Perhaps the BEST B1G Forum anywhere, here at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

Okay, so non-violent non-protestors deserve to get pepper sprayed (or in this case shot at with pepper paintballs)?

And you're using the case of non-violent non-protestors on their own property harming no one as your argument to... defend the cops from wrongdoing?

Based on what is discussed, I can't even be sure that it would have been legal for the cops in this case to arrest the protestors. I'm trying to find a link to the official curfew order, but the little I've seen on Google suggests that people could not be out "in public". Being on your own porch on your own property does not meet the definition of "in public". 

So the cop had no legal standing to demand that they go inside anyway. Which brings us to the endpoint: non-violent non-protestors on their own property being shot at with pepper paintballs for refusing to comply with an unlawful order that they had no legal obligation to heed.

You seem to think that I am some huge pro-police guy, just because I side with them over the BLM/Antics types. I have plenty of problems with police. If you want to pit the police against the pot heads or other nonviolent criminals, fine. I'll side against police. But that's not what this movement is about. This is a coordinated effort to paint violent criminals as the good guys, and the cops that have to deal with those scumbags everyday as the bad guys, so I'm out. I don't give a shit if the cops gun down a rapist who is fighting with them, and trying to retrieve a weapon from his car. That is precisely what the police SHOULD be doing, instead of executing paramilitary style no knock warrants over someone's botanical practices.
If the police were just rolling around ordering people into their homes and then shooting them with paintballs, it would be appalling. But given the backdrop of looting and rioting, it becomes a lot more understandable in my opinion. Tensions are high, and the reasons are bullshit.

Again, the Ukraine thing.

We went from "nothing happened it's just fake news" to "yeah something happened and it was a crime and it's an impeachable crime but nobody wants to call witnesses in the Senate because Republicans have enough votes to stop removal."

is this really why witnesses weren't called?

if so, why start the process in the first place and run it through the House?

It seemed ridiculous to me, I'm just hesitant because I don't know the entirety of the situation.

If the NG ordered me off my deck here, I'm not sure I'd comply.

you might eat a paintball

leaders on both sides of the isle lied about the virus, when it fit their agenda

is it really quite a bit?

If so, why let them get by with it?

Yes my question exactly

leaders on both sides of the isle lied about the virus, when it fit their agenda

is it really quite a bit?

If so, why let them get by with it?

I dont think this is the scandal the dems can hang their hat on

they have misread the voters who are much more concerned about law and order etc

but if they want to spin their wheels on this great its just another bad judgement move on their part

What would've come of it?

I really expected to read some kind of "after action report", perhaps an apology, a complaint made to someone in the city, something.

Well, the statute of limitations on a violation of civil rights and personal injury claims won't expire for a while.