More Evidence We’re Living In Crazy and Dangerous Times

This is a stunner of a story.  I give it a strong 8 on the ol 1 to 10 scale.  10 being the most outrageous.  -Jack

http://video.foxnews.com/v/2224293226001/woman-arrested-after-reading-constitution-during-tax-dispute/

If you can stand to hear about one more, this is heartbreaking, but a youth approached a women pushing a stroller and demanded money.  She said he threatened her and said he was going to shoot her dead and kill her baby if she didn’t produce the cash!  He then fired at her head, striking her in the ear and then turned the gun on the little baby and shot him in the face…killing him instantly.  Hear the mother’s own words and see this killer.  Oddly enough, he looks just like he could be Obama’s son.  

 http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/03/23/mother-of-baby-shot-dead-speaks-out-in-heartbreaking-interview-he-must-have-died-instantly/

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

9 Responses to More Evidence We’re Living In Crazy and Dangerous Times

  1. Libby says:

    Well, it would be, if she HAD been arrested for reading the constitution out loud. Actually, she was arrested for threatening to shoot employees of some company hired to reassess real property in her township.

    Being reassessed is highly traumatic, but spouting constitutional passages at a public meeting is not a terribly rational response, and then, to mention your guns … just not prudent.

    They say she can have her guns back when she’s demonstrated she’s not a crazy person. But she’s another one of them fundamentalists, and I think she’s gonna have some trouble with that.

  2. Harold Ey says:

    Ahhhh, where in the article did it confirm she actually threatened anyone?
    Here again is another knee jerk reaction by both the arresting officer, without proof (as per article) by other than The one who invaded her space, then may have fabricated the scenario. I do not see someone saying ‘lets see you pay your taxes now’ as a reaction to being verbally threatened that a weapon would be used. Clearly, a case of Government gone wild, literal and liberally

  3. Tina says:

    Libby I never want to see you on a jury Ever!

    The woman did not let an assessor enter her home because of a religious conviction; she does not meet with men in her home when her husband is absent.

    When she got her property tax bill she found her taxes had doubled.

    She and her husband went to the local meeting to protest the doubling of their property taxes.

    She cited Fourth Amendment to the Constitution as part of her defense:

    The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

    She was citing the Constitution to defend her right to be secure in her home against unreasonable seizure. A doubling of property taxes is certainly unreasonable, especially without warning and at a time when property values have plummeted and inflation is eating up family resources.

    She left the meeting and was followed out by the assessor. A dispute ensued wherein she has claimed the worst she did was call the man a “paper pusher”.

    He goes back in the building, calls the police and claims she made threats about coming back to “shoot up the place”

    Her word against his.

    However, on the (possibly vile) word of this paper pusher alone the police come to her home and take her guns (Another breach of her Fourth Amendment Constitutional rights?)

    We don’t have enough information to determine what happened exactly since the police and others are not talking.

    We do know that when any government entity can sick the cops on a fellow citizen simply for leaving a meeting a bit ticked off and using words like “paper pusher” and the police can then confiscate his property, we are already living in a police state.

    Her First Amendment rights may also have been violated. We can’t yell fire in a building but we certainly can call someone an admittedly snide, but nonetheless descriptive, name.

    This is outrageous!

    Since when do local pointy headed “paper pushers” have a right to make such accusations against another citizen without some kind of confirmation or proof? There is no evidence, that we have been made aware, of her making such a threat or mentioning guns, shooting, or any other similar threat.

    If the person that accused her of making a terrorist threat mistakenly thought she was sighting the Second Amendment, then his own ignorance of the Constitution may be what created the terrorist drama in his head.

    This is a good example of the consequence of irresponsible journalism and activism. This case reminds me of the time the Black congressman was so certain the Tea Party was racist he imagined someone was purposely spitting on him.

    As for this citizen speaking at the meeting, I would think that it would be incumbent upon those serving in the community to be more sensitive to the concerns of this woman regarding her property taxes.

  4. Libby says:

    No, no, no … darlings, you have to get off “The Blaze”. The local paper wrote it up in a much more even-handed manner (and no other entity has bothered with it, at all). It was at a community meeting with the appraisers that she spouted the Constitution and about her guns. Her earlier refusal to let appraisers onto her premises without her husband being home is not contested, or at issue.

    And the whole thing WAS totally blown out of proportion by the appraisers, and by The Blaze.

