Image 01 Image 03

Rep. Rashida Tlaib Demands An End To ‘Policing, Incarceration, and Militarization’ As Looting Spreads In Minnesota

Rep. Rashida Tlaib Demands An End To ‘Policing, Incarceration, and Militarization’ As Looting Spreads In Minnesota

Ok, Tlaib. That means no more Capitol Police for you guys.

Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) demanded ending “policing, incarceration, and militarization” after the death of Daunte Wright in Minnesota. His death has led to riots and looting.

“Government funded murder.” So does that mean Tlaib will resign? She’s in the government. She’s in a government building surrounded by its own police force. Should we also get rid of the Secret Service?

Protection for me, but not for thee. These are the same people who want to disarm you and me.

Video shows that the cop who allegedly shot Wright scream, “Taser!” Officials labeled it an accidental shooting since she meant to use her taser gun instead of her gun.

Several hours after Wright’s death, riots and looting broke out. It happened again last night.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


Morning Sunshine | April 13, 2021 at 8:50 am

do it. Start with DC

Police shootings are generally very rare

Police shootings of innocent people are extremely – very exceedingly – Rare

Daunte Wright wasnt a choir boy

    Brave Sir Robbin in reply to Joe-dallas. | April 13, 2021 at 9:33 am

    Nor did he deserve to he shot and killed. However, this in no way justifies a violent response to his shooting. The police officer needs to be permanently deprived of her firearm and assigned, permanently, to office and administrative duties. She has proven she is unable to cope with the stress of active patrol work and needs to be promptly and permanently removed from such. She has proven to be dangerous with a service weapon, and should be deprived of it. The city owes the family of the deceased a lot of money.

    This guy seems to have been on a bad path, but this stupid accidental shooting was stupid, accidental, and unnecessary.

    Having said that, our woke overlords created the pernicious myth of institutional racism and famed the flames of hate, division, depravity, and lashing out with violence. As long as this is aimed at those who created it, why intervene? If Democrats want to burn down their own cities, how is that skin off your back? Fortify in red counties where the police, courts, and people are on your side. If you still live in a blue city, why?

    But also insist, where ever you live, the police behave professionally, and those police officers who are unsuited for their highly demanding duties and responsibilities are placed in positions where they can do no harm. Nothing more needs to be done to this woman, but it needs to be done.

      TX-rifraph in reply to Brave Sir Robbin. | April 13, 2021 at 9:47 am

      And, the Brooklyn Center City Manager was fired because he pushed for due process which sounds like actions based on facts to me. Racist politicians fired a Black City Manager, apparently, but there will be no riots over that because it is not about race–it is a Marxist revolution. The Brooklyn Center politicians just surrendered the first of many suburbs to crash and burn up there. That is the plan. The center city is the base and then spread out.

        Brave Sir Robbin in reply to TX-rifraph. | April 13, 2021 at 10:01 am

        “The center city is the base and then spread out.”

        OK, but if they want to destroy their own cities, why stop them? I know they will sally forth and try and attack people outside their cities, but, again, if you live in a place with supportive police and judges, that will not be successful, nor last long.

        Make sure you support your police and judicial system, but make sure they also support you.

          Agree, but that won’t keep the virus from spreading.

          The police aren’t God so they can’t be everywhere all the time. Be prepared to defend your family, your self, and your property.

          Brave Sir Robbin in reply to Brave Sir Robbin. | April 13, 2021 at 11:37 am

          The armed law abiding people, fortified by supportive police, prosecutors and judges, is a very difficult force to overcome. So we are in complete agreement.

          I should add that the law abiding armed populace, and their supportive police and magistrates, need a viable defense against the servile, malicious and slanderous press which shall prorogate any lie to stir the vile passions that seek to trespass upon civil order and liberty.

          This is the conundrum posed by “Rules for Radicals” in that the enemy has learned to use our rules against us by employing a vile duplicity of mendacity and hypocritical double standards within our governing rule set that values freedom of expression and debate.

          Right now, this is an information war, and we are not winning.

