For The Record - Tonight 8pm est

User Profile: 2GodBeTheGlory


Member Since: September 02, 2010


123 To page: Go
  • [2] September 14, 2014 at 6:23pm


    “At that point in time the police had a duty…” – Nope. not event legally bound to respond to an active shooter.

    A call to 911 of a “suspicious person” does NOT authorize RS for a detainment. Therefore, LEO mays approach and ask, however, what they cannot do is hinder the person, even upon no response. They may not perform a pat-down, nor use any show of force in preventing the citizen from going about his way. Yes, LEO can ask questions, but never is a citizen REQUIRED to respond to an officers question (other than upon arrest to provide name, address, DOB).

    Everything else is supposition. Remember, LEO have been caught in lies before in the use of lethal force, to include “lunging” where video PROVED no such act by citizen after LEO made official written report on said use of lethal force.

    I don’t trust a liar, how about you?

    Remember, since early 1960′s, it became lawful by SCOTUS ruling for LEO to lie to citizens. Now, it is considered “good police work”. Further, LEO view the Bill of Rights as an speed bump, so that LEO will IGNORE it, and “see what the judge does”, over and over again. They do NOT care about the Bill of Rights, UNLESS it becomes a high profile case. In that case, the officer will resign, and sign up on another police force after a period of time for things to blow over. Vary rarely will an officer be charged like a citizen would, with all facts being the same.

  • [10] September 14, 2014 at 12:30pm

    After reading the Constitution, reading the words and acts of our founding fathers, I must disagree that a person with a lethal weapon that flees an officer with no other cause for detainment other than “suspicious person” allows for an officer to use lethal force. I do not trust a liar, and it is apparent that this officer lied (re: lunged).

    There are way to many murders and use of lethal force recently to agree with the state at this juncture. Too many “the person lunged” reasons used where video proved that the officer lied on official written reports of a lethal use of force.

    Could it have happened just the way the officer described – sure. Did it? Don’t know, could go eitherway. The statement of “well, someone called us”, again, does NOT justify detainment nor use of ANY force. That is THE law.

  • September 13, 2014 at 5:42pm


    Your attempts to insert racism, sexism, bigotry, and discourse into a discussion of a person following what an ancient book dictates is telling of the type of person you are. It is apparent that you hate this country, the precepts under it’s establishment, the founders, the founders intent, and the actual idea of freedom OF religion (as opposed to “FROM”). It is apparent that you HATE this mans position in following the Holy Bible and the man/God for which his entire religion is based upon. You hate Jesus, that is your choice, and you HATE anyone who dares to follow Jesus.

    I would surmise that you believe yourself as “all inclusive” and tolerant. After reading your comments, it is clear that you are bigot (I would suggest using Merriam-Webster definition for the word “bigot”).

    By the style of your writing, one could conclude that you where sexually assaulted by someone who claims that they follow Jesus. Remember this, Jesus ACTUALLY stated that it would be better for a man to have a stone fastened around his neck and tossed into the sea than a person cause a child to sin. Does Jesus words make up for a sexual assault on a child? No. However, you will never find in the Bible where it is acceptable to sexually assault anyone. The life of Jesus, his words, and actions never promote slavery, prostitution, drunkenness, any form of sexual issues, racism, of any other sin – So, what was it that Jesus did or said that makes you so offended by HIM?

  • [1] August 27, 2014 at 6:58am

    Murder is wrong. Don’t care who it is from.

    When citizens are placed in fear of their life by these actions and return fires upon an officer who is NOT in legal standing for being there (back yard – for instance – no warrant, no extenuating circumstance, children present). Especially if the homeowner has video.

  • [49] August 26, 2014 at 4:24pm

    Let’s see; Kill a “police dog”, get charged with murder of an officer. Police kill YOUR dog – so what? Let’s see a citizen charge an officer like that and see what the police dog would do, and if it be justified.

    Responses (3) +
  • [29] August 24, 2014 at 4:56pm

    I didn’t think this could happen in LA. Don’t they have stricked laws against using/having guns?

