Whodathunkit - Little Old Provo

[smac97]

7 minutes ago, bsjkki said:

New live stream. https://www.facebook.com/ksltv/videos/2339028793069251

 

Amazing how civil these protesters are when there are police out in force and also substantial numbers of armed citizens.

[Duncan]

3 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

It might help dissuade them to know there have been arrests and charges made. 
 

Things quieted down PDQ in Salt Lake City after they arrested and charged some of the rioters who overturned the police car. 
 

Calling for the defunding of police at times like these is beyond idiocy. It is outrageously irresponsible. 

The Church has been saying the same thing for decades now what is termed "defunding the police", i.e. breakdown of the family equals increase in violence and weakening of societal restraints. President Hinckley said in conference 1975, "additional billions for increased police forces and larger prisons"-He was quoting from an article. Defunding the police doesn't mean disbanding it, it just means money could be better spent elsewhere. In the POF in 1995 we read, "Further, we warn that the disintegration of the family will bring upon individuals, communities, and nations the calamities foretold by ancient and modern prophets."

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/1975/10/opposing-evil?lang=eng

[bsjkki]

This live stream has a chill vibe. The cops are not in riot gear and the protesters are not blocking traffic. Much better night. https://www.facebook.com/KUTV2News/videos/299118094536057

*I saw this in Denver too. The protests were de-escalated. I think this has a lot to do with the cities and protest organizers working together behind the scenes.

 

Edited July 2, 2020 by bsjkki

[Duncan]

1 hour ago, smac97 said:

Amazing how civil these protesters are when there are police out in force and also substantial numbers of armed citizens.

would you be bothered if the armed citizens were protestors? Does US gun laws differentiate between a someone who is pro BLM or a someone who is against BLM? 

Edited July 2, 2020 by Duncan

[Calm]

35 minutes ago, bsjkki said:

*I saw this in Denver too. The protests were de-escalated. I think this has a lot to do with the cities and protest organizers working together behind the scenes.

I got the impression (from very limited info of course)the organizer who got them to efficiently disband last night was pretty savvy about her people, so very smart if city/police are working with her and others. 

Edited July 2, 2020 by Calm

[smac97]

49 minutes ago, Duncan said:

would you be bothered if the armed citizens were protestors?

Nonviolent, law-abiding protesters?  No, I would not mind that.

49 minutes ago, Duncan said:

Does US gun laws differentiate between a someone who is pro BLM or a someone who is against BLM? 

US law differentiates based on conduct.

Thanks,

Smac

[InCognitus]

1 hour ago, Duncan said:

The Church has been saying the same thing for decades now what is termed "defunding the police", i.e. breakdown of the family equals increase in violence and weakening of societal restraints. President Hinckley said in conference 1975, "additional billions for increased police forces and larger prisons"-He was quoting from an article. Defunding the police doesn't mean disbanding it, it just means money could be better spent elsewhere. In the POF in 1995 we read, "Further, we warn that the disintegration of the family will bring upon individuals, communities, and nations the calamities foretold by ancient and modern prophets."

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/1975/10/opposing-evil?lang=eng

Long ago when I was studying some of the anti-Mormon claims against Joseph Smith as a so-called "false prophet", I took a long hard look at section 87 of the Doctrine and Covenants.  Ever since that time there is a portion of that section that has always stuck in my mind.  The prophesy sets the stage by telling us it is speaking "concerning the wars" (emphasis on the plural) that would begin with the United States Civil war, and the events that follow that seem to lead up to the two world wars ("war shall be poured out upon all nations").  That takes us up though verse 3.  All of that seems to be history to us now, and perhaps even verse 4.  But it's verses 5-7 that have always stuck in my mind, but I'll start with verse 4, since it seems to indicate a longer passage of time ("after many days"):

Quote

4 And it shall come to pass, after many days, slaves shall rise up against their masters, who shall be marshaled and disciplined for war.
5 And it shall come to pass also that the remnants who are left of the land will marshal themselves, and shall become exceedingly angry, and shall vex the Gentiles with a sore vexation.
6 And thus, with the sword and by bloodshed the inhabitants of the earth shall mourn; and with famine, and plague, and earthquake, and the thunder of heaven, and the fierce and vivid lightning also, shall the inhabitants of the earth be made to feel the wrath, and indignation, and chastening hand of an Almighty God, until the consumption decreed hath made a full end of all nations;
7 That the cry of the saints, and of the blood of the saints, shall cease to come up into the ears of the Lord of Sabaoth, from the earth, to be avenged of their enemies.
8 Wherefore, stand ye in holy places, and be not moved, until the day of the Lord come; for behold, it cometh quickly, saith the Lord. Amen.
(Doctrine and Covenants 87:4–8)

I have long pondered the meaning of verse 5, and I brought up this verse in this forum in January in response to a post that was made on Mormon 5:24 because it has similar language.  But there is a lot more to think about now given the context of what it says in verse 6.  So if I were to guess, these verses would be included in the "modern prophets" portion of the "calamities foretold" quote you gave from the Proclamation on the Family. 

