Bigbrog

Are you trying to be the cinnamon pastry guy but on the NWT board?

Someone's been hitting grandma's cough medicine again....

Good question...honestly, I didn't see, nor not see in the documentary that I would say wasn't true...my point is that I personally would never say any documentary is 100% correct as I am sure that there are things about said documentary that wasn't included, left out (on purpose or otherwise), or wasn't available to include in the documentary. Anyway, that is just how I view any documentary that I watch, and I love watching them...more than I do a movie.

Documentaries can absolutely be inaccurate. I'd say the majority of them are directionally correct but often leave out certain things that are sealed in court documents and/or edit the content to create a certain narrative (see Making a Murderer). Anyway, in this documentary I agree that it is pretty much correct and addresses the core issues that are factually correct...the doctor is a disgusting sexual predator, and the coaches/administration were reprehensible in their actions or lack thereof.

What I read is that Russia made the comments of how this could escalate to where this could destabilize the region to the point that nukes are an option....insert more grandstanding political speak...yada yada yada...then ended with the hope is that this will be settled diplomatically and urged all sides to come to the table.

I believe if you go back and read all my posts on this topic, I have been pretty clear that anyone who tries to put murders into a specific group other than the mentally ill whackadoodles group is using lazy thinking and...well...stupid. Then RV as he does all the time escalated the lazy thinking to double down with his insane predictions and rhetoric that Christianity is responsible for millions of deaths...and I explained it was the ignorant mental gymnastics that people use to skew their viewpoints in order to use <insert any religion and/or reason here> as an excuse to commit murder...it is an excuse plain and simple. People that murder are mentally ill whackadoodles...it's not because of a religion, not an inanimate object, not a political party, etc. I understand both sides like to look for a "bucket" to but people in when they commit a terrible crime like murder, and it is very common for the media to start rhetoric around this, but I stand by what I said and mean...if you kill someone you are a crazy whackadoodle...hard stop.

This single post clearly represents your level of "thought" used into this, and any other topic on this board, and why you are one of the most ridiculous posters on here that no one takes seriously.

What's the opportunity for anyone to put people into these superficial buckets when they commit horrific acts?? And where is the hypocrisy in my post? Or are you just shouting into the wind again about something that you KNOW is going to happen but hasn't and more than likely doesn't??

But, PLEASE do not start posting like he does...one poster who only writes endless overly wordy posts is enough

Christianity has NOT caused millions of deaths. Severe mentally skewed interpretations and mental gymnastics, and/or plain mental delusion has caused millions of deaths. Trying to label the deaths into a category is lazy and serves absolutely no purpose other than to make someone feel all warm and fuzzy because they can point their finger at something and say "SEE! SEE!" Again, in this case calling him an "extremist Christian" is no more relevant that describing the type of vehicle the person rolled up in.

LOL..."seems like his Christianity was likely a factor"...seriously?!?! The only factor was that he is a whackjob with mental health issues!! Throw Christianity, lefty, righty, truck driver, gun owner, etc. out the window as those are superficial things that have no bearing on why he did it.

So what group does this guy fall into other than he is a whackjob with mental health issues??

Here we go again, fighting to lump some crazy person into this group or that group to somehow make us feel all warm and fuzzy...how about the guy is clearly a whackjob...hard stop!

And I heard something about that China is helping Iran right now?

agreed!

This. I watched it last night, and I understand that documentaries can skew things and purposely create a narrative, but man, Hellickson and Jordan did themselves no favors for how they acted, and more importantly didn't act. Their behavior after this all broke, and even recently is at minimum head scratching and at worst reprehensible.

I hope we stay out of this mess

You do realize that you are only looking at it from one perspective only to make it work for your "argument"? You keep throwing out the "its his 1st amendment right" as if the cop KINEW that this guy sneaking up on his car was just taking pictures. And using your argument, which is true about taking pictures in public, it's pretty obvious that once the cop KNEW he was in fact only taking pictures he left without arresting the person. Why do you guys keep conveniently not taking into account that the cop clearly had NO idea what the guy was doing?? You use after the fact information to assume it should have been known in the exact moment...and refuse to look at it from the police's perspective. And I am sorry but your family of LEOs would probably be ashamed that you are using them as some sort of "evidence" that "you don't hate cops" and then turnaround and claim that this cop did something wrong while clearly refusing to acknowledge the potential perspective of said cop. By the way...how is this a right v left thing??

Wait...there are crazy trolls (R, D, I, etc.) on social media...please say it isn't so!?!?

Tell me you know nothing about how police are trained without telling me you know nothing about how police are trained. By the way, the way YOU acted (reaching for something in the door and getting out) is what prompted the response from the police officer when he was conducting a traffic stop...funny how people like you always conveniently overlook the behavior leading up to a reaction. Also, the police DO NOT have to use their siren to pull someone over. And how in the heck would one not realize a cop with their lights on were behind them...I'm calling BS on that one. YOU are the one with a dangerous worldview of police officers and THAT is the problem!

How many??

Reason #132,435,345 why you are not taken serious....you'd take Iran over Israel?!?!

Please provide exact examples of how "he's repeatedly ignored court orders to reverse course on certain policies"....

LOL...this topic cracks me up!! FYI...this isn't a new law enforcement tactic. Different agencies have used this approach on multiple occasions for many many years. I believe the standard protocol is that a law enforcement agent, no matter how they are dressed, has to verbally identify themselves upon contact with suspect(s)...and once detained, as they seem fit given the situation and suspected crime, they then can notify as to the reason why they are being stopped and detained. So the bigger question is why is this all of a sudden an issue with people?? I think we all know the answer to that. I'd challenge any one of you on here that think you know better than law enforcement on what their policies and protocols should be, go do an actual ride along, or even just talk to a law enforcement agent.

Pretty stupid and ridiculous on his part