User Profile: 2GodBeTheGlory


Member Since: September 02, 2010


123 To page: Go
  • [1] July 26, 2016 at 6:19pm


    Re: “ban guns” – Try, I dare YOU. Here’s some info for you and your ilk. There are roughly 365M firearms with an increase of well over 10M per year. If you take the average of four firearms per gun owner, that would leave you with 91M citizens owning four or more firearms (roughly 1/3 the adult population). If only 1/3 of the remain population resisted such a ban, that would leave 30M+ in active revolt with YOU. Now, figure out the number of LE that would fire upon those citizens (maybe 50%), which would leave 500K LE left to protect YOU. Now, if you want to bring in the military to ENFORCE law, then you are going to loose at least 1/3 who will go against YOU (actively).

    Re: “rescind 2nd amendment” – Of all the constitution that you would like to change, only the Bill of Rights are NOT NEGOTIABLE. If you actually read the preamble to the Bill of Rights, you might find out that those RIGHTS where REQUIRED before the states would ratify the U.S. Constitution. If you attempt to take out that RIGHT, then the ENTIRE U.S. Constitution fails.

    Finally, the actual cause for the start of the revolutionary war was because Governor Thomas Gage gave orders to destroy the MILITARY GRADE FIREARMS that the CITIZENS had amassed after gun control measures where put in place.

  • July 25, 2016 at 8:54pm


    Ok, last time, child. Then after this, learn that you lost and are an idiot for trying, then go away before you further discredit yourself.

    Re: “Now aren’t you too stupid to realize that I myself am a former Marine and there are thousands of former and current military people who are in Law Enforcement.” – Just because you where in the military doesn’t mean that you where down range with real professionals attempting to kill you in a real firefight. That’s like saying “you won!” with a participation award.

    Re: “police have been successfully sued for not responding which makes your point moot” – Yep, your showing your police training again. Maybe, just maybe you should ACTUALLY, I don’t know, READ the ACTUAL RULING before revealing your ignorance. Don’t rely upon the PD’s lawyer, read it for yourself. Oh, in that ruling, as I pointed out, LE are not bound by law to respond to any call – even an active shooter. Now, in order for you to refute my assertion, you MUST find a law that REQUIRES LE to respond. I dare you. I’ll even wait…………..

    Re: “Oh by the way, outdoor speakers set up for music, tv, ect. ARE NOT PA SYSTEMS.” – Hm, ALL outdoor speakers can be utilized as a PA system, if you know what your doing. So what does that mean? I can use my phone as the mic. Don’t believe me? Look on amazon for the “Pulse Wireless Bluetooth Receiver By Proxelle” $16.99. Maybe you’d like to use a bluetooth mic (amazon $15.59).

    Your cooked.

  • July 25, 2016 at 7:40pm



    RE: “esponding “in” and “with” emergency equipment and are wearing uniforms so that they are identifiable to you and other Law Enforcement.” – You do know that LE has zero requirements, in law, to respond to even an active shooter situation, right (Warren v. District of Columbia and Castle Rock v. Gonzales)?

    I’d rather call on someone that I TRUST, not someone like you. I need someone dependable, accountable, responsible, actually been in real firefight with real professionals. I need someone that I can rely upon to help me and my family, and you, Sir, are not it. You’ve been measured and found to be wanting. No, I will not be calling the likes of you, for your comments alone solidifies why citizens should NOT call you for assistance. You can do something useful and clean up the mess by getting rid of the other vermin off my property.

    You shouldn’t even talk about a real hero like Chris Kyle. You vile, worthless, government sucker that would attempt to make similarities of a home invasion with what happened with Chris Kyle.

    Go away, boy, go away.

  • July 25, 2016 at 7:30pm


    Struck a cord with you, I see. Don’t care.

    I see how you attempted to disparage highly trained and decorated members of the military by your vile and worthless diatribe. You sicken me, and are a big problem in loosing the trust of citizens, causing this country to burn because of your liberal, big government Obama loving hatred. You really need to step back and retire, doing something useful like getting my steak (medium rare), would be a start in repairing the trust of the people you claim to serve.