Are we there yet?

Edited July 2, 2020 by InCognitus

[USU78]

21 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Nonviolent, law-abiding protesters?  No, I would not mind that.

US law differentiates based on conduct.

Thanks,

Smac

Except does it really in actual practice? {ducks for cover}

[bsjkki]

25 minutes ago, USU78 said:

Except does it really in actual practice? {ducks for cover}

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/aug/21/black-open-carry-activists-protest-police-brutalit/?espv=1

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.detroitnews.com/amp/5275209002

https://www.gainesvilletimes.com/news/politics/pro-gun-rally-thousands-virginia-ends-peacefully/

In the past, maybe not. Now? Yes.

Edited July 2, 2020 by bsjkki

[USU78]

5 minutes ago, bsjkki said:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/aug/21/black-open-carry-activists-protest-police-brutalit/?espv=1

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.detroitnews.com/amp/5275209002

https://www.gainesvilletimes.com/news/politics/pro-gun-rally-thousands-virginia-ends-peacefully/

In the past, maybe not. Now? Yes.

Thanks for that!

[alter idem]

10 hours ago, smac97 said:

Seems odd that protesters were allowed to take over the streets.  I would expect better of Provo PD.

Or if a permit was pulled, if the "time, place and manner" restrictions were observed?

Seems unlikely that Provo City would authorize a protest involving walking in the middle of the streets, accosting and swarming passing motorists, throwing objects, preventing motorists from passing, shooting at motorists, etc.

Peaceful protests need to be well and truly peaceful.  Not kinda sorta.  Not "Hey, we were just obstructing traffic, swarming and menacing passersby, throwing object and passing vehicles, etc."

Thanks,

-Smac

Mayor Kaufusi claimed the police response was 'inadequate'. I wonder..why is that, Mayor? Could it be they were told to let the protestors have more latitude,  like so many other foolish mayors of other cities,  who've let these protests turn into riots? I hope this will be looked into and local government officials who make poor decisions will answer for it.

Protests should not block traffic, protestors should not be vandalizing, attacking cars and terrorizing bystanders.  Organizers should be vetted and they should be required to work to keep their protests following guidelines for safety in the community. They have a responsibility, just as local officials do, to protect local citizens and their rights as well.

[Thinking]

Quote

 

Police have arrested two people on Tuesday in connection with a shooting during a protest in downtown Provo.

Jesse Taggart, a 33-year-old Salt Lake City resident, and Samantha Darling, a 27-year-old from Ogden, were taken into custody at the Utah County Jail, Provo Police reported on Twitter.

 

Outsiders looking to stir up trouble.

I watched as many of the videos as I could. It seems that the vehicles are initially trying to gently encourage the "protesters" to move by slowly nudging forward. I don't blame the driver who was shot for speeding away AFTER he was shot. The protesters seem to think it's OK to block traffic and that the drivers should be OK with it.

The police should have been there to tell the protesters to leave the drivers alone.

[Rajah Manchou]

1 hour ago, alter idem said:

Mayor Kaufusi claimed the police response was 'inadequate'. I wonder..why is that, Mayor? Could it be they were told to let the protestors have more latitude,  like so many other foolish mayors of other cities,  who've let these protests turn into riots? I hope this will be looked into and local government officials who make poor decisions will answer for it.

Protests should not block traffic, protestors should not be vandalizing, attacking cars and terrorizing bystanders.  Organizers should be vetted and they should be required to work to keep their protests following guidelines for safety in the community. They have a responsibility, just as local officials do, to protect local citizens and their rights as well.

If the police response is adequate, then why do armed citizens feel the need to go down their with AR15s around their necks to "keep the peace"? Why not stay home with their guns locked up in a gun cabinet and let the well-funded police do their job?