    But you really, really, cannot, in this day and age, make frivolous pronouncements of a violent nature (“I’m goin’ to my truck, man!), and not have the authorities descend upon you … as the woman now knows.

  5. Tina says:

    “No, no, no…”? Really Libs? Still playing Mom are we?

    “It was at a community meeting with the appraisers that she spouted the Constitution and about her guns.”

    Yes, I wrote it all out to make that very clear.

    So far the threat looks like he said she said!

    So far you have shown us no evidence, including a link to the “better local story”, that she actually made a threatening statement or mentioned guns!

    And somehow you find reading The Blaze more of a threat to society than a possibly emotionally/mentally crippled adult bureaucrat using his power to send the troops to a citizens door without cause and having her personal property removed without cause? You are also equally unconcerned, apparently, that this citizen was treated like a serf when she protested a doubling of her property taxes!

    This thinking is how the German citizens, including the Jews, to remove the Jews from their homes and stuff them into a train. We know how that turned out for most of them.

    Freedom is not important to you? The rule of law is not important? You truly are a socialist…we all work for the state and nothing we have is really our own! Heaven help us!

  6. Libby says:

    Didn’t I say getting reassessed was traumatic?

    Don’t have actual facts, but inferring from her photos, and that she said nothing has been done to the house for thirty years, it’s just possible that she’s living in her parent’s house. And if it hasn’t been reappraised for 30 years, she is in for an awful jolt.

    But that’s life. She ought to have known it was coming and been making plans.

    And … all that Germans with the trains stuff is kind of irrational, in the circumstances, don’t you think?

  7. Chris says:

    The irony of Tina, who has consistently defended police brutality and excessive force against liberals, complaining about a “police state” is simply delicious. Apparently only conservatives can be victims of the police state.

  8. Tina says:

    Chris we can always count on you for lots of drama!

    I have defended the police for doing their jobs and dealing with people in difficult situations. You do have a point that a similar comparison would be ironic, but my complaint wasn’t with the police, or about police brutality, so I’m not certain we’re talking apples and apples here.

    Someone with experience in police work can tell us if, during these times of terror threats or in any circumstance, the police would be compelled by the law to follow up on a complaint such as the assessor made against this woman. I’m pretty certain do have to follow up.

    My comment directed at the “type of thinking” that assumes without cause that a fellow citizen is dangerous (a terrorist) and should somehow be controlled and denied possession of her fire arms….or that someone is a danger to society even for something as innocuous as “reading” a blog. That is exactly the “type of thinking” that allowed the Germans to look the other way when Jews were taken from their houses and herded into trains. Now I admit a degree of drama exists in my comparison but the absurdity is for good cause. Does this woman have a right to read the Constitution and protest tax rates in an assessors meeting without being treated like a serf without rights?

    I wish we had more information.

    The extreme political left has made a lot of assumptions about law abiding gun owners in America. They have labeled them as dangerous and a threat. We have no proof that this is even mildly accurate and yet, people have the idea that gun owners can’t wait to shoot up the mall. If this woman is telling the truth, her accuser is either a bald faced liar who wanted to make this woman pay for her effort to lodge a complaint or he is suffering from the brainwashing campaign to convince Americans that gun ownership equals terrorism.

    I acknowledge we do not have enough information to determine what was actually said or if the woman actually did make a threat.

    All in all, I’m not sure your delight is all that well founded but I’m pleased if it made you happy.

  9. Tina says:

    Libby you still have not provided the link to the story that can inform us with certainty that the lady actually made a threat, or is “one of them “fundamentalists” (as if that is a crime?), is a crazy person, or otherwise threatened the assessor.

    I asked for the link what’s the prob?

    Hmmmm…I wonder what it would take for you to think that government, and people employed by government, are out of line and stepping on the necks of the citizens? How far can they go? So far you seem to be looking for a time when we are all comfortably controlled by a police state.

    Now if we want to talk irony…you wrote:

    She ought to have known it was coming and been making plans.

    Don’t you think it’s incumbent upon every citizen to run his life this way? Think of all those able bodied people on SSI, food stamps, and other programs sticking it to us to pick up their tabs. Think of all the people who should have known adulthood was coming and prepared for it that you think the rest of us should just pay up and shut up to provide for them?

    I don’t know Libby. I think you’d be doing all of us a hell of a favor if you could just get that the entire purpose of the right is to get others to take on that kind of responsibility. As long as we let our leaders devise more ways to let people off the hook the more of them we will have to pay to keep and so on and so on and so on!

Comments are closed.