Dennis Dodd has a piece about how Kansas head coach David Beaty will try to handle the new state law allowing anyone 21 or older to carry a firearm without a permit or training, but the saddest part of the story comes at the very end:
Beaty said it was only a coincidence his team, at the moment, is being taught a different kind of weapons training.
“We are training our kids right now specifically on what to do when they are pulled over on a traffic stop,” Beaty said. “Where their hands go, how their hands go, how they speak, what they tell their policeman about what’s in the car.
“We’re not taking anything for granted because we don’t want to lose one of our babies.”
Now that’s a helluva thing for a college football coach to have to worry about.
Get The Picture 
Kansas is the definition of a flyover state. And the state cops pull some BS. Because it’s adjacent to Colorado they are obsessed with people driving through with weed. On the main interstate through it the cops like to pull a scam where when you’re going up a hill they will put up signs saying that there is a drug checkpoint and dogs ahead. The speed limit is 80 which is nice but when drivers and truckers see those signs they slow down fast because they are assuming a checkpoint means having to stop.
As I said it’s a scam because they will put these signs up right by a rest area and there actually is no checkpoint. The cops are actually waiting at the rest area and search anyone who gets off at the exit. I wasn’t carrying so I didn’t care but when you have most people doing 85 or 90 on a 2 lane interstate it’s pretty damn scary and IMO dangerous when everyone basically slams on their brakes expecting to have to stop for a fake checkpoint.
I’d shoot myself before I’d live in that shit state of nothing but silos and cornfields. I’d imagine that being a young black guy living there would suck if the cops are already pulling such blatant chicanery.
LikeLike
Trust me Georgia troopers do it too. They will have a car with lights flashing at a bridge. A sign down the road just before the exit. When people see the sign and flashing lights they exit off and that’s where the GSP is set up. Many people throw stuff from their cars before getting to the check point but they have spotters on four ATV’s confiscating what was thrown and matching it with the vehicle it came from.
LikeLike
Omg…this is great shit. The next thing you freaks will say/type is that “The Man” is planting dope on your persons. The law is the law. Whether you like it or not!
LikeLike
You think it’s better in the rural south? I had a choice of jobs in a tiny town in Quitman County, Ga. or Wichita, Kansas. The latter was a no-brainer, believe me, and still is.
LikeLike
Good idea. When those on the receiving end of a traffic stop become better trained and less afraid than the cops then progress might occur. Assuming that the cop is less afraid than the guy he’s stopping isn’t wise.
LikeLike
Key word…”cooperation”, do what they tell you. You that, incidents go down.
LikeLike
What the hell are these Republican lawmakers (and yes, it is Republicans passing all these right to carry laws) so freaking scared of? They see a terrorist behind every freaking bush. They’re a bunch of terrified little wimps that feel the need to carry a gun everywhere.
LikeLike
This has many applications:
And don’t let anyone tell you that a law-abiding American adult can’t be trusted to operate a gun safely and responsibly.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2017/06/29/he-thought-a-book-would-stop-a-bullet-and-make-him-a-youtube-star-now-hes-dead/?utm_term=.5c01d82392b5
LikeLike
Meh.
Law-abiding. Maybe.
Stupid definitely.
“The Desert Eagle is a powerful .50 caliber pistol that is capable of producing muzzle velocities exceeding 1900 fps and muzzle energy of 2800 ft-lbs,” the website says in its review of the gun. “To put those numbers in perspective, .50AE bullets can travel twice as fast as .45s and hit with the force of a .308 Winchester.”
The reviewer writes that the Desert Eagle could “(punch) holes in engine blocks. ”
Fify
Reminds me of people doing dangerous things and taking selfies and getting killed. Or texting while driving. Damn….. Outlaw cells phones.
LikeLike
You can’t outlaw everything that people can do to harm themselves but I have little problem strictly regulating items that can be used to efficiently kill innocent people whether they’re inspired by ideology, really fucking dumb, criminals or just plain crazy.
LikeLike
I hear you. I’m not willing to shout you down because we may disagree.
You can regulate guns. Use of cell phones. Ball-bearings. Pressure cookers. Delivery vans driving on crowded bridges etc. But there’s Nothing more effcient than an IED in a crowded theatre.
