Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News

Drudge Retort

User Info


Subscribe to rstybeach11's blog Subscribe


Special Features

Thursday, July 02, 2020

As if the death toll of COVID-19 weren't bad enough, a new study estimates that the true number of U.S. fatalities linked to the pandemic is up to 28% higher than the official tally. read more

Tuesday, June 30, 2020

Top officials in the White House were aware in early 2019 of classified intelligence indicating Russia was secretly offering bounties to the Taliban for the deaths of Americans, a full year earlier than has been previously reported, according to U.S. officials with direct knowledge of the intelligence. read more

Friday, June 26, 2020

The Department of Justice confirmed the existence of a legal memorandum penned by the Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) outlining the department's rationale for declining to charge President Donald Trump with obstruction of justice based on the Mueller Report. However, the DOJ is refusing to provide the legal justification OLC relied upon in reaching the conclusion that there was insufficient evidence to charge Trump, only releasing a heavily redacted version of the memo after protracted litigation.

Friday, June 12, 2020

Nearly three months after Louisville, Kentucky police shot and killed Breonna Taylor while serving a no-knock warrant at her home, the Metro Council unanimously passed a comprehensive ban on no-knock police raids. Earlier in the day, all 26 members of the Council signed on as co-sponsors to the ordinance, which is entitled "Breonna's Law." They voted on it Thursday evening. read more

There's a catch if you want to attend President Donald Trumps first rally since the pandemic: You can't sue the president if you contract the coronavirus while cheering him on. "By attending the Rally, you and any guests voluntarily assume all risks related to exposure to COVID-19 and agree not to hold Donald J. Trump for President, Inc.; BOK Center; ASM Global; or any of their affiliates, directors, officers, employees, agents, contractors, or volunteers liable for any illness or injury," reads the waiver which appears on the Trump campaign's website when you sign up for tickets. read more



I've been following our comments about this matter and find you to be far more convincing.

And you're suggestions have been corroborated on other websites that I frequent.

The couple in question had no reasonable fear of their lives. If they had, they would not have exposed themselves (barefoot and all) beyond the walls of their refuge. The idea that they were attempting to protect their property is based on the hypothetical that the protesters exhibited violence, which the only evidence suggesting that happened involved a gate at the entrance to the community. Was the couple aware of the gate's destruction prior to walking out of the house? Sincere question, that would justify a modicum of fear. But even so, that justification is swiped away the minute they step foot outside of their confines pointing weapons at people. I'll explain more on this point in a minute...

No matter what right you have to 'protect your property,' your egregious actions must be justifiable based on a reasonable sense of fear. A comparison to the liquor store owners during the L.A. riots is an apt comparison here to illustrate how the situations are apples and oranges. Liquor store owners had seen the rash of looting and destruction leading up to their decision to take action. Stores around their businesses had already been looted and burned, reasonably justifying their sense of fear. This situation had no such context for the couple to consider. The only sense of danger they had came from what they were watching on TV that was taking place outside of their community. They made an immediate association, that was based on hyperbole, that influenced their reaction.

It's one thing to walk outside of your protective confines with an AR-15 slung over your shoulder (many anti-quarantine protesters proved this), just observing the group walking by. It's a totally different situation to hold your weapon at the ready, engaging in taunts with the crowd, and occasionally pointing the weapon at the people. That's not reasonable behavior as a reaction to reasonable fear.

I ask, please someone, convince me otherwise.

Drudge Retort

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2020 World Readable