maddogdrivethru.net

Open all night
It is currently Wed Dec 19, 2018 2:36 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 320 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: ANTIFA - Unreasonable?
PostPosted: Thu Aug 09, 2018 12:37 pm 
Offline
Sergeant Major
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2008 9:50 pm
Posts: 31699
Location: West coast of the east coast
Reputation points: 20000
Anthropoid wrote:
Look, if someone is wearing a mask they CANNOT BE positively identified. PERIOD.

That applies to scumbag crypto-commie anarchists just as much as it applies to Jesus Christ, you, me or Ronald Reagan in his prime.

YOU WANT it that way, trust me.

This is why people wearing masks at demonstrations or any other sort of public gathering (which is not in temperatures below 0 C should be:immediate detainment by police.


Quote:
Look, if someone is wearing a mask they CANNOT BE positively identified. PERIOD.


I respectfully disagree.
IIRC, here were other identifying features (the sunglasses that he was wearing, the straps on his backpack, other clothing that he was wearing, etc) that led to the perp being identified as Eric Clanton.
[Pictures on social media of him with his face clearly visible (and with the sunglasses and backpack and clothing) compared to pictures of him masked with those same sunglasses, clothing and backpack)

Quote:
This is why people wearing masks at demonstrations or any other sort of public gathering (which is not in temperatures below 0 C should be:immediate detainment by police.

What about Halloween or other public events involving the wearing of costumes? ;-)

PS: I agree with the law that was passed making the wearing of masks at demonstrations illegal. For too long, masks have served as a shield for anonymity to Antifa/black bloc groups to hide behind.

_________________
The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public’s money.
- misattributed to Alexis De Tocqueville

No representations made as to the accuracy of info in posted news articles or links


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: ANTIFA - Unreasonable?
PostPosted: Thu Aug 09, 2018 1:20 pm 
Offline
Sergeant
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 19, 2008 10:09 am
Posts: 1680
Location: On the beach
Reputation points: 8777
I'm not sure where wearing a mask lies on the legal spectrum.

But one thing is for sure, when demonstrators wear masks it is almost synonymous with violence of some form. As such local authorities should pay special attention to those who attend demonstrations and wear masks.

The wearing of masks at demonstrations reeks of violence and anarchy. Perhaps that is a good reason to allow folks like Antifa to continue to do so. I'm sure I'm not the only person who thinks when they see a demonstrator with a mask ... "that person is probably an anarchist who will most likely participate in some form of violence."

_________________
"In this present crisis, Government is not the solution to our problem; Government is the problem." - Ronald Reagan

"Because in America, we don't worship Government; we worship God." - Donald Trump


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: ANTIFA - Unreasonable?
PostPosted: Thu Aug 09, 2018 1:34 pm 
Offline
Sergeant Major
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2008 9:50 pm
Posts: 31699
Location: West coast of the east coast
Reputation points: 20000
Lava wrote:
I'm not sure where wearing a mask lies on the legal spectrum.

But one thing is for sure, when demonstrators wear masks it is almost synonymous with violence of some form. As such local authorities should pay special attention to those who attend demonstrations and wear masks.

The wearing of masks at demonstrations reeks of violence and anarchy. Perhaps that is a good reason to allow folks like Antifa to continue to do so. I'm sure I'm not the only person who thinks when they see a demonstrator with a mask ... "that person is probably an anarchist who will most likely participate in some form of violence."


My bold emphasis above.

Some information regarding that, as it relates to California (where the Berkeley bike lock attack occurred and also the scene of numerous protests involving Antifa)
Quote:
https://www.losangelescriminallawyer.pro/california-penal-code-section-185-pc-wearing-mask-or-disguise-to.html

California Penal Code Section 185 PC: Wearing Mask Or Disguise To Evade Police
1. Definition and Elements of the Crime
police evasion
While wearing masks or disguises is not usually illegal, if someone wears a mask or disguise to avoid being detected by the police he or she could be charged with a criminal offense. Under California Penal Code Section 185 PC, it is unlawful to wear a mask or disguise in order to evade the police.