Yes,you can regulate guns. And, I being a law-abiding citizens will follow the law. However, the non law-abiding citizen could give a shit about your law or regulation. And that’s the rub for me. And I don’t feel I need to be regulated. Just sayin’
LikeLike
The lack of need I feel in being regulated does not mean I don’t think some need to be regulated so that they don’t harm me, or least feel safe in the knowledge that they’ll be punished if they do.
LikeLike
You’re either missing the point or ignoring it entirely. You can’t regulate Outlaws that refuse to obey your regulations
LikeLike
That’s who you should fear
LikeLike
Right so the answer is anarchy and there’s no need for an ordered society. Food regulations? Why when people would cheat and sell rotten meat anyway? FFA? Why? Idiots will ram planes into each other any way. Regulation of the pharmaceutical industry? Why? People will sell poison anyway. Why have laws against making IED’s? Fuck it. The terrorists and criminals don’t care.
The fact that your premise is fucking stupid in every other single aspect of life probably means that it’s fucking stupid here.
You do know that most mass shootings are committed by people who can legally buy guns right? My only suggestion is that we limit the types of weapons they can get so that they can’t kill 57 people in 38 seconds. That’s just hard to do with a revolver and a shotgun and a hunting rifle. Is it possible, maybe, but that doesn’t mean that that we need people with “street sweepers” and .50 caliber sniper rifles in order to have freedom.
LikeLike
Lol. Methinks you’ve forgotten the Twin Towers…. Not one bllet was fired.
LikeLike
Oh yeah so that means more guns! The Charlie hebdo attack was guns so less guns! But wait the Boston marathon wasn’t with guns so more guns. But wait. Orlando was with guns so less guns. But Oklahoma City wasn’t guns so more guns. But northridge was guns so less guns.
And of course we will always remember Bowling Green.
LikeLike
lol you kinda picked a rather large exception there, genius.
LikeLike
“Damn….. Outlaw cells phones.”
I think it’s illegal to text and drive in most states. As it should be.
I’ve got nothing against gun ownership (I have 3), but to allow anybody to carry a weapon almost anywhere is ridiculous.
People who are afraid, and why would you be carrying a weapon if you weren’t afraid of something, and untrained in firearm use are the last people I want pulling out a weapon in a crisis situation.
LikeLike
We will just disagree Walt. If you think I’m a scardy cat so be it. What Im really afraid of are the lost of what I believe to be my personal freedoms. I’m afraid of people that don’t believe I have them or need a particular one in their particular view. I don’t carry as a rule. I did on the few days the convicts escaped. And on certain multi-family jobs sites in certain locales I may. I wouldn’t say I’m afraid while there. Just very aware that I “ain’t in Kansas anymore”.
LikeLike
I’m not speaking of you specifically. If you have some form of training, and you continue to train yourself in firearm safety, then I’m less concerned with your actions. If you’re working in a dangerous environment, then I can see why you’d want protection. I’m more worried by the thought of someone inexperienced person who buys a gun, goes to the shooting range a couple of times, and then proceeds to carry their gun into bars, movie theaters, sporting events, etc.
Imagine, a young housewife or college student who has never hunted and never owned a gun before getting a nice new Glock as a birthday gift (I’m thinking specifically of a former co-worker). They shoot a few clips at a shooting range and then carry the loaded gun everywhere they go. Do you really believe this person is going to act rationally when someone else pulls out a firearm and starts shooting. I’d say the odds at 50:50 in the best case scenario. I’d say there’s a damn good chance the new gun owner panics and starts shooting at random targets. Hell, look how often cops shoot unarmed people, and they have more training than anyone except some soldiers.
I’ve had guns all my life, and I used to hunt, but gave it up years ago. I can still remember the first time I shot at a deer at age 12. I was shaking with buck fever so bad, I didn’t come withing 10 yards of him. I can only imagine the shaking one might feel when someone is shooting back at them.
LikeLike
Meh.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/bearingarms.com/bob-o/2016/06/29/concealed-carrier-just-stopped-mass-shooting-night-club-media-remained-silent/amp/
LikeLike
I don’t doubt that there are some who can demonstrate that they have the requisite character to have the privilege of carrying deadly weapons. There’s a reason you have to earn different levels of security clearance and there are reasons banks rely on credit scores. The greater the responsibility or risk the more selective and cautious we should be. The idea that if you’re born in America that you can be entrusted, or you must be trusted via the constitution, to own and/or carry an AR-15 is just really fucking stupid.
