ATF Busts Ningi on UGA Campus

After thinking abut this a bit longer, it's right on par with Waco and Ruby Ridge. Murder charges definitely need to be filed here.

No police officer should have to think twice before shooting an armed suspect that is a threat to them or others. But they MUST think twice before shooting any one else, or suffer the same fate as a civilian that accidentally shoots a cop.

Exactly, just like Bush's preemptive strike policy. I'm still waiting for the "precogs".

. I bet you criticized Michael Moore's movie dealing with 911 without watching it either. (Farenheit 911). You're a patheitic lump of quavering jello,dude

That's a very reasoned and sane response to our brown-shirted friend's commentary, Bob

I belive the standard answer is that he could have been armed which makes it ok if 10 of them beat the crap out of a one unarmed person. After all they are protecting us. Now all we need is someone to protect us from them.

Phil

My wife and I discussed this incident. We were figuring that the cops blew it for not checking out what local events were going on, and the kids throwing the pirates vs. ninja event blew it for not taking outside events into consideration.

Bob

I wonder if any of these JBGTs remember the golden rule.

I suppose that we shoud all treat these agents as armed thugs whenever we deal with them. In a situation like this, I'd grab the nearest phone, and dial 9-1-1 and tell the response center that it was a situation involving armed assailants.

Shouldn't that be "armed terrorists dressed as federal agents"?

You can't be too careful these days. Those IDs could be fakes.

They sure don't remember how to handle firearms:

Protect yourself first, then play the 911 circus.

Only a MORON would need to watch the movie, considering first; who produced the movie, his publicly known and expressed dislike for GW, and the hyped trailers shown on TV. Of course, any MORON who would threaten someone on this forum, knows that. I'm sure you understand, being a anonymous poster and all..

Fred

snipped-for-privacy@yahoo.com wrote:

Seems the A-team was performing the following training class. This part is very funny. "Core materials frequently contain, but are not limited to, characteristics of armed gunmen"

I guess the book has pictures of black clothed youth with red bandannas in that section.

BTW, Hobby Lobby has bandannas for only 63 cents this week.

ATF Site Support Description: The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives' (ATF's) Office of Training and Professional Development can deliver custom-designed training to local agencies, in conjunction with the ATF field division in the area. Classes can be designed for law enforcement officers, prosecutors, or a combination of both groups. The curriculum varies by site and is tailored to the needs of the jurisdiction requesting the training. Core materials frequently contain, but are not limited to, characteristics of armed gunmen, firearms identification and tracing, international firearms trafficking, federal firearms law, guns and gangs, and stolen firearms.

I don't see anything in there about APCP purchase, storage, and use.

The WOOSH folks did get the BATFE to do a presentation for them once, but the BATFE refused to allow it to be taped for use by those who couldn't attend.

I know there are regulations regarding taping phone conversations, but what are the regs regarding taping events in your own home or place of work?

And you're a typical Shrub supporter. Talk to me after the village idiot leads us into another hunt for non-existent WMD. An anoymous poster? I have a valid e-mail address; is yours?And where exactly is the threat in my statement? Oh wait. Just like the brown shirted thugs who jumped thew ninja, you see threats everywhere. You too are a pathetic lump of quavering jello....dood. And incidently, only a MORON would criticize a movie without watching it. Sieg heil, muthafukka.

Thanks for verifying your status, as it is in line and supports the on going moronic characterization of the vast majority of your responses on this forum.

My email is munged, but the name is real. "Comcast" supports the "net", but be careful how and if you respond in email: Usenet responses are one thing, direct email is another.

Your threat was in another of your responses in another thread; (If you're the Tony semenuk, I know, your azz is grazz.)

BTW, if you ever have the pleasure of in person conversation with me, I doubt "lump of quavering jellow" will be the lasting impression you remember, about our conversation or encounter. Remember, Google is you friend..

Fred

snipped-for-privacy@yahoo.com wrote:

Awww, he's afraid to watch it! After all, if he saw it, it might cast doubt on his closely held beliefs. The refusal to listen to ideas other than your own has been taught be religous zealots for thousands of years.

I've done a good bit of training for and by some large companies - generally the rule is that they not be taped. It's not a "regulation", it's the choice of the presenter.

First, because the content is a salable commodity, which probably doesn't matter to the BATFE.

Second, because what you say on tape can haunt you ad infinitum. Generally, I was allowed to noodle around and ad lib quite a bit in presentations; on the one or two sessions that were taped, I had to adhere precisely to a prepared and approved script.

And that was just corporate stuff. Imagine how much harder to pin down the goon squad must be!