          I propose we take a lesson learned and oppose them asymmetrically. Fight them on their turf. They say they want to redistribute wealth and are for racial reparations. OK, fine. They are now the owners of all that wealth. Let’s demand they give it to “black” Americans to pay for reparations. Let’s demand they give up their wealth and “privilege” and power. Take it all and give it away, to include all those billions stuffed into various “charitable” foundations that are nothing more than a way to shield their wealth from taxation while they employ it, with full control, for their self-glorification and ambitions to control the globe.

          They are using their wealth, power, and privilege against you. You are not deriving any benefit. Why not take it away and give it to someone else? If someone cannot use an automobile responsible, what do you do? If someone cannot use a gun responsibly, what do you do? If someone cannot use their wealth and power responsibly, what do you do?

          Time to change the way we think.

      No, he didn’t deserve to be shot and killed, but nor did any of the innumerable victims of friendly fire and accidental shootings over the years. Mistakes happen. They should be minimized as much as possible, but they will never be eliminated.

      I don’t know that the police officer needed to be relieved, though I understand she has been. She has not “proven she is unable to cope with the stress of active patrol work”. Her decision to pull and use her taser was correct, and she shouted “taser” as she had been trained to do; her only error was in not checking that she had in fact pulled the tool she thought she had.

      This is something that happens. There are at least a dozen other cases of it. Maybe training can be improved somehow, without introducing an unacceptable delay in deploying the taser in the 99.999% of cases where it was correctly pulled.

      The city does indeed owe the deceased’s family money, but if we are to be honest it doesn’t owe a lot, because he wasn’t worth that much money; his expected earning capacity, if you exclude the proceeds of crime, was not very high.

        Brave Sir Robbin in reply to Milhouse. | April 13, 2021 at 11:42 am

        “She has not “proven she is unable to cope with the stress of active patrol work”.

        Milhouse – she panicked and pull the wrong weapon, held it in her hand for several seconds where she again should have realized she had the wrong weapon, and then fatally employed the weapon.

        The results speak for themselves.

        All I am calling for is permanent desk assignment. I do not want people who panic so easily placed in a position where their weaknesses, and we have them, work against her, her colleagues, and the public. If a person is a bad surgeon who performs poorly under stressful conditions, they must be limited to non-stressful surgical procedures.

        Seems pretty basic.

          That’s not ‘panic’. It’s poor engineering and training. You shape the lethal and non lethal tools nearly identically to the hand, then place them near each other on the person, you will get that type of error. When tasers first were being developed, that was an overriding concern. Indeed, use of force experts routinely would predict we would never adopt a pistol style taser for that very reason. If it is that similar you won’t be able to tell the difference. I’ll bet that the department uses a composite firearm as well.
          If this was her training, warning-taser, she’s already into a use of physical force, a fight. I’m surprised we don’t have more female officers smoking some guy when she meant to light him up. They’re smaller, weaker and slower than men and break more easily. They tend to escalate faster.

        Brave Sir Robbin in reply to Milhouse. | April 13, 2021 at 12:01 pm

        “his expected earning capacity, if you exclude the proceeds of crime, was not very high.”

        I take grave exception to this statement. A person’s life cannot be simply reduced to their the monetary value of their presumed economic contribution to society. First of all, your position on this person’s economic worth is purely speculative. Second, your logic, taken to the extreme, where logic tends to go, would support letting the old, who are drawing upon accumulated wealth in the form of pensions, transfer payments like social security, and personal savings and are thus a net drain in terms of productive value have no intrinsic human value and may be thus disposed of at will and with no consequence. It expressly devalues the poor versus the wealthy. What about people born with severe disabilities? Toss them over a cliff or into a pit?

        It’s an appalling notion.

        If you want to make this a purely economic calculation, the guy was what, 20 years old? Average life expectancy is 80 years, more or less? Average income is $60k or so per year (not his now, but normally income grows over time over course and averages out). Therefore, $60k x 60 is $3,600,000.

        Does the deceased have any felony convictions? What happened to innocent until proven guilty? Or are we affirmatively tossing that aside now? I look at a guy and think to myself, “This is bad seed,” and so snuff out his life at no consequence, or at the very least not suffer any consequence if I, with great recklessness kill or main that person?