[Scott Lloyd]

6 hours ago, Rajah Manchou said:

If the police response is adequate, then why do armed citizens feel the need to go down their with AR15s around their necks to "keep the peace"? Why not stay home with their guns locked up in a gun cabinet and let the well-funded police do their job?

Hmm. Could it be having been force-fed a steady diet of unchecked lawlessness in the news for the past month served up by feckless, “woke“ politicians? I’ll reiterate: If people get the idea their government can’t or won’t protect them, they’ll arm themselves and take care of business themselves. 

Edited July 2, 2020 by Scott Lloyd

[smac97]

On 7/2/2020 at 1:29 AM, Rajah Manchou said:

If the police response is adequate,

"If."

We've seen plenty of instances of local political leaders pandering to lawless protesters and rioters.  We've seen plenty of instances of local political leaders vilifying law enforcement, issuing "stand down" orders, and so on.  See here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here.

Quote

then why do armed citizens feel the need to go down their with AR15s around their necks to "keep the peace"?

Because we cannot always trust politicians' willingness to keep the peace, nor can we always rely on law enforcement's ability to keep the peace.

Did you notice a distinct difference between A) the lawless, wantonly and arbitrarily violent "protests" on Monday in Provo, and B) the calm, ordered protests that occurred in Provo last night?  Elsewhere, violent protests have been serial in nature.  In Provo, the city government, and law enforcement, and law-abiding citizens stood up and made it clear that violence was not an acceptable part of protests.  A key feature of this clarity was . . . armed law enforcement and armed citizenry.

See here:

Quote

PROVO, Utah (KUTV) — Two protests converged in Provo on Wednesday night. The gatherings were peaceful, but were brought on in part by a shooting earlier this week.

Police, protesters and counter-protesters lined Center Street, with different groups on either side of the road. Through speeches, chants, and marches it all remained peaceful. But to understand tonight, it helps to understand what happened in Provo on Monday night.

Les Harward came from Delta, Utah to be a part of the counter-protest Wednesday night. He told 2News:

Quote

“I generally have a weapon with me, but last night, up here three blocks away, these protesters stopped a vehicle, and when the man tried to get through, they shot him. That’s why I’m here tonight. That is not going to happen in my state and my town."

I think Utahns have seek feckless responses to riots and violent protests elsewhere, and decided to stand up and take lawful measures to minimize the risk of such things recurring here.

Note that nobody tried to stop last night's peaceful protests. Nobody has a beef with lawful protests (I am really curious if last night's protest group, or Monday's group (they may be the same) received deferential treatment from Provo City).

Quote

But John Sullivan, with Insurgence USA, which organized Wednesday night's protest, said the gathering was in part to decry the violence earlier in the week.

“After seeing the violence yesterday, or the day before yesterday, and everything that transpired that day, it came to my realization that this place needed it the most. Because nowhere in Salt Lake City have I seen that just blatant hatred people trying to run people over. Just disrespectful," Sullivan said.

Sullivan is a special kind of mendacious idiot.  The kind that encourages lawless mobs to take over the streets, swarm passing motorists, stop them from traveling, throw objects at them, swear and scream at them, menace them, and then turn around and claim victim status when motorists try to escape the mob violence incited by Sullivan, and also accuse the victims of the mob of "hatred."

Quote

Accounts differ on the events of Monday night’s protest in Provo. Some say a person tried to drive into a group of protesters, and was then shot. Police say the driver was trying to turn onto Center Street, when protesters surrounded the vehicle, and one shot the driver.

There is what happened, and then there is the spin-doctored crapola being peddled by Sullivan and his fellow lawless thugs.

An older man did nothing but happen to be driving through downtown Provo.  He encountered a lawless mob, who swarmed his vehicle and surrounded and stopped his vehicle.  Faced with a screaming mob, he tried to get away, at which point a thug in the mob took out a gun and shot him.  The man, now wounded, drove away, only to be shot at again by the same thug.

Quote

The incident led to tonight’s protest and counter-protest.

“We’re not here to escalate, we’re not here to intimidate, we are just simply here to let it be known that you can’t just destroy, wantonly, America. No more," Harward said.

That seems like a pretty . . . American thing to say.  We are appreciative of government.  We are glad it's there.  But we don't particularly trust it.  We don't rely 100% on its ability, willingness, and/or competency to do its job.  We have, or should have, a strong streak of self-reliance.  And yes, that includes protecting ourselves.  And yes, protecting ourselves can include arming ourselves.

