Well yeah one are peaceful protestors, the other is armed. Cops get scared when someone else can fight back on an even playing field. Even if that somebody is a horrible monster murdering children. They didn't join the force to protect people they joined so people had to do what they say.
post
Because they know college protesters aren't armed.
Because theyβre cowards. Violent cowards who revel in oppression. The worst kind of coward.
College protesters really need to learn firearm safety and start open carrying rifles at their protests. But they all gotta do it. Can't be one or two random people.
Never forget that CA governor Ronald Reagan pushed for a law against folks exercising their second amendment rights to bear arms while patrolling and protecting their communities.
Those folks? The Black Panthers.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mulford_Act
Both Republicans and Democrats in California supported increased gun control, as did the National Rifle Association of America.
Theyβre just like the IDF. They can only fight unarmed women and children.
Cops are gutless cowards who can only punch down on people who can't fight back; as soon as they meet someone who poses even a slight threat they cower away.
I am basically afraid of getting on some kind of dissenter's list by up voting this one.
Yeah, they're bullies. They want to beat/kill unarmed minorities and college students for "not respecting their authority" (exercising their constitutional rights), not actually uphold the law. Cowards...
College protesters should have guns.
I mean sure but then we are absolutely asking for a massacre and internal war.
Guns only work if you are willing to use them. And once we are, we are saying we don't find police presence valid and the state comes crashing down upon you to end your pitiful existence for posing an internal threat.
We are a country with essentially a bad auto-immune disease that attacks whatever it deems as foreign.
The red hat morons had guns at all their protests and they were allowed to protest as long as they wanted, since police didn't want to escalate.
Meanwhile peaceful, unarmed protesters get pounded into the ground
π€
Most of them weren't willing to use them and were left alone because the cops were in civilian clothes and busy... You know, doing something other than police work in the exact same area for some reason.
And again what's seen as foreign.
Complaining about us stomping others by being a nuisance is against the people that just want us to shut up and get in line.
Complaining that we aren't stomping hard enough and not enough people is just constructive criticism.
The current goal is to keep things exactly as they are or with more oppression as needed keep it static.
The left can bring guns but it won't change anything other than maybe slightly more likely to die by a cop's hand unless they are willing to use them and once that starts it's will be a lot tougher because we are on the side of change, which must be crushed by the current system.
That's how it is.
What is 'NDd' short for? I'm drawing a blank, and searching for anything on the internet is pointless these days...
"Negligent Discharge."
It's used in the firearms community instead of anything with the word "accident" because there's almost never a reason for a gun to fire unintentionally that doesn't involve a serious fuckup by the user.
Any ND that results in death or injury should also be treated as a felony. There are 4 basic rules to firearm safety that should be followed at all times. Any one of them should prevent injury, so you have to fuck up all 4 at once to hurt someone.
- Treat every gun as if it were loaded at all times.
- Keep your finger away from the trigger until ready to fire.
- Do not let the gun point at anything you're not willing to kill or destroy
- Know your target and what's beyond your target.
The only true accidents I know of regarding a gun being fired unintentionally involve faulty weapons firing on their own (more likely to win the lottery), but even then they shouldn't hurt anyone because it should be pointed in a safe direction.
I think it's short for negligently discharged but it's kind of stupid to shorten that. I can't imagine what reason there is to not just write " negligently discharged".
Frankly I think calling it a "negligent discharge" is giving the officer too much credit. The gun shouldn't even have been unholstered. Guns are used to shoot not threaten. If he was pulling the gun out then he intended to fire it and if he pulled the gun out without intending to fire it then it wasn't a negligent discharge it was an incompetent booger hooking by a pants shitting coward.
Negligent discharge is the term you use whenever someone shoots their gun when they didn't intend to. It's just common lingo to shorten it to ND or ND'd. It's one of those terms that, at face value, doesn't convey the seriousness of what you just did, but people who use the term regularly know just how bad it is.
Not at all wrong. I hate to use this word because it denigrates our wonderful lady friends (both bio and of choice), but cops are pussies. Like the ultimate ones. "look at me! I'm a badass cop gonna violate your rights! Back the Blue!" Let's see what my lawyer has to say about your "badassery". I thought so, bitch. Here's a coupon code for Dunkin. Go away.
You could have just said coward and then you wouldnt need to justify derogatory gender-oriented language
I'm almost positive the use of the word to call someone a coward has nothing to do with a vagina.
The solution is clear, protesters and school shooters need to put aside their differences and team up.
top 50 comments