          “Average income is $60k or so per year”

          Have you seen Andy Ngo’s coverage of Daunte Wright? His posts on Facebook where he flashes big wads of cash, guns, and gang signs? He was living the thug life and was not going to be earning a $60k salary.

          amatuerwrangler in reply to Brave Sir Robbin. | April 13, 2021 at 2:38 pm

          BSR— Two things, maybe more:
          — The deceased chose not to register his vehicle as is required of all of us;
          — He had other dealings with “the authorities” that resulted in a warrant being issued for his arrest.

          Are you advocating that the police do not respond to these things?

          — The deceased when confronted elected to actively resist the police officers who were doing their lawful job.

          No, he did not “deserve” to die that night. But his own chosen actions started a progression of action that resulted in it.

          You need to calm down.

          Brave Sir Robbin in reply to Brave Sir Robbin. | April 13, 2021 at 4:14 pm

          “Are you advocating that the police do not respond to these things?”

          Not at all. I am advocating that we should expect police officers to not pull out and use a GLOCK 19 located in a holster located on their right hip when they meant to pull out a taser located on their left hip, In other words, I expect police to behave in at least a minimally competent manner so people are not needlessly maimed or killed.

          When police do not live up to at least minimal standards of professional competence, I suggest they be reassigned to duties in greater comport to their competence.

          In addition, none of the things you mentioned, as you admit, justify the death of the deceased.

          My question back would if you are advocating we allow incompetence, whether it be from police officers, surgeons, construction engineers, airline pilots, go unsanctioned? I am not advocating any at drastic, just mere administrative reassignment.

          I honestly cannot fathom why anyone would argue this woman dies not belong on patrol duty and should be assigned unarmed administrative duties.

          Another question I pose to you is since when is advocation for competence considered being out of control and needing to “calm down.”

          More details about the deceased and his contributions to society:

        paracelsus in reply to Milhouse. | April 13, 2021 at 1:24 pm

        I agree with you. If a police person gives me a reasonable, comparatively legal order, I will stand on my head and attempt to spit wooden nickels; not out of fear of being shot or tasered, but I’m assuming the official has assessed the situation and for everyone’s safety has given that order. If I do not comply, I accept that the person has every right to do whatever’s necessary to ensure the “community’s” safety: the results of my (in)action has become my problem.
        It’s not necessary to comply (particularly if you don’t wish to be loaded onto a cattle-car), but if you wish to fight, be willing to accept the possible consequences.

          Brave Sir Robbin in reply to paracelsus. | April 13, 2021 at 4:21 pm

          “If I do not comply, I accept that the person has every right to do whatever’s necessary to ensure the “community’s” safety: the results of my (in)action has become my problem.”

          If you thought through this, it is unlikely you would to give police or anyone this sort of power. Your argument is that if a person does not comply to the instructions of a police officer to the satisfaction of that officer, no matter how stupid or potentially dangerous or unconstitutional those instructions may be, that officer has the right to shoot you dead.

          Wait until they give badges to Antifa thugs. Maybe you will change your mind.

          In any event, this incident simply involves gross incompetence.

        Sanddog in reply to Milhouse. | April 13, 2021 at 2:42 pm

        She was holding her firearm, right in front of her face and pulled the trigger. Yes, it was an accident. You could tell from the bodycam she didn’t intend to deploy her handgun. That said, the punishment needs to be more than reassignment. She was negligent and killed someone. As I said, the firearm was in her line of sight. She aimed and pulled the trigger and she needs to be held legally responsible.

          Brave Sir Robbin in reply to Sanddog. | April 13, 2021 at 4:26 pm

          My position is policing is an inherently difficult job. It is impossible to avoid error. People will screw up. It must be expected. As long as this officer is not on patrol or equipped wit a firearm, I am not sure how this can happen again, at least by this officer. If investigation undercovers malice, then that is different. Otherwise, it’s like revoking surgical privileges to to a doctor you cannot trust to perform surgery, but who is still competent practice other forms of medicine like basic physical examinations.

      An appropriate comparison would be to a policeman who kills someone in a traffic accident. Should that policeman be reassigned? Should any driver whose error has caused a traffic accident be deprived of their license?

        Brave Sir Robbin in reply to Milhouse. | April 13, 2021 at 12:10 pm

        If the policeman showed an inability to drive under normal or stressful situations, and so ended up killing another person, then yes, I would not allow them to drive a vehicle. They could perform desk duties or ride along in the right seat. But I would not let them drive around and endanger the public.