    Responses (1) +
  • [31] August 22, 2014 at 12:44pm

    It’s not just Cathlic schools, it’s the removal of morals as the communist agenda lists. Removal morals, blur the line of “marriage” and secual conduct, lie, cheat, steal, and destroy the Consitution and this is what you get. You didn’t ask God to leave, you Kicked him out, by force. He left as he always does – to leave you to your own vice. Good luck!

    Responses (1) +
  • August 21, 2014 at 9:33pm


    Yep, that fax gets more and more garbled due to “line noise”……

  • [2] August 21, 2014 at 9:23pm

    Same as the source on Fax that said the eye socket was fractured. Anonymous is never a reputable source. Anytime I hear “expert”, anonymous, official, senior official, officials, senior economist, etc., it means absolutely nothing to me.

    Responses (2) +
  • [2] August 21, 2014 at 9:19pm

    Quick,an anonymous source said “?????” it must be true! It’s all hearsay until we have confirmation people. Quit jumping to conclusions things that it must be right. Event then, unless I see a video, I will always be suspicious of the facts around the case. “There where 12 witnesses saying the same thing”, again, hearsay. Remember, hearsay is the reason why there are people in the streets acting foolish, breaking the law and hurting businesses, not based on facts of the case.

    I recommend stopping the Knee-JERK reaction.

    To The Blaze: Stop leaning on with the “cop was justified” slant. Just like the media outlets that claim that the officer was the “bad guy who viciously murdered an innocent gentle giant child”.

  • August 21, 2014 at 6:08pm


    You are assuming that all the information provided “a source said” is accurate and correct. Making assumptions is what is causing all the problems out there to begin with. From childhood to young adult, I had respect for LEO in all forms. However, as an adult, I have seen too many officers murdering citizens, lying about it in a police report, then a video reveals the opposite. I have found that police are trained to infringe upon the rights of a citizen then “let the courts sort it out to see if it passes” – so that the inalienable rights are now NOT a concern to the state. I see judges preventing LEO, other Judges, DA’s/prosecuting attorneys from being charged on laws because “there are too many laws for any one person to know” – yet a citizen can and will be prosecuted to the full extent of the very same law. How about a primary charge of “resisting arrest” without having an actual arrest taken place? How many people have been taken to jail under that charge where the charge is later dropped or dismissed by the judge? Based on that, an officer can take a women into custody, rape her, if she resist and strikes him, he can still charge her with “resisting arrest” and “assaulting a police officer” even though his acts be illegal the charge can still stick (read the “resisting arrest” law for your state).

  • August 21, 2014 at 3:31pm


    “If you assault me.. thats reason enough for me to believe you want to harm me.. and reason enough for me to shoot you.”

    Hmmm, hopefully you do not carry a firearm, for if a person could think that way, then a person that cutt you off on the road, or hit you would give you “reasonable” reason to “fear for your life”. Here is another – If LEO comes up to you and takes your hands by force without saying a word, would that not, in your example, justify “self defense” to enclude “shooting” the officer – for officers have murdered innocent citizens before? If you really think this way, and others do as well, then there is going to be much blood on the street.

    If this keeps up, I can see in another 10 years and officer killing a citizen because “he looked at me right in the eye and I became in fear of my life so I shot him”.

  • [3] August 19, 2014 at 11:58pm


    12. How is it that we have come to a position that for a person to exist, they MUST enter into a contract with the state?
    13. Why is the state and federal government have ANYTHING to do with birth, death, marriage? Before the FED, you would find all that information in peoples Bible, not in government hands. They have the census, they need no more info than how many people – that’s it. You think the founders would have given all this information to the British?

    Glenn says there are no real immediate problems – I strongly disagree. I did take your advice, Glenn, I did read their words and have reviewed their actions – this is NOT the country they would have called “home”. You claim that we should follow this perrson or that person – why don’t you say to follow the founders? Are they less than the ones you put forth because they took a stand? Is it because you feel we have a say, anymore? I can show many more examples that reveal we have no say in this Fed owned government anymore. You may think otherwise, that’s your choice, however, I strongly suggest that YOU follow your own recommendations and find out for yourself.