    RE: “PA system which sounded ridiculous” – It’s actually quite useful in many different ways (music, outdoor TV, etc.). You act like you’ve never heard of people using outdoor speakers……..I guess I shouldn’t be that surprised coming from you.

    RE: “By calling 911″ – I can get shot by an idiot who is poorly trained, has a habit of not identifying their target before shooting, horrible on the range and worse in the field, and not held accountable for their killing of innocent citizens (for the most part). Would you like cases? Go ahead, I dare you.

    RE: “uniform” – Hmmmm, like the 4 criminals with FBI jackets and badges that came to burglarize a house? No, a uniform does not distinguish a good guy with a gun verses a bad guy with a gun. I know, I know, you’ve been trained to shoot everyone not wearing a badge and holding a firearm, but I’m hear to tell you, son, you’d better repent from those ways. > 86M citizens owning 4 or more firearms.


  • [2] July 25, 2016 at 7:12pm

    Loved the timing of the song with the fighting.

    Never liked opera until this (still don’t like most of it)

  • [7] July 25, 2016 at 7:03pm

    Respect is earned not taken by force.

    With that said, it is necessary for the “home” to include two loving parents born as a male and female who place God above all – including their kids. For if the parents do not love God, and obey God, then how can to “train your children in the way that they should go”?

    I RESPECT God because he made me, this world, and everything in it. I respect God because he loves me and has giving so much to me. I respect God because HE, being perfect, died for me. Yes, God EARNED my respect.

  • [2] July 25, 2016 at 3:10pm


    RE: PA system – Very useful for misdirection and concealment.

    RE: “Call 911″ – Sorry, I never call 911. I’d rather call friends that I know can handle themselves in a firefight, who’ve actually been tried by fire and didn’t crack. Too many times responding LE took shots at the homeowner instead of the criminal.

    RE: “get all family members hunkered down in one room” – Hmmm???? All my children who are of sound mind goes through extensive firearm and hand-to-hand training. As they get older, they also are trained on situational awareness, and utilizing EVERYTHING as a weapon or distraction. Remember, the only person responsible and accountable for your safety (as an adult) is you. I would rather my daughters shoot their attempted rapist then call 911.

    RE: “anything that is not identified as a Law enforcement official touching the knob” – First, I don’t care who is there. If you are touching my door in the middle of the night where you don’t have a right to be, you force me to be in fear of my life and the life of my family. Second, if you sweep my house with the barrel of a firearm, that allows for the use of lethal force – I don’t need to wait for someone touching my door.

    RE: “would be well ventilated” – Absolutely. Oh, my wife is a better pistol shot then me.

    That reminds me….does anyone know what a .308/7.62 does at a range of just 30 yards? Anyone? Anyone? Anyone?

  • [28] July 25, 2016 at 12:03pm

    Something doesn’t sound right. As a person with tactical training and home field advantage, it’s suspicious that the officer was killed. If a group of people where in my back-yard, I wouldn’t place myself in a situation that others in hiding would get at me. A good PA system is useful for that.

    Please pray for those that he left behind.

    Responses (11) +
  • [-1] July 23, 2016 at 3:29pm


    Maybe you don’t understand that when you make a comment about an article, as above, your comment needs to directly relate to said article, not as an arbitrary opening to another topic.

    In this case, specifically, the office shot the dog who was secured in the back yard. The officer had a 10 year old warrant and had been told on previous visits that the family had moved into the house 1 year ago and did not know the person listed on the warrant. So, in this specific case, the officer did not have the authority to go into the back yard (trespassing) so his “fear” was unreasonable because he was not where he ought to be.

    Maybe you should enter into training everyday to understand how to communicate on topic. Just a recommendation in conversational speech.

    Shall I expect ad hominem now?

