Get ready boys & girls this is the type of behavior that is coming.


Those paying attention probably understand the need to have a second security camera that is well hidden watching the first security camera that people can see.

Also of course the importance of hardwired cameras that can't be jammed easily...
 
It's fine, they will do an investigation and everybody involved will be terminated immediately. Just you wait and see. All bullshit aside this is how tragic things happen, the owner legally comes out with a gun and bad stuff happens. This a breaking and entering at the least, what country do we live in this is straight out of a communist playbook.
 
It's fine, they will do an investigation and everybody involved will be terminated immediately. Just you wait and see. All bullshit aside this is how tragic things happen, the owner legally comes out with a gun and bad stuff happens. This a breaking and entering at the least, what country do we live in this is straight out of a communist playbook.
So, a confused homeowner comes out and does not realize who it is breaking in the door and starts shooting because no one has identified themselves and this would result in less government agents in the world.

Tragic for the homeowner because he will probably get charged with crap for defending himself and standing on the 3rd Amendment, once it becomes clear that it was g-men barging in.

I think the only reason they did not just find a handy bush is because then others would see how small their pee-pees are.
 
Its been my understanding they now had to squat to piss, based upon DEI getting implemented? Are my facts wrong?
You are correct and I stand corrected. I still think part of it is not wanting others to see the diminutive stature of their penises. Only so much embarrassment a guy can take.
 
Those paying attention probably understand the need to have a second security camera that is well hidden watching the first security camera that people can see.

Also of course the importance of hardwired cameras that can't be jammed easily...
And tripwires......many tripwires
m-18a1-claymore-mine-front-toward-enemy-mark-hendrickson-3755138409.jpg
 
This kind of behavior has always occurred, you just didn't have a way to document it like you do today, with everyone having surveillance systems, etc. This is why some agencies are still against the use of body-mounted cameras. They see it as a liability they don't want.

One tame example is how often K9s destroy or damage property during sweeps.

It can be as simple as a dog pissing on the floor to tearing apart furniture and even killing family pets and attacking people.

These incidents are rarely reported unless they're caught in the act, such as in this case. They knew what they were doing, they taped the cameras. It wasn't their first rodeo.
 
A direct violation of the Constitution, specifically the 3rd Amendment.

We shall not be required to, in peacetime or war time, to house and quarter troops.
While it would feel that way, SS has a lot of reach that the courts have backed. Such as warrantless security checks. They can enter your property without a warrant if it's viewed as required for national security, such as a presidential visit. United States v. (Edit deleted because it was the wrong case and I can't find the damn case now where a court ruled special circumstances allow warrantless search) would likely be case law for this particular situation. As it the court found that the entry was justified by the need to protect the Vice President and that this interest outweighed the 4th amendment rights involved.
 
Last edited:
While it would feel that way, SS has a lot of reach that the courts have backed. Such as warrantless security checks. They can enter your property without a warrant if it's viewed as required for national security, such as a presidential visit. United States v. Aguilar would likely be case law for this particular situation. As it the court found that the entry was justified by the need to protect the Vice President and that this interest outweighed the 4th amendment rights involved.

A campaign rally does not have national security implications
 
A campaign rally does not have national security implications
The safety of a VP does however regardless of event, rather it's right or wrong it's what the courts have ruled, and in the USA case law is king when it comes to interpreting and future Implementation of a law.

This would apply likely to the nominees such as Donald Trump and JD Vance due to their future as potentially head of state.

Personally I don't feel anyone should have access to your property without a warrant and just cause. But I don't enforce the rules.

Also I provided the wrong case, I was searching casetext and now I can't find the case I was looking for. Anyhow it's pretty well established. They can't go nuts, but in the immediate area they will search private property even if the owner doesn't consent. Most events however happen at designated areas where owners provide consent and are hosting the event in the first place, or it's a government controlled area.
 
Last edited:
So, a confused homeowner comes out and does not realize who it is breaking in the door and starts shooting because no one has identified themselves and this would result in less government agents in the world.

Tragic for the homeowner because he will probably get charged with crap for defending himself and standing on the 3rd Amendment, once it becomes clear that it was g-men barging in.

I think the only reason they did not just find a handy bush is because then others would see how small their pee-pees are.
the feds and locals have done such more than a few times. also,have killed people by no knocking the wrong house.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 232593
The safety of a VP does however regardless of event, rather it's right or wrong it's what the courts have ruled, and in the USA case law is king when it comes to interpreting and future Implementation of a law.

This would apply likely to the nominees such as Donald Trump and JD Vance due to their future as potentially head of state.

Personally I don't feel anyone should have access to your property without a warrant and just cause. But I don't enforce the rules.

Also I provided the wrong case, I was searching casetext and now I can't find the case I was looking for. Anyhow it's pretty well established. They can't go nuts, but in the immediate area they will search private property even if the owner doesn't consent. Most events however happen at designated areas where owners provide consent and are hosting the event in the first place, or it's a government controlled area.

The don’t have the right to seize property for their use just because they feel like having a rally there.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 232593 and BurtG


Nice one from Aus. The world over our Police have morphed into Seal Team Six copies.

As usual the comments will be around excusing their actions with the obligatory 'yeah but what did the bloke do to deserve this' statements.
Screenshot_20240812_115605_Chrome.jpg
Screenshot_20240812_115620_Chrome.jpg
 
Last edited:
This kind of behavior has always occurred, you just didn't have a way to document it like you do today, with everyone having surveillance systems, etc. This is why some agencies are still against the use of body-mounted cameras. They see it as a liability they don't want.

One tame example is how often K9s destroy or damage property during sweeps.

It can be as simple as a dog pissing on the floor to tearing apart furniture and even killing family pets and attacking people.

These incidents are rarely reported unless they're caught in the act, such as in this case. They knew what they were doing, they taped the cameras. It wasn't their first rodeo.
FTP

Fuck anyone that try’s to make excuses for their criminal behavior like you are appearing to do, too


“Don’t want cameras that will show is being criminal pieces of sbit “
If you ouija dog destroys property. You should pay for it.
 
Maybe the owners go to the SS building and leave a urinal deuce?

On a serious note I bet NONE of the fedboi LEs involved receives any sort of punishment for this shit (no pun intended)
 
  • Like
Reactions: BurtG
Kamalala needs to have a press conference to apologize for this:

“I want to apologize to the salon owner for the actions of my secret service protection detail who were only trying to do their job, which is first and foremost to protect the public, then myself and campaign staff. Believe me when I tell you, if I hadn’t made it to that toilet when I did, y’all would need a FEMA HAZMAT team over here. Fortunately, due to the training and quick thinking of my protection detail, my colon is unburdened by what has been. My campaign will pay for any damages. Thank you and make America great again!”
 
Looks like prosecutors are getting in on the crazy

 
  • Wow
Reactions: Big Phish