  • [3] August 19, 2014 at 11:54pm


    6. Why is it that we have allowed a tax code that is incomprehensible to the average tax payer?
    7. Why is it that we have a continual military? Remember, this was one of the largest “evils” that the founders spoke about.
    8. Why is it necessary to have ANY federal LEO? It is not found in the constitution anywhere.
    9. How is it that the current SCOTUS exist without the entire country turning on them for rulings like allow the federal government to “regulate” your own personal garden for personal consumption.
    10. How is it that the current legal system is configured in such a way that judges refuse to allow themselves, DA’s, and LEO to be charged for crimes because “there are too many laws for one person to know”, yet they will prosecute a regular citizen? Isn’t that the same system the our founders fought against with the crown?
    11. How is it that SCOTUS can remove over 200 years of contract case law by requiring every citizen to enter into a contract with a company (insurance) under threat of loss of money (which is illegal)? I guess now, anyone can make you sign a contract with a gun pointed at your head and the contract is valid.

  • [3] August 19, 2014 at 11:54pm

    Some aspects that Glenn does not talk about, nor do I hear much here;

    - Glen talks about love and giving up, however, that does not correlate with the founders actions – for instance
    1. The founders had less than 18% tax – Did Glenn or anyone here vote for a rep. that said they would raise taxes? Can we poll the number of people across the country to find out if they wanted taxes raised?
    2. The founders started the war when the British came to confiscate the military grade firearms. Why is it that our current system does not recognize history and state that the founders wanted to restrict arms? Why is no one talking about it?
    3. Why is it that in our current system, LEO are taught to infringe upon the constitutional rights of the citizen. “Let the court work it out”, time and time again? Why is it that we as a people allow this to happen?
    4. Why is it that we are allowing the militarization of LEO? If you’ve seen the new pictures out from Ferguson, you will notice that they have removed the tactical gear.
    5. Why is it that LEO are allowed to arrest someone for the single charge of “resisting arrest” – when no arrest has been made for an actual crime (even suspected)? Why is it that many thousands of people are taken to jail and processed for that single charge, yet the charge is invariable dropped? Why are we letting this happen?


    Responses (2) +
  • [2] August 19, 2014 at 11:18pm

    “Voting System”? What, where two people who NEVER talk about increasing taxes and all sing happy songs for their “party” get into office based on the big spenders, and then increase taxes, keep same level of government or increase – no matter what the promise. That kind of “voting system”?

  • [5] August 19, 2014 at 3:43pm

    You are all talking as if the initial encounter was legit. Now, if the initial encounter was legit and all other facts that are provided are true, then yes, lethal force was authorized, however, that’s a pretty big if given all the facts so far. Remember, up to this point, the citizen has had no criminal record at the time. For anyone to go from none to full tilt is uncommon. I know if I was walking down the middle of my street and I didn’t hear a car coming (lawnmower, kids, etc.), and found it was a cop who tossed me against the hood, I would become in fear of my life. We do not know all the events yet and therefore I stand by the facts that a citizen is NOT a criminal until proven in court. I have seen way too many recent cases where officers escalated situations and MURDERED citizens (or attempted murder) and the officers where never charged. Remember, we even have officers lie on their official reports, then a video surfaces to prove the officer murdered the citizen.

    All I am saying is don’t be too quick to judge. Many here sound like as bad as the people trashing stores – a bunch of lynching mobs.

  • August 19, 2014 at 10:53am

    not “lunching” – lunging

  • [21] August 19, 2014 at 10:51am

    Even if the officers account is correct, it still does not provide for lethal force. If that where the case then a guy running at me or lunching at another provides lethal force. No double standard shall exist in the use of lethal force. If an officer be in fear of his life, then a citizen can do so as well. Be very careful how you view this action by anyone, either by state, or by citizen.

    Officers are not granted “extra” powers – they are not authorized to shoot “just because he beat me up!”. Can you imagine a world like that? “Because I was pistole whipped, I shot and killed him!”. Again, does not elevate to lethal force. Think of examples of how this could play out with citizens.

    Responses (11) +
  • [2] August 18, 2014 at 8:39pm


    You are correct.

123 To page: Go