To prove that a defendant is guilty of wearing a mask or disguise to evade the police, a prosecutor must be able to prove the following elements:

The defendant wore a mask, false whiskers, or any personal disguise
The defendant evaded or escaped discovery, recognition or identification
AND the defendant was in the commission of a public offense.
OR:

The defendant wore a mask, false whiskers, or any personal disguise
The defendant’s use of the mask, false whiskers or any personal disguise was used for the purpose of concealment, flight or escape
AND the defendant was charged with, arrested for or convicted of a public offense.
2. Related Offenses
Similar offenses include the following:

False Identification to Police - California Penal Code Section 148.9 PC
Resisting Arrest - California Penal Code Section 148(a) PC
3. Examples
A man commits a robbery at a convenience store and is concerned that he will be caught, as his face was clearly seen by store cameras and the store’s owner would be able to describe the man’s appearance. The man puts on a fake beard that he has in his pocket after he leaves the store so that he will not be able to be recognized or identified. This man could be charged with wearing a mask or disguise to evade police in violation of California Penal Code Section 185 PC in addition to any other robbery or burglary offense he may have committed.

In another example a man is at a Halloween party when he gets into an argument with another person at the party. The man physically strikes the other man and knocks him unconscious, then decides to go to a different party. After the man leaves, other guests at the party contact the police to report an assault and battery. While walking to the other Halloween party, the man puts on a mask that is part of his costume. While this man may be charged with assault and battery, he would not be guilty of wearing a mask or disguise to evade police because he did not wear the mask to avoid police detection, but rather only wore the mask because it was part of his Halloween costume.

4. Defenses to Wearing a Mask or Disguise to Evade Police
As discussed above, a defendant must wear the mask or disguise in order to avoid detection. If the disguise is worn for some other reason, the defendant would not be criminally liable for this offense. Simply wearing a mask or disguise is not a crime in and of itself. Additionally, if the defendant did not commit a public offense, or was not in the commission of such an offense at the time the mask or disguise was worn, he or she would not be guilty of this offense.

5. Penalties
Wearing a mask or disguise in order to avoid police detection is a misdemeanor offense that is punishable by up to 180 days in jail, community service or community labor, costly court fines and any other conditions of probation that a judge may impose. In addition, the defendant could still be prosecuted for the underlying crime for which they were trying to avoid detection.

That is from a law firm's website, not the actual statute.

The statute itself:
http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces ... k+disguise

Quote:
PENAL CODE - PEN
PART 1. OF CRIMES AND PUNISHMENTS [25 - 680] ( Part 1 enacted 1872. )
TITLE 7. OF CRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC JUSTICE [92 - 186.34] ( Title 7 enacted 1872. )

CHAPTER 8. Conspiracy [182 - [185.]] ( Chapter 8 enacted 1872. )

[185.]
Section One Hundred and Eighty-five. It shall be unlawful for any person to wear any mask, false whiskers, or any personal disguise (whether complete or partial) for the purpose of:

One—Evading or escaping discovery, recognition, or identification in the commission of any public offense.

Two—Concealment, flight, or escape, when charged with, arrested for, or convicted of, any public offense. Any person violating any of the provisions of this section shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor.

(Amended by Code Amendments 1873-74, Ch. 614.)


_________________
The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public’s money.
- misattributed to Alexis De Tocqueville

No representations made as to the accuracy of info in posted news articles or links


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: ANTIFA - Unreasonable?
PostPosted: Thu Aug 09, 2018 2:45 pm 
Offline
Gunnery Sergeant
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 3:16 am
Posts: 6486
Location: The Cockney Paradise
Reputation points: 20000
chijohnaok wrote:
IIRC, here were other identifying features (the sunglasses that he was wearing, the straps on his backpack, other clothing that he was wearing, etc) that led to the perp being identified as Eric Clanton.
[Pictures on social media of him with his face clearly visible (and with the sunglasses and backpack and clothing) compared to pictures of him masked with those same sunglasses, clothing and backpack)

You are correct, that was a key factor in identifying Clanton.

_________________
I could be the catalyst that sparks the revolution
I could be an inmate in a long-term institution
I could dream to wide extremes, I could do or die
I could yawn and be withdrawn and watch the world go by
What a waste...


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: ANTIFA - Unreasonable?
PostPosted: Thu Aug 09, 2018 5:22 pm 
Offline
Sergeant Major
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2008 9:50 pm
Posts: 31699
Location: West coast of the east coast
Reputation points: 20000

_________________
The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public’s money.
- misattributed to Alexis De Tocqueville

No representations made as to the accuracy of info in posted news articles or links


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: ANTIFA - Unreasonable?
PostPosted: Thu Aug 09, 2018 8:05 pm 
Offline
Sergeant Major
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2011 3:06 pm
Posts: 12126
Location: inside your worst nightmare
Reputation points: 16336
Well apparently the prosecutor disagrees with you, else he/she would not have offered a plea deal to Clanton.

Don't get me wrong: I'm not happy that the fucker is getting off very lightly. I'm simply pointing out the realities of how jurisprudence work. Specifically: the indictment of any of us for a felony is not a simple matter of the assemblage of a bunch of circumstantial evidence.

