The Texas Biker Gang Shoot-Out
gq.com
gq.com
I had my run with the law that disenchanted me. I saw a city worker stealing mail. I was laughed at by the police officer and almost charged for wrongfully calling 911. City worker tried slamming their car door in my face while I was talking to the officer, and the officer laughed again. I just walked away at that point.
The head of the grand jury is obvious bias. The imprisonments for 'being present' are insane. A blanket bail that is an unreasonable amount is odd. The false propaganda that biker gangs from all over the USA were flooding towards Waco with terrorist weapons was just a blatant lie.
Tip or not, why was full swat basically waiting in the parking lot before the event? Any other day, they wouldn't care if a few <insert anything not living in Hewitt> picked each other off in the parking lot. If they had a feeling something was going down, why not be proactive instead of reactive?
House taxes rise, school budgets cut, service cuts, and dodgy press release guy gets a promotion. yay. At least Baylor made a new shiny stadium to distract the general population.
Edit: Oh yeah, the current 'Waco Warrant Roundup' posted names of everyone with known warrants in the county. They're pulling over everyone and running warrant searches. Seems unlawful. I got pulled over and warrant checked because of 'loose articles in truckbed'. It was a bloody tie down strap that was hooked to the truck.
Hate lawyers and law schools if you want, but they have their time and place. The problem here seams not that officers broke the law, but that they seem not to have any understanding of the law in the first place. Instead of planning and deliberation, they were all showboating against each other. The whole incident reads like a script for Lethal Weapon IV.
The bottom line is three gangs met that day. Two of them without an official mandate.
The article builds a timeline of events that is outside the official story. I appreciate that you recognize the police are a gang, but the article is trying to cover some specific things, not generalities.
Imagine being in an IRC channel with a 200 people and 10 of them got into a fight, presumably hacked each other, and than everyone in the channel is arrested on felony charges, and sent to jail with $100,000 bonds. Allegedly there may have been provocation and excessive weapons use by the police posing as members of rival groups.
This is the real problem. The police operate on a blank check principle and are held to zero accountability. The taxpayers are the real victims here.
It's the taxpayers that are giving them that blank check in the first place. They're not victims, they're complicit.
https://www.google.com/search?q=waco+population&ie=utf-8&oe=...
Given what happened (a chaotic firefight at a bar) I would expect a great many conflicting stories to emerge. That's what happens in chaotic situations. So the conflicting accounts from the various biker/bystander groups is in a way a confirmation of the events. It is the police's polished and consistent narrative that seems out of place.
Since we're over 4 months later, I'm not sure how they're still being held without trial. Criminal thugs or not, they MUST have their day in court and the opportunity to defend themselves.
Or the system is all a sham after all..
Roadhouse? As in Logan's Roadhouse? As in the Chili's of the great plains? That stabbing happened in a Logan's Roadhouse parking lot, not the Road House where James Dalton bounced. This is a fascinating story, but it loses some credibility (to me) with a purposeful omission like that.
The Hell's Angels and such have been around forever, but I never much heard about them until a couple of years ago.
Are people watching _Sons of Anarchy_ and saying, "I want to join an outlaw biker gang?", and hence "on the rise" as you put it? I dunno, when _Goodfellas_ or _The Sopranos_ came out, did the mafia start to be "on the rise"? No. Such things might get more attention by the media when the topic comes out in popular media, which might sell more ads, so more stories are produced.
> and there's a viable theory they were just waiting for an excuse
But is there a viable theory that the police started the shooting?
If you're going to start a shootout in town, and the police are there in force to try to stop that from happening, and you start a shootout anyway, and the police shoot you to get you to stop shooting other people, well... I don't have much room for feeling like the police are out of control there.
If you have evidence that says that I misunderstood the way events happened, feel free to correct my understanding...
What we do have is narratives from bikers present, and some photographic evidence that raises doubts about who started it. There's a lot to discuss/research, so I'll just give you a couple links as major starting points. I'm not saying whether I agree/accept the theories or not, just that we don't have enough definitive evidence to support or deny the conspiracy theory.
Short version: police snipers were already positioned, an undercover agent either started something or was "made", a fight was provoked and police were strangely quick to start firing.
http://www.breitbart.com/texas/2015/05/19/biker-truthers-eme... http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2015/05/27/waco-twin-pea...
(Please don't launch into criticizing the messengers; this is about the message.)
unless you were a tax payer funded gang with no accountability and were heavily armed
The devil is in the details. I think that most people would happen to agree, but I don't approve of e.g. capital punishment or arresting based on being associated with a gang involved in criminal activity. These kinds of reactions don't just affect the current generation, they affect that generation's kids. Only rehabilitation of the parents is likely to seriously improve their lives, IMHO.
Did you get that from the article, or do you have additional sources? The article had one photo of a Christian biker (or rather, one photo of a biker and the caption said he was with a Christian club). The caption did not say that he (or others with the club) were at Twin Peaks, nor did the article mention them whatsoever. Or did I miss something?
To me, it seemed really odd, like the article was trying to say "see, some of these bikers are really decent people" and imply that some of them were there at Twin Peaks that day, when they really weren't.
Apparent trick questions make me nervous.
I'm wondering what those folks did to deserve removal from society without question.
The guy probably did it as a pseudo-legal way of punishing folks for being in a MC, without going through the hassle of due process. As they say, you can beat the rap, but you can't beat the ride. In his mind, the bikers were all guilty of "contempt of Waco".
A Texas JP is allowed to institute penalties for contempt of a maximum of $100 and 3 days in jail. They can set bail, but their authority to try cases is limited to misdemeanor offenses punishable only by fines, and civil disputes less than $10k. Given the situation, the JP should have called upon a real judge--or actually several real judges--to process the 177 in custody.
It's the government legislation of morality that empowers outlaws and it will never end so long as human beings like to fuck and get high.
Edit: s/causes these things/empowers outlaws/
Take people out because someone says they're bad. That's not.