So far we have no facts.
Robin
Apparently, for so many, facts are absolutely not needed.
So far we have no facts.
Robin
So far we have no facts.
Robin
Sources please.One big fact.... We have victims who have stated that they were in fact wronged by this guy.
There is in fact a complaint signed by at least two different people of crimes that were committed against them.
These complaints and facts as seen cannot be ignored.
Sources please.
Well google isn’t really helping in that respect. Wish it was posted.Research his court appearance. It is there for all to see. His arraignment can be read by all.
Well google isn’t really helping in that respect. Wish it was posted.
Those charges are from articles published after the standoff from the statements the Putnam Cty Police published. Previously they made public statements that he wasn’t wanted on any charges but was rather wanted for medical attention. Which is it?Alexander Booth was subsequently arrested on a felony warrant issued by Town Justice Jacobellis stemming from the previous domestic incident. Mr. Booth was charged with Penal Law 140.25 Burglary 2nd Degree a class C felony; 140.15 Criminal Trespass a class A misdemeanor; 215.50 Criminal Contempt 2nd degree a class A misdemeanor; 240.30 Aggravated Harassment 2nd degree a class A misdemeanor; 155.25 Petit Larceny a class A misdemeanor. He was arraignment in Carmel Town Justice Court.
I will make a wild assumption here, innocent till proven guilty.
He may well be a jerk, and soon a felonious jerk, but that does not detract from the real time decisions people made and the well made and articulated point Spat over and over again.
Robin
So what is it that you are saying? All jokes aside, there is absolutely no way at all to verify any information. And even if you could, it would boil down to if you are okay with red flag infringements for people that haven’t been convicted of a crime. Because whether it’s a true red flag from a doctor or a a school official or a wife claiming Domestic Violence whether true or not , either way they are the same. A man is getting his guns confiscated without a hearing, trial, or conviction based on the word of another.
I would want to help a Felon as well that called for help. The Constitution never said that Felons who served time for a DWI or perjury or for having marijuana are okay to be infringed upon.
Yes, it does. They rallied for the wrong person, at the wrong time, for the wrong reason in support of a wanted person due to crimes with non-government victims who swore out multiple complaints.
They make the 2nd Amendment crowd look stupid. No different than the “didn du nuffin” ghetto crusaders.
So, to speculate even further (since we don't have a lot of facts), if this guy went to his former home (that he still might be paying for) to pick up his socks and underwear, and had words with his ex who may have been agitated, the above charges could be the result. Knowing a few people who have gone through messy divorces from spouses who made up accusations, I'm not ready to treat this guy like Charles Manson."Alexander Booth was subsequently arrested on a felony warrant issued by Town Justice Jacobellis stemming from the previous domestic incident. Mr. Booth was charged with Penal Law 140.25 Burglary 2nd Degree a class C felony; 140.15 Criminal Trespass a class A misdemeanor; 215.50 Criminal Contempt 2nd degree a class A misdemeanor; 240.30 Aggravated Harassment 2nd degree a class A misdemeanor; 155.25 Petit Larceny a class A misdemeanor. He was arraignment in Carmel Town Justice Court."
It all depends on if you believe in red flag laws or Domestic violence laws which are one in the same. Many do. You take offense because you are a cop. That is all.Note that I have been very clear in regards to his rights under our system of laws. I’ve never once argued this person should’ve been bum rushed in a way that forfeits his normal legal rights. I went way out of my way to stress that in my posts.
I’m specifically addressing the fact that supposed defenders of the 2nd Amendment mobilized (albeit weakly) in his defense during the incident to include multiple threats against the police and a coordinated attack on the local 911 system with no indication that any assault on his rights was happening, beyond disagreement with a law which wasn’t even part of the situation.
Note that I have been very clear in regards to his rights under our system of laws. I’ve never once argued this person should’ve been bum rushed in a way that forfeits his normal legal rights. I went way out of my way to stress that in my posts.
I’m specifically addressing the fact that supposed defenders of the 2nd Amendment mobilized (albeit weakly) in his defense during the incident to include multiple threats against the police and a coordinated attack on the local 911 system with no indication that any assault on his rights was happening, beyond disagreement with a law which wasn’t even part of the situation.
