The L.A. Times.
And who was the source of that info?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
The L.A. Times.
And who was the source of that info?
It is funny to me how people on here are so adamant about defending the second amendment, but could give a **** about the rest of the Bill of Rights
The L.A. Times.
- - - Updated - - -
I can't tell if you're being argumentative for poops and giggles or if you're just dense. What part of "the cops told him to leave the area and he chose not to" is hard to understand?
I will say that IMO, the cops should have tazed or peppered the dog, if possible. I don't know what the effects on stopping the dog would have been, but it would have been worth a try.
And as a sidenote:
http://intellihub.com/2013/07/02/dog-killer-cop-killed-man-with-down-syndrome-as-a-rookie/
- - - Updated - - -
Google is your friend.
So if the cops come into your yard and tell you to leave the area, you have to?
Sorry friend, but failure to obey what a cop tells you to do is not obstruction. Preventing a cop from performing his lawful duties is.
If he was a problem and in danger or causing danger, why did they not tell him to leave immediately?
If you think that you have to do everything a police officer tells you to do, you are the dense one.
And again, I don't believe everything that I read in the papers.
It's already been covered. Freedom of speech is limited, whether some of you choose to believe it or not. There are free political science classes people can take online. They're fun and informational.
I'm not the one in cuffs with a dead dog. Seems to be I'm on the right side of things.