        Let’s take an example of an older person who loses their faculty to safely operate a vehicle. How many accidents must the person have before someone takes the keys away?

        I do not fathom why you take exception to disallowing people prone to panic from wielding a gun and making life-and-death decisions as normal part of their job. Incompetence should be recognized for what it is, and this was clear incompetence.

        Reassign her to a position in which she actually has competencies. Why is this common sense proposal objectionable?

          Not yet clearly shown that the officer was “prone to panic”. We need to wait and see what comes out.

          Brave Sir Robbin in reply to Brave Sir Robbin. | April 13, 2021 at 12:42 pm

          “He was living the thug life and was not going to be earning a $60k salary.”

          Speculative, first of all. Secondly, so we can kill people, accidently with great recklessness, without consequence, because they are young and misdirected?

          I think few of us would have made it to adulthood.

          The cop panicked with tragic results. She is not suitable to roam around with a gun and mix it up with people. She needs permanent desk assignment. I don’t care who she killed, because next time it may be someone you love and care about, even if you have no regard for this current victim.

          Incompetence should not be rewarded or overlooked. This is a pretty basic and, I would think, completely non-controversial position.

          I have no problem with her decision to employ a taser in this situation. But she clearly mistook her service weapon with her taser with tragic results. She’s dangerous. Take her off the street.

          The Friendly Grizzly in reply to Brave Sir Robbin. | April 13, 2021 at 12:48 pm

          At least she has something we mere “civilians” lack: qualified immunity.

          Brave Sir Robbin in reply to Brave Sir Robbin. | April 13, 2021 at 12:49 pm

          “Not yet clearly shown that the officer was “prone to panic”.

          Oh, my. She was in a stressful situation. Yes or no? She a decision to employ a taser which is located on her left hip, but pulled her service pistol located on her right hip, yes or no? She then held her service pistol in her hand for several seconds, still thinking it was her taser, yes or no? She then fired her service pistol into the subject thinking it to be her taser, yes or no?

          If this was not panic induced error, what was it? The alternatives look worse for her, and at the very least do not invalidate my recommendation to remove her from patrol duty or carrying a service pistol. Someone who screws up that bad should not be allowed to continue in that line of work. It’s basic accountability. I do not want her or someone like her anywhere near me at any time if she is armed.

          Maybe she panicked. But was she *prone* to panic? You assume that she was. That is my point.

          Once again, you missed my point: I did NOT say that his conduct made it okay to kill him. I merely pointed out that his conduct showed that he was already a young thug and it was therefore very unlikely that he was going to become a good and productive citizen earning a substantial salary at a respectable job.

          Brave Sir Robbin in reply to Brave Sir Robbin. | April 13, 2021 at 4:30 pm

          ” But was she *prone* to panic?”

          Oh! I finally get it. Sorry – public school education. Don’t blame me. Blame the system. You know, the man! I was never even taught about 1619. Really, it’s not my fault.

      henrybowman in reply to Brave Sir Robbin. | April 14, 2021 at 1:21 pm

      “If Democrats want to burn down their own cities, how is that skin off your back?”

      That’s a first-order estimation. Then you reflect that big blue cities typically drive an entire state’s statehouse and their federal delegation, oppressing not only every conservative within their state, but also every conservative outside their state. Look at New York City, Phoenix/Tucson, Chicago, Las Vegas.

2smartforlibs | April 13, 2021 at 9:39 am

Seems to me she just declared open season on every American.

    Brave Sir Robbin in reply to 2smartforlibs. | April 13, 2021 at 10:12 am

    She should be forced to live by her own edicts. Perhaps the police should stop for a donut and cup of joe if responding to a call for service to help her, or stand back and let people attack her, like they did, mostly, when a mob attacked Rand Paul walking away from a nominating convention for president in the the nation’s capitol, which apparently was not an attack on our democracy or an insurrection.

    Cops need to figure out who the enemy is and take sides. If we are going to have a country of selective enforcement, then select. I want to state for the record that “black: people are not the enemy. “Black” people are being as oppressed and ripped off by the fascist corporate elite as much as “white” people. All people can become our allies, but we need to be clear and focused on who the real enemies are..