Quote:
Circumstantial evidence is evidence that relies on an inference to connect it to a conclusion of fact—like a fingerprint at the scene of a crime. By contrast, direct evidence supports the truth of an assertion directly—i.e., without need for any additional evidence or inference.

On its own, circumstantial evidence allows for more than one explanation. Different pieces of circumstantial evidence may be required, so that each corroborates the conclusions drawn from the others. Together, they may more strongly support one particular inference over another. An explanation involving circumstantial evidence becomes more likely once alternative explanations have been ruled out.

Circumstantial evidence allows a trier of fact to infer that a fact exists.[1] In criminal law, the inference is made by the trier of fact in order to support the truth of an assertion (of guilt or absence of guilt).

Testimony can be direct evidence or it can be circumstantial. For instance, a witness saying that she saw a defendant stab a victim is providing direct evidence. By contrast, a witness who says that she saw the defendant enter a house, that she heard screaming, and that she saw the defendant leave with a bloody knife gives circumstantial evidence. It is the necessity for inference, and not the obviousness of a conclusion, that determines whether evidence is circumstantial.

Forensic evidence supplied by an expert witness is usually treated as circumstantial evidence. For instance, a forensic scientist may provide results of ballistic tests proving that the defendant’s firearm fired the bullets that killed the victim, but not necessarily that the defendant fired the shots.

_________________
Anthro's NSFW Thread


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: ANTIFA - Unreasonable?
PostPosted: Mon Aug 13, 2018 7:02 am 
Offline
Sergeant Major
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2008 9:50 pm
Posts: 31699
Location: West coast of the east coast
Reputation points: 20000
https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/ni ... ted-antifa

Quote:
NBC Ignores Own Reporter and Crew Assaulted By Antifa in Charlottesville

By Nicholas Fondacaro | August 12, 2018 10:05 AM EDT

On the one-year anniversary of the deadly Charlottesville protests, white supremacists and radical leftists known as Antifa descended on the Virginia town once more to commit more violence. Late Saturday night, NBC News reporter Cal Perry and his crew were in the thick of it as Antifa members ganged up on them and attacked. The next morning, NBC’s Sunday Today ignored the attack and suggested the media was simply “heckled” by their assaulters.

On Twitter, Perry was documenting the protesters as they marched through the streets of college town when they started to get “very aggressive with the media” and trying to block their camera shots. “Yeah. We’re getting a lot of this. Protesters trying to grab our camera,” he responded to one Twitter commenter telling him to “f**k off national media vulture.”

[WARNING: Strong language used in the video]

[video at above link]

Things got super-heated when one Antifa protestor shouted “F**k you, snitch a** news b**ch. F**k you” and tried to either pull the camera away from the person using it or knock it to the ground. It was unclear in the video.

Despite the video evidence on the ground from their own reporter, NBC went to Garrett Haake, who was at the White House in anticipation of violence there as another white supremacist rally was set to be held. “Overnight, tense moments in the streets of Charlottesville, Virginia, far left protesters heckling the media and chanting anti-police slogans,” he suggested at the top of his report. They actually used footage Perry and his crew shot but didn't show anything from their attack.

The assault on NBC’s reporter came almost a year since their political director, Chuck Todd used his MSNBC program, MTP Daily to elevate Antifa’s violence as a legitimate tactic against the right. He even doubled down and allowed them to use the formerly prestigious Meet the Press as a platform to push their hate and violent methods. Todd has never condemned them.

[more video at above link]

Todd appeared on Sunday Today and had nothing to say about the attack or Antifa, which had been declared a domestic terrorism group by the State of New Jersey before he had them on last year. Instead of condemning Antifa, he lambasted the President for criticizing anthem protesters and targeted his supporters as racists.

“So I don't think, if the President is, quote, ‘learned anything’ I think in his mind, he has seen this is an effective political strategy to keep his base, his base,” he declared about what the President had learned since last year’s violence. “That it is the president's continuation of using to be generous, dog whistles, others say they're not silent. You can hear the whistles pretty loudly.”

It’s sad and disturbing that NBC would choose to ignore violent leftists assaulting their own employees in exchange for railing against President Trump’s voters, but this appears to be the world we live in now. The assault also came after the entire liberal media had been trying to convince the public that Trump supporters where violent ones reporters had to watch out for.