LikeLike
I take it your concern is with the number of bullets in a clip 15 or 20, what 30? You do know there are Pistols that that carry 20 rounds in a magazine Plus One in the Chamber. Its pretty common that a lot of pistols can hold fifteen in the clip and One in the Chamber. Here are pistols that shoot up to 16 times without reloading. So what you’ll say is that after you outlaw AR-15s because the magazine capacity then you’ll want to outlaw pistols because of their magazine capacity. Then Outlaw eight Shooters because of the number bullets that they have. then they’ll come to five Shooters and eventually you’ll say “really you just need a shotgun with one barrel that only shoots one shot because if you miss with a shotgun with one shot what the hell? Just saying
LikeLike
Well, here is where I stand. I’m at the age that I can’t physically defend myself, so, yes I carry a weapon with many rounds and have done so for quite sometime. My wife has her own gun also. She is on the road by her self everyday for a 4 hour commute. And we both are licensed to carry.
LikeLike
Agree completely. There are some places that us wimps just shouldn’t go.
LikeLike
It is not fear it is respect for the second amendment. Learn to respect it Walt.
LikeLike
Look at it from Walt’s point of view. The Constitution doesn’t enumerate powers to the government and limit government powers when interacting with basic rights of citizens. It lists privileges that citizens can sometimes enjoy, until government decides to take them away. That’s what the second amendment is. We can have guns until some lawmakers decide that enough is enough and we can’t have them anymore. Who are we to question?
LikeLike
College coaches should not have to teach someone how to act during a traffic stop. This should have been taught by parents along the way. I’m glad, though, that these young men, because of their athletic talents, might get to learn something they might not have learned otherwise (both in the classroom and outside) from these coaches. We scoff that UGA coaches have to check up to make sure the guys get drivers licenses renewed. Another big target of our jeers is Derek Dooley’s hygiene crusade. The truth is, there are a lot of people in our society that are not getting instructed as they should. Some folks are lucky enough to get the instruction through other avenues. Hopefully they’ll receive it well.
LikeLike
There are certainly some unjustified shootings and those cops should be prosecuted. Most of those shootings are more complicated than they first appear. However, who would want the job the cops have to do. Walking up to a stranger in a car, not knowing if it’s just a regular guy, or a thug with a trunk full of whatever. I should as hell wouldn’t want that job.
Go to you tube and search “the murder of officier Dinkheller”. You’ll see what can happen when a cop does not use overwhelming force immediately when things start going wrong. It’s pretty rough to watch. The bad guy is a crazy white guy, so race has nothing to do with it. You’ll learn why cops shoot before some people think was necessary.
LikeLike
Any qualifier preceding “lives matter” is pretty stupid since no one questions that all lives are important, and should be respected. Simply obeying the orders of law enforcement virtually makes this issue go away.
I would like to see more respect for law enforcement taught in the schools to overcome the negative BS that exists in the media’s portrayal. Recent attacks on police officers are outrageous and has led to more tension and attempts to justify bad behavior. Very confusing to young people and will lead to increased problems down the road. By the time these young men get to college it is difficult to overcome the poor attitudes they may have already acquired. This isn’t criticizing the coach’s attempt to save his players from future harm, but this type of training should begin around the age of three.
I would like to see more police officers hired to limit the number of single officer cars patrolling the roads/streets. Salaries of police and military should be doubled, or more, with additional training and technology provided. Elevating these positions in terms of compensation, and respect, is long over due.
LikeLike
I love the “virtually” part.
If you think a 22 years old black kid who is law abiding could have a licensed firearm in the passenger seat next to him and survive a pull over if he follwed instructions you’re fucking nuts.
The guy in Minneapolis (Castille?) found out that no, you won’t survive it.
How about tamir rice. When I was 12 I could play with a pellet gun. Not a black 12 year old in Cleveland. And he was given NO instructions. Just shot down.
The kid in Chicago with a knife? McDonald. Walking away and shot what 17 times?
I guess that’s an acceptable “virtually” for you. Personally I think if these kids looked like your children you’d suddenly lose you arrogant confidence in the police state we live in.
LikeLike
We live in a “police state”? Hyperbole is alive and well when you get to preachin’ ,Derek.
LikeLike
What do you call it when the group of people charged with enforcing the law are above the law?