  • [-1] July 23, 2016 at 10:36am


    Maybe you should look at more than this one website about this story. The dog in question was secured in the back yard, where he was shot by the officer (x2). The officer had a 10 year old warrant and had been told twice prior by the new occupants that they had moved in one year ago and did not know the suspect (which is easily verified). But no, you go ahead and blame the dog and the dog owner…….

    Responses (2) +
  • [-1] July 23, 2016 at 10:32am


    Re: “I will not question the cop shooting the dog” – So you don’t mind an officer shooting a secured dog in the back yard after the occupants informed the officer twice (prior) that they had moved into the house 1 year ago and did not know the suspect on the 10 year old warrant? Wow, just wow.

  • July 23, 2016 at 10:29am


    Re: “If the dog was secured, it would still be alive today.” – Sure because the officer couldn’t have made a mistake and shot the dog in the back yard behind a secured fence, now could he?

    Maybe, just maybe you should review more reports on this case before you jump to false assertions.

  • July 23, 2016 at 10:26am


    Do your own investigation by reading other reports on this, then get back to us with your support of this officer and his commander.

  • July 23, 2016 at 10:18am


    The other dumb one is his commander, who got relieved for giving investigators “misleading information” about the case, WITHOUT pay.
    Even the council is talking about this one to reporters. Their scared, and should be.

    My take is that the commander attempted to “redirect” and “obfuscate” in order to cover his guy’s actions, like he’s done many times before. However, because of the unrest all around, it was not going to fly this time.

    The officer admitted to firing three rounds, asserting that he thought that the patient was going to shot the victim. However, they have not (nor can) explain why they hand-cuffed the victim in the shooting. Also, look at the video, if you know ANYTHING about firearms, you know that the object in the patients hands could not be REASONABLE called a firearm.

  • July 23, 2016 at 9:28am


  • [4] July 22, 2016 at 8:20pm

    The dog was secured in the BACK YARD, where he was shot by the officer.

    Responses (4) +
  • [-1] July 22, 2016 at 8:19pm


    RE: “Well, it was the right house several months ago.” – No. The officer had been to the house twice in the past year to execute the 10 year old case warrant. This specific officer had been informed, on both occasions, that the current residence moved into the house 1 year ago. The officer did not have to take the word of the residence, but perform a REASONABLE check to verify their story before harassing them a third time.

    Finally, the dog was shot in the back yard, where the dog was secured. The officer left the scene after the shooting with no incident report, nor anyone from any department to investigate the discharge of the officers firearm(s) (x2).

  • [-1] July 22, 2016 at 8:16pm


    The warrant was for a 10 year old case. The officer had visited the residence twice in the last year where he was told by the residence that they moved into the house 1 year prior and did not know the suspect on the warrant. So, this same officer KNEW the warrant was no longer valid and had REASONABLE evidence to tag the file (it would be easy to verify the assertion of the new occupants).

    Finally, the dog was secure in the back yard. Once the officer shot the dog, in the back yard, he just left the scene. No one came out from any depart to investigate the officer discharging his firearm(s) (x2).

    Doesn’t sound like a reasonable discharge of a firearm to me.

  • [-1] July 22, 2016 at 7:49pm


    More to the story. The officer had been to the same residence twice before since the new occupants had moved in 1 year ago. Further, the warrant was for an old, 10 year old case. The occupants had informed the SAME OFFICER, TWICE, that they did not know the suspect.

    Finally, the dog was secured in the back yard. The officer shot the dog with his sidearm, then his rifle, then left. No incident report, and no one else came from the department to investigate the officers discharge of his firearm.

    Now, tell me what justification allowed for the officer to be on the property when he had been notified of new occupants (x2) and an easy way to verify their assertions?

  • [12] July 22, 2016 at 7:42pm

    The warrant was on a 10 year old case. The officer had stopped by twice before where the NEW OCCUPANTS informed the officer that they did not know the person he was searching for and that they had moved into the house 1 year ago.

    It is very easy for the PD to check the validity of the occupants of the house, however, it’s apparent that the officer REFUSED to do so. Instead, the officer continued to knowingly harass then illegal discharge his weapon upon the family pet secured in the back yard.

123 To page: Go