Snoofy. I'm the only one that does get it. That flag is about pride in their chosen profession. Period. Full stop.

Traitors don't get to define what it means.

I hope the NFL has to pay him millions.

78. You are assuming facts not in evidence.

What do you think should happen? Every cop on the country that doesn't agree with them should be totally vocal about their politics and their lack of support for what happened? Have you monitored every cops Facebook or other social media pages to see if they haven't done exactly that? Secondly, wouldn't that be a weird issue to single out even if they did speak out? Specifically addressing a few of them carrying police support flags is such a minor issue compared to what they did, I don't think they even need to address it as being stupid. The traitors proved that they held no support of law enforcement by attacking cops ... . That should be obvious to everyone.

... .,Black background with the line?

Is your only quibble that it is an altered American flag? Would it bother you if the flag was only a black background with the?

If so? I can see that. I think it's minor. But I can see it.

I don't know a single cop that flies the thin blue line flag over the American flag. Its not an in lieu of, it'sa separate deal. Unity, pride, and camaraderie in their profession. Most professional organizations have a symbol. Electricians, plumbers, etc ... all have a coat of arms, often affixed to a flag and flown at meetings in conjunction with the US flag. Just because the thin blue line is easily recognizable And widespread in its support among non members of law enforcement, doesn't immediately make it evil.

And the traitors from January 6? The ones that beat cops with thin blue line flags? I will never cede them any authority or power over defining a roll of toilet paper. They only get the power we allow them to have. Eff them.

Absolutely nothing.

Just like there isn't anything wrong with the thin blue line putting a blue line on an American flag and using it to spread solidarity among cops.

Or firefighters using a red line for their own purposes, or yellow for medics? Or green for military members ... . And etc ...

I mean you tell me what's the big deal. You tell me why the fringe idiots get to have so much power that they get to be the sole definition of what symbols mean. Why are you giving them the power they crave? They are losers and have no power to change anything.

Oh please. Quit being such a wuss. The flag can withstand being abrogated into a similar symbol to a different purpose without being the end of the world.

Oh no! A guy wearing a greenpeace t short is a serial murderer. Greenpeace and its symbol are completely ruined and it's totally evil!!!

It's ridiculous. The thin blue line, and it's application to a Flag are totally innocuous and symbol of law enforcement unity.

These losers that carry them don't get to define what the symbol means.

Just because some jerk insurrectionist steals a perfectly good and acceptable symbol, doesn't make it a traitors symbol. The American flag has been held by traitors and used as a shield by the worst offenders. But that doesn't change its meaning.

The thin blue line is a 7 decade old symbol of unity of police. No different than any other professions symbols.

The requirement to ship to an FFL has ZERO stipulation that it applies only for those shipped as interstate commerce. That is a federal law that has ATF jurisdiction regardless of local cooperation or not. Even if it is dropped in the mail from the north end of the state to the southern end, or even across town, ATF can arrest and prosecute for violations. Who cares if the locals cooperate or not, except to save fed man hours?

No matter the reason this is a hollow and stupid gesture.

#50 I don't know what you think I'm missing. I'm not. Federal agents can enforce federal laws. Local police can NOT. Will they cease cooperating, meh. It's not as often as anyone thinks they are working hand in hand. Unless it's on a task force where the locals have been federally deputized. They can pull all of those guys out, and have very little impact on the enforcement of federal law.

In terms of "invalidating" any federal law? He can't.

It's like the Governor has never heard of the Supremacy clause. A state can't invalidate ANYTHING federal. Such an empty gesture.

#5 And snoofy, show us on the doll where the thin blue line flag ... . that has been in use for 7 decades ... hurt you.

Assuming his license was valid and he wasn't committing a felony at the time, he would still be a murderer. You don't get to just fire through a "locked and secured" (the shooters words!) for almost ANY reason. If he saw the guy with a gun at any point, or the guy was actively kicking the door down or trying to pry the door off the hinges, I can see it. But the guy admitted the door was locked and secured and just started throwing lead through it? Nope. Active license or no, he deserves the murder charge.

Wow. You are a seriously hyperventilating over him "juggling the door handle" the night before? That's a quote by the way.

The owner has video on the door. Since he can see the door, and no mention was made of ooh, I don't know "the perp stepped to use a crowbar to pry the door off to the hinges" or "used a sledge hammer to smash the door in" , no he just showed up the next day and checked to see if it was locked for all the police report and charging document read. At no time was he an imminent threat or forcing his way in ... . Unless some VERY A SIGNIFICANT facts come out.

And again. You are reading facts not in evidence. Talk about adding your feelings. What attempt to unlawfully enter was made beyond jiggling the door handle? Again, forceful entry would have taken burglary tools ... . No mention of that ... imminent threat would have meant armed ... . No mention of that ... and the owner even admitted the door was locked AND SECURED at the moment he fired through said locked door. So again, not meeting any of the requirements set forth in the law. Touching the door handle doesn't constitute forced entry.

They have video, remember? If he had burglary tools and were actively trying to break the doors down they would SEE and record it. But if none of that is on video, your assertion he can still claim self defense is stupid. And wrong.

Methinks it doesn't say what you think it says. That hole in the law allows for charging MURDER 1. And is considered and automatic exclusion for a self defense claim. It doesn't mean that everything would have been fine and he wouldn't be facing murder 2 or manslaughter claims.

But keep thinking stand your ground laws apply when you aren't facing a threat.

"The guy behind me at Lowe's keeps invading my personal space and put his paint on the belt before I did! Boom! I'm standing my ground!"

Except I am challenging your idiotic assumption you can shoot through a locked door and think it's okay in ANY situation. Can you get THAT through your head? My example stands. No mention of burglary tools or armed. If someone walks up to your front door any time of day and you see on the ring doorbell they touched the door handle, and you shoot through the door, you are going to be rightfully arrested in ANY jurisdiction. Period. You can't stand your ground against something that ISN'T a threat.

#50 I know more about guns and have been around them more than you could ever imagine. You don't get to shoot blindly through a LOCKED door. You call the police and report and active trespasser and attempted break in. If you think they are ACTUALLY getting through the door that statement would have been made loud and clear to the police and been in the report. If the guy that was shot was armed and/or had burglary tools and was trying to smash through the door at the time he was shot, that ALSO would have been loud and clear in the report. None of those three mitigating factors exist. He deserves every bit of the murder charges he is facing.

How can he be "breaking in" if the owner, who shot him, admits the door was locked and Secure when he fired through it?!?!

So "jiggling " the door handle two nights in a row is "attempting to break in" and completely justified by Oklahoma law? Please.

You're wrong and you know it.

#36. So if someone knocks on your door at 1 am And touches the door handle, it's open season to shoot through the door?

That's literally the stupidest thing I've ever heard. And there is no way that's true.

"Bratcher admitted to police that the door was "locked and secured" when he started shooting. "

Uh ... . That's murder. He couldn't even get through the door and into the business? Owner is in no danger? Kills him through said locked door? Yeah, that's murder.