      Paul and his wife were attacked while walking from the White House, not the Capitol. Partisan events such as the one they’d attended can’t be held at the Capitol; it was even controversial to hold it at the White House. (And it wasn’t a convention, it was the President’s remote speech to the convention.)

        Brave Sir Robbin in reply to Milhouse. | April 13, 2021 at 12:23 pm

        I did not say the incident occurred in the “Capitol”. I said the incident occurred “in the the nation’s capitol,” which is clearly Washington, DC, and not the big domed building on the hill at the end of what they call “the mall,” which is not a shopping center.

      henrybowman in reply to Brave Sir Robbin. | April 14, 2021 at 1:22 pm

      “Cops need to figure out who the enemy is and take sides.”

      They’ve already taken sides. It’s whatever side their paycheck is signed on.

    The Friendly Grizzly in reply to 2smartforlibs. | April 13, 2021 at 4:28 pm

    And, she will be re-elected. Easily. She won’t even need to cheat.

SeiteiSouther | April 13, 2021 at 10:15 am

That woman is denser than a singularity, and about as bright.

Pretty sure she didn’t think that statement all the way through to its logical conclusion:

No barricades, no military (armed NG in the thousands), no Capital Police in general and certainly no security details in DC.

I look forward to her and other d/progressives jumping on this bandwagon to cosponsor legislation removing the current militarized status in our Nation’s Capital.

Except, that is, for Trump supporters. Indefinite incarceration without bail for them. Just for starters.

These Dem/Left frauds never put their money where their mouth is. Tlaib and her fellow frauds have turned the Capitol into a paranoid Fort Apache. The razor wire and the actual militarization of DC needs to be the first thing to go.

No one mentions the likelihood the guy was stones on marijuana – like half the nation is now.

There are no legalized potheads in Communist China or Russia.

America is over. We need to get out while we can, befre our military is indoctrinated against us.

Secession NOW.

    henrybowman in reply to | April 14, 2021 at 1:28 pm

    “There are no legalized potheads in Communist China or Russia.”

    True. There are plenty in the Netherlands, Canada, and Uruguay.

    Once upon a time, I made a list of reasonably free places I could bug out to if the madness in the USA became unbearable. It was amazing how often the latter two lists lined up.

    And no, I’ve never used.

Subotai Bahadur | April 13, 2021 at 3:01 pm

The proper response to the call by Rep. Tlaib to disband the police would be first to disband the Capitol Police [a separate force larger than the DC city police]. If they want to, they can then bar DC police from the Capitol compound. Second, demilitarize by sending the military home, dismantling the fences and barriers. I have absolutely no problem with that.

Subotai Bahadur

This woman is a race-baiting fool and a charlatan.

So this cop, who has been on the force for 26 years, has been biding her time for a quarter-decade…waiting until possibly the WORST time to act on her supposedly racist feelings by shooting a black man.

Sure…makes a TON of sense, you ding-bat.

texansamurai | April 13, 2021 at 5:57 pm

from the video, appears the other two officers have the situation under control and are about to cuff the suspect–then she intervenes–why?

from the video, the suspect was a moment from being under control, did not appear to be an active threat/resisting arrest so why was force(especially lethal force)suddenly required upon her intervention?–did SHE feel threatened?

don’t care if the suspect was black/green/blue, whatever–he would likely be alive and in custody if she had not interfered in a lawful arrest procedure

she made a rookie(albeit a catastrophic)mistake–she does not need to be wearing a badge and carrying a weapon

Duante Wright had an outstanding warrant relating to a 2019 armed robbery. The ancient Greeks would have executed him not only for committing armed robbery but also for violating the sacred laws of hospitality. Unfortunately he was out on bail.

“Wright’s bail was originally set at $100,000 with orders that he should not contact the victim or any witnesses, refrain from drugs and alcohol and not have any weapons. A bond bailsman paid $40,000 for his release.
But his bail was revoked in July last year due to his ‘failure to not possess a firearm or ammunition’ and not keeping in touch with his probation officer, court papers show.
At that time a judge issued a warrant for his arrest, that was still outstanding on the day he died.”