It's also a fairly Latter-day Saint thing to say:

• "Behold, I send you forth as sheep in the midst of wolves: be ye therefore wise as serpents, and harmless as doves."  (Matt. 10:16)
   
• "And Alma, and Ammon, and their brethren, and also the two sons of Alma returned to the land of Zarahemla, after having been instruments in the hands of God of bringing many of the Zoramites to repentance; and as many as were brought to repentance were driven out of their land; but they have lands for their inheritance in the land of Jershon, and they have taken up arms to defend themselves, and their wives, and children, and their lands."  (Alma 35:14)
   
• "And again, the Lord has said that: Ye shall defend your families even unto bloodshed. Therefore for this cause were the Nephites contending with the Lamanites, to defend themselves, and their families, and their lands, their country, and their rights, and their religion."  (Alma 43:47)
   
• "And Moroni was a strong and a mighty man; he was a man of a perfect understanding; yea, a man that did not delight in bloodshed; a man whose soul did joy in the liberty and the freedom of his country, and his brethren from bondage and slavery; Yea, a man whose heart did swell with thanksgiving to his God, for the many privileges and blessings which he bestowed upon his people; a man who did labor exceedingly for the welfare and safety of his people.  Yea, and he was a man who was firm in the faith of Christ, and he had sworn with an oath to defend his people, his rights, and his country, and his religion, even to the loss of his blood.  Now the Nephites were taught to defend themselves against their enemies, even to the shedding of blood if it were necessary; yea, and they were also taught never to give an offense, yea, and never to raise the sword except it were against an enemy, except it were to preserve their lives."  (Alma 48:11-14)

We not only have the right to defend ourselves and our families and our communities, we have the affirmative ethical and moral duty and obligation to do so.  To abdicate that duty is a profound act of cowardice.

Quote

Sullivan said the gathering was meant to be peaceful.

Quote

“It is unacceptable to hurt other people, and violence does not make that better. It only incites more violence from both sides. A peaceful message is a good way to go about it.”

Again, Sullivan is a medacious idiot.  He incited a mob.  He didn't hold a peaceful protest in a city park or on the steps of city hall.  He took his thugs to the streets, where they blocked traffic, threatened and menaced and actually assaulted passing motorists, even culminating in an attempted murder.

I hope Sullivan is arrested and charged.  And that he does a very long prison sentence.  Those who deliberately incite violence should be extensively and visibly punished under the law.

Quote

Why not stay home with their guns locked up in a gun cabinet and let the well-funded police do their job?

Most people did.  But what's wrong with what people like Les Harward did?

Thanks,

-Smac

Edited July 4, 2020 by smac97

[alter idem]

6 hours ago, Rajah Manchou said:

If the police response is adequate, then why do armed citizens feel the need to go down their with AR15s around their necks to "keep the peace"? Why not stay home with their guns locked up in a gun cabinet and let the well-funded police do their job?

I'm not sure you read carefully.  It was a protester who brought a gun to what was supposed to be a peaceful event. The masked gunman was apparently provoked to shoot a driver who's only crime was trying to maneuver through a crowd of people blocking the road he was driving on. 

My criticism of mayor kaufusi is if she's trying to divert blame to police when, imo, it's most likely she's the one who ordered an 'inadequate' police response, by not anticipating these protestors are unpredictable. She could have believed that an 'adequate' police presence would anger the protestors and get them more riled up.  This has been the thinking of some mayors (let the protestors act out their pent up anger and it will blow over quick)  and it had the opposite effect.imo

[smac97]

15 hours ago, Raingirl said:

Sounds like the so-called protests that have been happening here in Portland every night for over a month  

I am glad that we’ve been working remotely and will continue to do so for the foreseeable future. We’re just a couple of blocks from the center of the protests and traveling to and from work would be impossible. Not to mention dangerous. I’ve been caught in previous protests and it’s terrifying. 

As it is, we’re repairing damage on almost a daily basis. 

I am sorry to hear you are in such a difficult situation.

[alter idem]

Those who claimed a driver plowed into protestors so he was shot? Was he driving on the sidewalk? Roads are for cars, sidewalks are for people and protestors are no exception.  What the video showed was not a crazy driver trying to mow over protestors, so these guys are lying to defend this egregious act of violence.   And shooting the driver is not justified anyway! You take down the license  (take a picture with your phones, idiots) and report it. As a civilized society,  we don't condone vigilante justice, right?  