LikeLike
Dude… If Iwere black 20 something I’d much more likely be murdered byvanother black 20 something than a cop. But that really doesn’t fit your narrative does it?
: lA toddler was shot in the head and killed on Chicago’s gang-plagued West Side on Tuesday, police said.”
Where is your outrage here? yeah does it fits your narrative?
Let It Go you’re wrong
LikeLike
If you’re a married woman you’re more likely to be murdered by your husband than anyone so who gives a if there’s a less statistically significant band of murdering rapists, dude?
If statistics matter, than why is ISIS in the news? How many Americans have been killed by foreign terrorists on US soil since 9/11? Almost none, so who gives a fuck right?
The idea that there’s an acceptable level of killing innocent people because there are other crimes too is really fucking dumb.
LikeLike
Nonsense. Black on black crime is outta control. And ignored by the media and a major impetus to the quality of life for millions of black Americans. So is the alarming number of single parent black families . Are you really this obtuse or you just playing?
LikeLike
In that case send in a bunch of cops and mow them all down. They either deserve it or they’d do worse to each other so fuck ’em.
Just because urban crime is a problem it is neither ok or insignificant that the people charged with keeping the peace are killing innocent people.
You’d make a great minister of propaganda for the Royals in Northern Ireland btw.
LikeLike
No cops are necessary there mowing each other down
LikeLike
Your repeated use of grammar in this thread is very telling, fwiw
LikeLike
Love the irony here.
LikeLike
Yes, there are bad cops just like their are bad doctors, attorneys, accountants, teachers and every other profession. No one deserves to be the victim of abuse by law enforcement. However, the unfortunate and tragic incidents you cite are rare. They are statistically insignificant when you consider the number of public encounters, arrests, and traffic stops law enforcement makes each day. Law enforcement is not perfect but it is not the problem.
https://www.slideshare.net/mobile/robertsearfoss33/police-lethal-forcepresentation
LikeLike
As opposed to a white 22 year old ??
LikeLike
I don’t agree that all lives are important. IMO humans are really only compassionate when it behooves them to be. Someone you love dies and you’re sad. If you see an oncoming a funeral procession while you’re driving, you probably pull over to show some respect for the bereaved, but it’s usually out of you thoughts once you’re a couple miles down the road.
Any economist will tell you that no one does anything that’s not in their own self interest.
LikeLike
Of course that’s right. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Th%C3%ADch_Quảng_Đức
LikeLike
People willing to die for religious convictions are not that uncommon. Especially if you’re promised a bunch of virgins after death.
But your point is well taken. The person who donates his kidney to a stranger at the risk of dying himself is exceptional example of selflessness .
LikeLike
There are exceptions to every rule. In general, humans are not very nice.
LikeLike
The problem with the assertion that people act in their self interest presupposes that they know what’s in their best interest, that you can therefore predict what they’ll do and that people don’t act in ways that they know are not in their best interest. Once you add those three levels of uncertainty the original hypothesis is useless.
LikeLike
Jeepers! Now that sounds like something out of CNN. ” now you really don’t know what you know or what you think you know, until I tell you what you should know and how you should know and this is what I know that you should know and if you don’t know what I know then you don’t know s*** blah,blah blah.
LikeLike
I’m out… I couldn’t resist
LikeLike
Huh? How can you premise anything on “self-interest” in a world with heroin addiction, cigarette smoking and rampant obesity? People DO NOT act in their self interest. If you decide to open a competitor to McDonalds you aren’t going to win simply because your food is is healthier and thus its in the customers self interest. People do what the fuck they wanna do for all sorts of reasons that have zilch to do with either objective or subjective self interest.
LikeLike
Huh? You don’t think a heroin addict fat lady pot smoking drug alcohol addicted fool is not acting in their self-interestb you don’t think they’re getting a bum rush off of that deal then you are naive
LikeLike
I do which is why self interest doesn’t tell us much. One person’s carrot stick is another box of Krispy Kreme. With that sort of divergence what does self interest predict? Not a fucking thing.
LikeLike
Put the pipe down Duh’rek. You’re starting to babble.
….peace out.
LikeLike
http://www.economist.com/node/179495
LikeLike
The guy in Minneapolis do that he should not have done? He had a carry permit. He told the officer he had a gun. He was polite. He obeyed the officer’s instructions. What did he not do that would have “virtually [made] the issue go away?”