The transcript is below, click "expand" to read:

NBC's Sunday Today
August 12, 2018
8:02 a.m. Eastern

WILLIE GEIST: Let's begin this morning with the one-year anniversary of the deadly white supremacist protest in Charlottesville and the death of Heather Haier. Demonstrations in Charlottesville during the day on Saturday were peaceful but got out offhand last night as leftist Antifa protestors lashed out at the media and police. Today a large rally is planned in Washington, D.C., with a big police presence to meet them. NBC’s Garrett Haake is there for us. Garrett good morning.

GARRETT HAAKE: Hey, good morning Willie. D.C. Police will be flooding this area later today trying to keep separate groups of white nationalists and counter-protesters, even as they converge on this small park later tonight.

[Cuts to video]

Overnight, tense moments in the streets of Charlottesville, Virginia, far left protesters heckling the media and chanting anti-police slogans. As the city rolled out a heavy police presence on the eve of its darkest day.

(…)

HAAKE: On a working vacation in New Jersey, President Trump will watch the rally on television, not from a White House window. On Saturday, Mr. Trump tweeting to preemptively “condemn all racism in violence”. A stark contrast to his response to last year’s chaos in Charlottesville.

(…)

8:04:34 a.m. Eastern

GEIST: Chuck Todd is NBC's political director and moderator of Meet the Press. Chuck Good morning.

CHUCK TODD: Good Morning.

GEIST: Another extraordinary day in the presidency of Donald Trump right across the street from where he works. He’s not there today but will be this demonstration from white nationalists and probably counter-protesters as well. It comes one year after Charlottesville when the President said, of course, there were very fine people on both sides, seeming to put equivalency between the left and the racist right. Where are we a year later? I know you’re going to tackle some of this on the show. What has the President learned 12 months on?

TODD: Look, I think we are in a pretty divided place today. I think we are probably more racially polarized today than we were a year ago. And as for the President, since Charlottesville, think about the biggest fight he's picked since Charlottesville. The anthem protesters with the NFL and African-American players kneeling there.

So I don't think, if the President is, quote, "learned anything" I think in his mind, he has seen this is an effective political strategy to keep his base, his base. But I could tell you pretty much every other Republican who has to be on a ballot in 2018 believes that this is at the core of the Republican party suburban voter problem, right? That it is the president's continuation of using to be generous, dog whistles, others say they're not silent. You can hear the whistles pretty loudly. But that is sort of why the Republican Party is in this bind in 2018, where you have a slice of the party, the suburban voters, who are just uncomfortable with the Trump brand of Republicanism.

(…)




When NBC showed video of what happened with Antifa to the press in Charlottesville, they failed to include the footage on a protester swatting at the NBC cameraman, even though it was their NBC crew that filmed it.

_________________
The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public’s money.
- misattributed to Alexis De Tocqueville

No representations made as to the accuracy of info in posted news articles or links


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: ANTIFA - Unreasonable?
PostPosted: Mon Aug 13, 2018 1:33 pm 
Offline
Sergeant Major

Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2008 9:50 pm
Posts: 10532
Location: Eskridge, KS
Reputation points: 14677
Quote:
... When NBC showed video of what happened with Antifa to the press in Charlottesville, they failed to include the footage on a protester swatting at the NBC cameraman, even though it was their NBC crew that filmed it ...


Further evidence that there is no "news" ... no "journalism" ... these days ... only political opinion blogs ...

_________________
Go trumpf Go !!!
(will the resident return to being the President?)
(will the rainbow shack return to being the White House?)


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: ANTIFA - Unreasonable?
PostPosted: Mon Aug 13, 2018 2:05 pm 
Offline
Sergeant Major

Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2008 3:19 pm
Posts: 27938
Reputation points: 20000
Trapped in my car listening to NPR this morning and they do a story on the firing of Strzok.

Instead of a story about the serial unprofessional behavior of Strzok it turns into a story about how Trump is "ruining morale at the FBI". The reporter states "Strzok was making critical remarks about numerous politicians" as if he was some kind of harmless malcontent. They also forgot to mention an FBI/DOJ review board recommended his firing. They also failed to mention his original suspension was for lying to FBI investigators

Just pathetic reporting.

_________________
I haven't figured out how to the block thingy works but if anyone alters my posts I will become really, really angry and throw monkey poop out of my cage.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: ANTIFA - Unreasonable?
PostPosted: Mon Aug 13, 2018 2:26 pm 
Offline
Sergeant Major
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2008 9:50 pm
Posts: 31699
Location: West coast of the east coast
Reputation points: 20000
Antifa: "No border, no wall, no USA at all"

https://twitter.com/PrisonPlanet/status ... -threat%2F

_________________
The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public’s money.
- misattributed to Alexis De Tocqueville

No representations made as to the accuracy of info in posted news articles or links


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 320 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group