Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

Peeeculiar t1_iuqy7ej wrote

I'd thought it was her house. It wasn't. She brought them as weapons to a planned protest of an eviction.

7

potus1001 t1_iurpzua wrote

Replying to guesswhatihate (#427,279)

In all fairness, from what I read in the article, three officers are allegedly allergic, but it didn’t say she confirmed they were allergic, prior to using the bees.

Most likely, she used the bees without considering whether they were allergic or not.

Nonetheless I agree with you that it isn’t cool. It could even rise to the level of assault and battery with a deadly weapon.

0

potus1001 t1_iuru5c4 wrote

Replying to [deleted] (#427,426)

Completely disagree with you there! Regardless of what you think of the law, these officers were doing their jobs, in a non-violent manner, and didn’t deserve a potential death sentence.

If you don’t like the way the law is written, then either run for office yourself, or vote people into office who match your views. But to wish death on people simply for following the laws in a non-violent manner, is a stark overreaction.

People need to cool down the violent rhetoric!

1

theopinionexpress t1_iuu2ir1 wrote

“I suggest you leave immediately.”

“Or what? You’ll release the dogs, or the bees? Or the dogs with the bees in their mouths and when they bark they shoot bees at you?”

1

potus1001 t1_iuvk7ed wrote

Replying to bubalusarnee (#433,289)

There was no attempt to “dunk” here.

But do you have a source that says different than what this source mentioned? Because every article I’ve read on this situation mentions that the officers were allegedly allergic to bees, not that she knew they were allergic.

Any additional information you could provide to help me learn about this situation would be very much appreciated! Thank you!

1