LikeLike
Here’s a suggestion: http://www.nbc.com/saturday-night-live/video/white-like-me/n9308?snl=1
LikeLike
Put his hands on the steering wheel and shut the f****** up. Game set match
LikeLike
Too bad tamir rice was too young to drive I guess.
LikeLike
You really are a piece of work……
BACKGROUND:
Drive-by shootings by violent street gangs contribute to early morbidity and mortality among adolescents and children in Los Angeles. This study attempted to determine the frequency of this problem and the population at greatest risk. We also studied the most frequently injured areas of the body, the seasons in which the most shootings occurred, the most common sites for drive-by shootings, and the types of firearms used.
METHODS:
We retrospectively reviewed the files of the Gang Information Section of the Los Angeles Police Department to identify all drive-by shootings in Los Angeles in 1991 in which a child or adolescent under the age of 18 was shot at, injured, or killed.
RESULTS:
A total of 677 adolescents and children were shot at, among whom 429 (63 percent) had gunshot wounds and 36 (5.3 percent) died from their injuries. Three hundred three of those with gunshot wounds (71 percent) were gang members. Arms and legs were the areas of the body most commonly injured. Handguns were the most frequently used type of firearm. All the homicide victims were African American or Hispanic, and 97 percent were boys. African American and Hispanic children and adolescents, especially male gang members, had a significantly higher risk than their Asian and white counterparts of injury and death from drive-by shootings in Los Angeles (P < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS:
Drive-by shootings involving adolescents and children are frequent in Los Angeles. Although Los Angeles may be an atypical case, understanding why violent street gangs form, preventing causes of violence, and limiting a
LikeLike
Tamir rice is still dead.
LikeLike
They all are
LikeLike
In your dreams I’m sure they are.
LikeLike
In ur dreams cops did it all…
LikeLike
If he kept his hands on the steering wheel he would not have complied with the order to produce his license,
He did exactly what the officer told him to do! You are saying that was wrong,
LikeLike
It is the naive, “fucking nuts” on this thread that leads to the justification that causes most all of these deaths. period. You can point to the exceptions all you want, but these deaths are unnecessary and caused by a belief that the police are the problem. That is so idiotic it doesn’t require additional conversation. I want every law enforcement officer, white, black, or any other color, to go home safe to their family every day but it is this support of the right to resist, and confusing where the problem lies that leads to the unnecessary deaths of police officers. And directly responsible for the deaths of most “bad shootings” by police. Don’t mistake it, none of the deaths of those police officers are accidental, and very few of the “bad shootings” aren’t a result of the same attitude.
In other words, it is the thinking of fools like those of some on this thread thinking the cause is a police problem that causes nearly every one of these deaths. And until it subsides, this issue will cause more deaths. Rationalize it all you want, we will not tolerate anarchy, and shouldn’t. I feel police are too handcuffed as it is, and should be more proactive, not reactive, when facing a citizen resisting them.
This has nothing to do with race, they should protect themselves when facing any combative citizen, white or black. Respect the law and we will have fewer incidents where either party is shot/killed, this isn’t even a discussion issue, just a fact. Does anyone really think a police officer goes to work thinking they might get a chance to shoot their gun and take someone out that day? So totally nutso.
LikeLike
It seems that some do….well said, Macallanlover.
LikeLike
Tamir Rice.
LikeLike
Superb. End of discussion and unlike some, you manged to convincingly convey your thoughts without using the “F” bomb or invoking the name of Tamir Rice.
LikeLike
Because if you’re going to talk about the avoidability of police shootings you must never invoke Tamir Rice. I’m sure that many people in Mississippi could have a “superb” conversation about how race relations have historically been quite acceptable without ever invoking the name of Emmett Till.
It really is fucking “superb” to avoid uncomfortable facts that contradict your worldview ain’t it?
LikeLike
Politically I find it ironic the same crowd who would legalize pot because “Everyone is doing it anyway. Legalizing it just keeps otherwise lawful citizens from breaking the law.” find legalizing firearms a bad idea. Everyone is doing it anyway. Legalizing it just makes otherwise lawful citizens from breaking the law. Don’t see many Kansas farm boys, going gangsta just because if this law, no more than I see many gangstas thanking their lucky stars it passed.
