are a screw-up and always have been. During your younger formative years you have missed developed milestone including: impulse control, self-awareness, decision making skill, conflict resolution skills, and a host of other necessary behaviors to qualify you as an adult. I believe your regret is real, unfortunately, only temporary. You are now 39 years old and the likelihood of you acquiring necessary adult behavior skills is remote. And yet, hope springs eternal and it is the hope of this Court that you find redemption, self-discipline, and most important, find the motivation to be a contributor to society instead of a net taker. I wish you God’s speed.

  18. According to the left, second amendment rights only apply to protestors shooting at police.


    “…Fallis is also sentenced to three years of supervised probation after her release. Chief Judge Daniel Hovland also put special conditions on her supervised release including drug and alcohol treatment and treatment for mental health issues….”.

    Drug and alcohol and mental health issues. This might explain why she would do something as mindless as bringing a loaded gun to a protest event where law enforcement is present…..and firing it.

    • “Drug and alcohol and mental health issues. This might explain why she would do something…”

      There’s another alternative: “Stupid”

      With all due respect to Red Dawn…err, Red “Fawn” that is.

  20. “— Unicorn Riot (@UR_Ninja)”

    says it all: totemistic voodoo dream weavers.

  21. I was hoping to be dead once the upcoming civil war begins. Day by day, I increasing believe that my death will not be soon enough.

Comments are closed.