So, to speculate even further (since we don't have a lot of facts), if this guy went to his former home (that he still might be paying for) to pick up his socks and underwear, and had words with his ex who may have been agitated, the above charges could be the result. Knowing a few people who have gone through messy divorces from spouses who made up accusations, I'm not ready to treat this guy like Charles Manson.
To further make stuff up, I have no issue with the bystanders. Since no shots were fired, I'm guessing they were bystanders who went to see that things were done on the up and up - no Waco type burn him out, no beating the shit out of a limp body while they scream "stop resisting", and no alligations of assaulting an officer when the guy went peacefully. 'Cause we know that never happens.
Yeah. I was looking at it from a slightly different angle based on what you said about that seemed to have a general "all perps are scumbags" vibe.
You're right, what we are seeing is a fundamental breakdown of a critical facet of society. The public trust in law enforcement.Because unlike times where we've discussed gun laws being "broken" and people might say "bad case, the guys is into weed," or "how about only breaking one law at once?"... the difference here is that crimes may have been committed that actually have real, citizen victims. Anyone supporting this guy is supporting an actual perp in direct relation to crimes he committed against citizens. Not cops, not the government, not local laws: a fellow citizen with rights to not be a victim of crimes.
Step two would be if his rights were being violated. They weren't. The cops waited him out and negotiated, a tactic which has been used for DECADES in this country. He was arrested peacefully and brought before a judge where he was given bail. All tenets that form the basis of our nation's system of laws.
The important thing of note here is that his supporters are in fact encouraging the breakdown of our system of laws by attacking during an incident which confirms the most base level need for a justice system: redress for crimes committed against fellow citizens.
Regardless of his innocence, that is what the justice system is for. His attorneys, the various laws and precedent which govern the process from arrest to trial. He was afforded all of that which applied at the early stages of this case. There was no overt indication of anything besides a routine arrest involving a perp with real accusers.
Now if this is what mobs are going to support, then we aren't seeing the beginning of a movement to address a suppressive government. We are seeing the beginning of a movement to achieve mob rule and vigilante justice. That is not a good thing. It is the news not because it's impressive but because it is scary and could be indicative of a coming time when no government role in law enforcement will be tolerated, which is not how a functioning society works.
Here's what I'm saying:
If this happened 15 miles from my house, I'm not going to show up ready to boogaloo for some stranger on the internet claiming he was red flagged when there is other information pointing to the contrary. Even if some guy from Kansas City chirps in on Reddit saying he just heard from the 2nd cousin of the county sherriff who, despite being tied up in a rapidly escalating mess, took the time to swap text messages with his 2nd cousin. I might show up, see what's happening, try to get a drone in the air to see for myself, talk to local news media off camera for details, etc. But under no circumstances would I insert myself into the situation on information that is insufficient to make me decide becoming my alter-ego boogaloo self is a solid course of action.
Alternatively, if this happened to someone I know and trust, I would likely respond differently.
Right. Every poor schlep going through a divorce that gets accusations thrown at him is a POS perp. Got it.This is getting ridiculous now.
Can you directly quote a statement where anyone described him like Charles Manson?
This is fucking bizzaro world.
Nice attempt at a dig on the police for no reason. Thanks for proving my point all along.
You fools know what you want out of this and you’re sticking to it regardless.
It doesn't matter if it's "the right incident" or not.I just had to urban dictionary lookup boogaloo.... Thanks.
This is the single post here I mostly align with.
I think if you're willing to go to the wall for a cause you believe in, you need to make sure you have it right or at least you have as much reliable, vetted and accurate information as possible. That's what I was getting at a page or two earlier here.
This episode showed how quickly things can turn into a cluster fuck where no one really knows what's going on and the water is muddy as hell.
I still find it very interesting the independent reactions of so many people who are reaching their moral line in the Sand breaking points all organically and spontaneously are having very strong reactions.
I am just concerned we are picking the wrong incident to make an example of. I still want us to have the righteous moral conviction of knowing we are right. I don't want our side being discredited or turned into villians. The left and media would love nothing more than to use an incident of right wing gun nuts as justification for draconian surveillance programs and gun controls.
I never once came close to expressing myself that way. Only with a heap of ingrained assumptions would one arrive at that conclusion.
Sorry to be abrupt, but how else does one argue against such misconceptions?
I’ve sarcastically discussed people supporting criminals many time.
No different than the “didn du nuffin” ghetto crusaders.