[smac97]

I just sent the following email to Mayor Kaufusi and all members of the Provo City Council:

Quote

From: Spencer Macdonald <--->
Date: Thu, Jul 2, 2020 at 10:20 AM
Subject: Riot in Provo
To: Mayor Michelle Kaufusi <michelle@provo.org>
Cc: Bill Fillmore <bfillmore@provo.org>, George Handley <georgebhandley@gmail.com>, Shannon Ellsworth <shellsworth@provo.org>, Travis Hoban <travis4provo@gmail.com>, David Harding <dharding@provo.org>, Dave Sewell <davesewellprovo@gmail.com>, David Shipley <dshipley@provo.org>

 

 

Mayor Kaufusi,

 

I am writing to express my deep concern about recent events in Provo.  On the evening of June 30, I heard my daughter walking out the door of our home in Provo.  I asked where she was going, and she said "Just on a walk with my friend around the temple."  I responded "Well, you'll need to go to the Provo Temple because there were violent protests near the City Center temple, including an attempted murder by one of the protesters.  So you'll need to avoid downtown tonight."

I never thought I'd need to be giving such cautionary instruction to my kids.

Now that the dust has settled on the lawless and violent "protest" on Monday, June 29, and the much improved and law-abiding protest on Wednesday, July 1, I think it's time to start asking questions of the government of Provo City.

What.  Just.  Happened?  

Let's start with Chief Ferguson (I can't find his email, so I'm sending them to you and asking that you forward this email to him).  Chief, why was a violent mob allowed to take over the streets of downtown Provo on June 29?  Where were the police?  I've watched numerous videos of Monday's "protest," some of which were taken by the thugs themselves (this one, posted on Facebook, is nearly fifteen minutes long).  I didn't see any police presence.  No boys in blue.  No police vehicles.  No flashing lights.  Why is that?  Why was this allowed to happen?  The "protest" culminated in an attempted murder of a passing motorist.  But along with that there were mobs of protesters taking over the streets, stopping traffic, shouting obscenities and screaming at passing motorists.  Some protesters stood directly in front of cars, and some actually went "hands on" and banged on the stopped vehicles, rocked them back and forth, threw objects at them, climbed on hoods, and so on.  Where were your officers during all this?

Next, I am asking you to answer some questions.  

Question #1: Mayor, you have publicly said that Provo's police response was "inadequate."  Well, let's look at that.  Why were police not out in force on Monday?  We've seen countless instances in other municipalities of feckless local politicians hindering law enforcement through "stand down" orders and such.  Did that happen here?  Was Chief Ferguson given any instruction by any representative of your administration to accord any sort of special treatment to Monday's protesters?  If so, what were those instructions?  Who issued them?  To whom?  When?  How?

Question #2: Did Provo City know about Monday's protest beforehand?  If not, why not?  How is it that hundreds of protesters knew to converge in downtown Provo at a specific time and place, but nobody working for Provo City or its police department was aware until after the fact?

Question #3: If Provo City did know about Monday's protest beforehand, did it require the protest's leaders to go through the permitting process for "special events" ("protests" are specifically designated as such by Provo City)?

Question #4: If Provo City A) knew about Monday's protest beforehand and B) did not require it to have a permit, why not?  Why would your administration allow an unsanctioned, unlawful protest to take place in downtown Provo?  Aren't you watching the news?  Haven't you seen how many of these protests have turned violent?

Provo City has an extensive list of requirements for "special events."  A 90-day application period, a review fee, a "Road Closure Petition," compliance with noise ordinances (or an exemption therefrom), a "medical plan," insurance and indemnification agreements, a map detailing the location of the event, special approval for holding an event downtown, a "Traffic Control Plan," rental of traffic control devices "from a licensed barricade company," barricades "at all intersections where full street closures are planned," police officers "at all intersections that are controlled by a traffic light," and more.  

I think it is pretty obvious that none of this happened on Monday night.  Mayor, why is that?

As a resident of Provo, I request a very public, very detailed accounting of what the government of Provo City did, and did not, do prior to the violent protest in downtown Provo on June 29.

 

Thank you,

 

Spencer Macdonald

Thanks,

-Smac

[Raingirl]

1 hour ago, smac97 said:

I am sorry to hear you are in such a difficult situation.

We have it easy compared to businesses who, while already heavily impacted by Covid, are now dealing with property damage and looting. I have lost 20% of my income due to Covid, but that’s nothing compared to what others are going through.

I don’t think a day goes by anymore that I don’t hear of yet another business that managed to hang on during Covid, but have now permanently closed because the damage done by the rioters was not financially survivable on top of previous losses.