LikeLike
Maybe this is difficult for you to understand, but it’s possible to object to legislating personal morality while recognizing that there is a social value to the regulation of items that are designed to cause harm to others. I’m a Second Amendment supporter and I can still handle both concepts. Without irony.
LikeLike
Just saw that Nevada is joining the legalization movement, hadn’t heard much about that but, all things considered, it does seem like a natural expansion. Haven’t heard how those states are progressing on ability to test the degree of impairment for drivers but that seems a necessary part of extensive expansion. Having some data on how MJ leads to fewer violent actions and less aggressive driving than alcohol might help sway some states.
I also think standardizing production would make more people confident about what is in the product. I realize the warm and fuzzy about mom and pop businesses but this is getting too large to be efficient, or safe. This could go a ling way in dealing with the potency issues as well.
LikeLike
Maybe it is too difficult for me to understand. You’re not the first to imply I’m an ignorant hick and I’m quiet sure you won’t be the last, though most people don’t generally make that determination quite as quickly as you did. Guess my comment triggered your knuckle dragger alarm to which I truely apologize.
From a humble Neanderthal point of view, I’ve always considered almost EVERY law as legislating morality and thus having a legitimate purpose. If laws against murder, rape, etc aren’t legislating morality, just what exactly is their purpose? And regarding the social value of regulating ‘items designed to harm others.’
The “design to harm others” originates in the users heart, but being a such a simpleton I could be wrong. None the less it seems to me that if only people could be somehow taught that ALL life has inherent dignity and sactity due to the fact we were created in the image of an infinitely Holy and Sacred God, that maybe all these issues of legislating morality would greatly diminish. Anyhow that’s how this ignorant hick sees it. I’ll do my best to avoid the lofty towers of your politically slanted blogs in the future as to not detract from nor challenge your clearly irreproachable views, and thus compelling you to engage such a slug as myself.
PS please overlook any grammatical or punctuation errors. Hard to type with these rocks.
LikeLike
I wasn’t accusing you of being ignorant. I took you at your word that you didn’t understand how someone like I could find such a distinction. Apologies if that didn’t come across correctly.
LikeLike
The comparison would only fit if you were talking about supporting the legalization of a drug that on occasion, while being used as designed, the drug didn’t kill the user but dozens of innocent people.
The promotion of the idea that freedom depends upon the ability to own AR-15’s in a world or speed limits, helmet laws, seatbelt laws, child restraint laws, a 21 year old drinking age, an .08 bac limit, drivers license requirements and indoor cigarette smoking laws is quite clearly insane and founded upon some type of delusional belief system which lacks the capacity to confront its own bullshit, but is quite useful to gunmakers and their stockholders.
LikeLike
At least this was an entertaining thread.
LikeLike
It was even when Hijo showed up. Still stings doesn’t it Hijo. 😉
LikeLike
Yes. When faced with government overreach, the solution is obviously more government overreach. Why a .08 BAC limit when .04 BAC would generate more revenue from “unsafe” drivers? What’s good for government is good for citizens. Personal responsibility is quite clearly “bullshit.”
LikeLike
The fact that they need to teach these basic skills is quite sobering. I think that it is admirable that they are addressing it. For many of these young men this will be the first time they have had this conversation. My father had it with me early on and he even role played scenarios with me. I was lucky in that I had a father who did this. We have a huge section of young men who have very few people to walk us through it. Let’s face it the Andy Griffith days are long since passed and we need to operate accordingly in this environment. I don’t see it improving anytime soon
LikeLike
I’m sixty and I grew up in upper middle class suburban Atlanta during the nineteen sixties. My Dad taught me how to act if I got pulled over. Everyone I know got “the talk.” He never really talked to me about sex but he made sure I knew how to interact with authorities. More importantly, he made me understand that justice is something that happens in a courtroom, not on the side of the road. It’s a shame so many fathers have abdicated their parental responsibilities.
LikeLike
To be fair, it was a different world. SWAT teams didn’t exist. The notion that officer safety should override all Constitutional rights of citizens didn’t exist. Police who look and act like soldiers on patrol in Afghanistan ready to shoot at any noise in the dark didn’t exist.
When you were a kid, cops were peace officers who wanted to protect and serve. Today, cops are frustrated soldiers fighting a war against the rest of us. Every suspect is a potential “insurgent” to be approached with “extreme prejudice.”
LikeLike