They are at it again.
And this time, some of the Laddites do not even bother to cover their dislike for Law Enforcement making it look like they wish their SWATting calls end up in somebody getting killed.
And doing a Willy Mays, “That’s not all” it seems they have a problem comprehending the idea of public records and the Sixth Amendment about “to be confronted with the witnesses against him.”
They would love being able to lay the most outlandish accusations if their identities could remain secret. Very Soviet of them. But it is also good to know that GSGV will stand next to them at trial for any future lawsuits their actions may generate, just like Brady did with the Phillips and their lawsuit against ammunition distributers…..Oh, wait.
14 thoughts on “CSGV: Doubling down on SWATting & Playing Puppeteer.”
Well, I certainly don’t see any way that this could backfire horribly and end up with people at the CSGV getting sued, fired, arrested, and/or killed.
Nope, none at all.
The “3nd Amendment”? The one about restrictions on the quartering of soldiers in private homes without the owner’s consent, and forbidding that practice in peacetime? That “3nd” Amendment?
Don’t confuse them with facts, George. They aren’t interested in facts, or accuracy. Only control
“No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.”
Can’t you stupid gun nuts read the plain as day text of the Ammendment? It says “no soldier shall be quartered in any house” and we all know this refers to the form of capital punishment where the condemned was chopped into four pieces — quarters! Duh.
So the government has the right to make you have soldiers living in your house as long as you don’t chop them up.
Because of so many anti comments like this I am thinking of painting a 1-2″ neon stripe all the way around the barrel of my daily carry.
This would be bright and obvious, but hidden while in my holster.
Then I can (should I survive the encounter) ask the police to confirm the witness statements, then have the police for the witness to describe the firearm that I was “brandishing”. Then I state that there is a 2″ stripe in bright neon (don’t say the color)… please ask the witness what color it is.
Now, unless they make a really lucky guess, I would press for charges: abuse of the 911 system, filing a false report, and lying to the police, reckless endangerment, and anything else that fits (assault by proxy?!?).
I would also FOIA everything for a civil suit against the witness who lied and called in the SWATing.
I had a co-worker (and friend) pulled over on the way to work one morning back in the late 90’s for supposedly pulling a gun on a lady while he was driving. Mike was never late so we knew something was wrong.
She had called 911 because he flipped her off after she nearly crashed into him forcing her way onto the freeway, nearly striking his car and the one behind him. There simply wasn’t room for her merge, but she was going to get in between, by God!
According to my friend, he got pulled over several miles later, and the police officer had his firearm drawn and made him exit the vehicle, hands up, etc. When it was all said and done, he was fortunate the officer was a reasonable fellow. The lady, when reporting, said it was some sort of little black gun. He had a gun, locked in his glove box, but it was a big old Raging Bull in stainless. The officer let him go because the gun was properly locked away (the legal requirement at the time), not loaded, and the wrong kind of gun compared to what was reported. According to my friend, the officer admitted that this kind of thing happened more than you’d imagine.
And of course, the lady who called in the false police report and threatened dozens of lives by driving recklessly gets away with nothing but the smug satisfaction that she(thinks she) got some guy arrested.
A friend of a friend was once subjected to a soft SWAT’ing by some anti-hunting lunatic that objected to his photographs taken with deer he had shot. They reported him to the local Child Protective Services agency for “running all around the apartment complex chasing his kids and trying to beat them with his belt.”
The social workers and a single policeman escorting them arrived, knocked, and politely made their excuses and left virtually the minute he opened the door.
Y’see, the man who had allegedly been running after his children to beat them with his belt had left both of his legs in a field somewhere south-southeast of Mosul.
God help us if these morons ever develop intelligence.
Amen…Holy crap how low can you go accusing a wounded veteran like that?
I wonder if you can FOIA for facebook crap like what is posted and find out if it’s the same person???
By “anyone” do they include Shannon Watts obviously armed bodyguards?
Agh! I wish I could find a way to get around the lockout CSGV imposed on me for injecting a little common sense and facts into their rants!
–Robert Edwards: “If you carry a gun, it implies violence, whether you are a cop or not.”
My reply: If you don’t carry a gun, it implies victimhood. And if you object to anyone carrying a gun, it implies you are looking for a victim.”
[…] controllers try to portray legal gun owners as violent and unstable, but in fact it’s the gun controllers who openly advocate life-threatening violence against legal gun owners. Seems to me that the rabid liberty haters are […]
[…] us traitors but they have no problems transmitting al Qeada BS as truth. And the latest is their embrace of Swatting Gun Owners just because they […]
Comments are closed.
Login or register to comment.