Can someone explain how stealing designer bags and Apple computers rectifies racial injustice?

Our county was finally allowed to partially re-open a couple of weeks ago, yet there are businesses in the protest zone who cannot, because it is simply not safe to do so. When “protestors” try to burn down police buildings with people inside, no one is safe.

I am continuing to work from home not only to help protect myself from Covid, but also to protect myself from “protestors”.

 

[strappinglad]

I have heard a few times on reports that the Police do NOT have a duty to ' protect ' . In law , is that true? , And if so, the protect part then must fall to the individual. 

[smac97]

1 minute ago, strappinglad said:

I have heard a few times on reports that the Police do NOT have a duty to ' protect ' . In law , is that true? , And if so, the protect part then must fall to the individual. 

In a strict legal sense, yes, that is correct.  See here:

Quote

Following last February's shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, some students claimed local government officials were at fault for failing to provide protection to students. The students filed suit, naming six defendants, including the Broward school district and the Broward Sheriff’s Office , as well as school deputy Scot Peterson and campus monitor Andrew Medina.

On Monday, though, a federal judge ruled that the government agencies " had no constitutional duty to protect students who were not in custody."

This latest decision adds to a growing body of case law establishing that government agencies — including police agencies — have no duty to provide protection to citizens in general:

“Neither the Constitution, nor state law, impose a general duty upon police officers or other governmental officials to protect individual persons from harm — even when they know the harm will occur,” said Darren L. Hutchinson, a professor and associate dean at the University of Florida School of Law. “Police can watch someone attack you, refuse to intervene and not violate the Constitution.”

The Supreme Court has repeatedly held that the government has only a duty to protect persons who are “in custody,” he pointed out.

Moreover, even though the state of Florida has compulsory schooling laws, the students themselves are not "in custody":

“Courts have rejected the argument that students are in custody of school officials while they are on campus,” Mr. Hutchinson said. “Custody is narrowly confined to situations where a person loses his or her freedom to move freely and seek assistance on their own — such as prisons, jails, or mental institutions.”

Hutchinson is right.

The US Supreme Court has made it clear that law enforcement agencies are not required to provide protection to the citizens who are forced to pay the police for their "services."

I think the reason for this is that imposing a legal duty would create a bottomless pit of legal liability.  Police cannot be everywhere at once, so imposing on them a universal and ubiquitous "duty" is not practical.

That said, there is an understanding in most communities that law enforcement is there "to protect and serve."

Quote

In the cases DeShaney vs. Winnebago and Town of Castle Rock vs. Gonzales, the supreme court has ruled that police agencies are not obligated to provide protection of citizens. In other words, police are well within their rights to pick and choose when to intervene to protect the lives and property of others — even when a threat is apparent.

In both of these court cases, clear and repeated threats were made against the safety of children — but government agencies chose to take no action.

A consideration of these facts does not necessarily lead us to the conclusion that law enforcement agencies are somehow on the hook for every violent act committed by private citizens.

I think that's an importat point.

Quote

This reality does belie the often-made claim, however, that police agencies deserve the tax money and obedience of local citizens because the agencies "keep us safe."

I disagree with the author here.  Law enforcement is a vital part of maintaining ordered liberty.  The absence of a technical "duty" imposed on law enforcement does not negate the fact that they put on the uniform, swear an oath, and put themselves in harm's way on a daily basis.

Thanks,

-Smac

[Calm]

4 hours ago, alter idem said:

You take down the license  (take a picture with your phones, idiots) and report it. As a civilized society,  we don't condone vigilante justice, right?  

This was what was done in other cases. In the video of the leader talking, it mentions this at least once and iirc more than once. 
 

Just an FYI, irrelevant to the shooting episode. 

Edited July 2, 2020 by Calm

[alter idem]

1 hour ago, Calm said:

This was what was done in other cases. In the video of the leader talking, it mentions this at least once and iirc more than once. 
 

Just an FYI, irrelevant to the shooting episode. 

That's good to know, and it's too bad that shooter didn't pull out his phone and take a picture of the license if he thought the person was doing something illegal, rather than drawing a weapon and shooting him!  Vigilantism should be nipped in the bud. imo.

[alter idem]

4 hours ago, smac97 said:

I just sent the following email to Mayor Kaufusi and all members of the Provo City Council:

Thanks,

-Smac

Excellent, I'm so glad you sent that, I think the Mayor and your other local authorities need to answer to the citizens exactly what happened and why this was allowed to turn violent.