Did you read the article?

@LovinLarge
Yes, I read the article. I admit Chris Ledbetter had major weaponry and published his willingness to use it in a civil war. We are not too far from that right now in Portland and other cities. Except the BLM protesters are peaceful and not using weapons. I think he has a mental health issue and should be treated for that by the VA, and perhaps should be in a psychiatric hospital until his ideation about weaponry changes. I don't think it would be constructive to put him in jail with violent people. It's good that the policeman that threatened the family was punished by being fired. A restraining order was not too much for the family to ask either.

@AnonySchmoose As I understand the old man's account, which may or may not be accurate, the Restraining Order was dismissed by a judge so apparently the evidence does not support your position, at least in the eyes of the judge who heard the evidence.

Also, calling for someone to be expelled from their home? That is unheard of and I hope our society never sinks to that level of barbarism.

@LovinLarge
IMO, the judge's dismissal may indicate that she/he is biased for police regardless of what they do, and biased against citizenry whose privacy and rights were infringed upon by a police officer. I remember police recently killed a woman in her home from outside. They didn't even present a search warrant, and she was not involved in anything criminal or illegal. Judges and police OFTEN do anything they feel like doing to citizens and are not held accountable. They are not to be assumed to be our friends every situation. IMO, protection of a police officer who made a threat of violence should never be excused by a judge, nor should his use of another citizen's garbage bin, IMO.

@AnonySchmoose Absent a legitimate reason not to do so, I will side with a judge who heard the evidence over a civilian who did not.

"Judges and police can do anything they feel like doing to citizens and not be held accountable."

While we know that happens in some instances, probably more than we know, as a blanket generalization that is false because there are processes in place to establish accountability.

@AnonySchmoose I see you have edited your comment since I responded to it. My comment stands but now I add this: You are assuming that you know what really happened and what evidence was before the judge solely on the basis of a one-sided account. You don't. Neither do I, that's why I am in no position to take a side other than the judge's who heard the evidence.

@hankster Upon what evidence did you arrive at that conclusion?

@hankster It's not sense if it's not based upon facts.

@hankster, @Bierbasstard A legitimate court ruling can only he made upon the facts in evidence. If either side has reason to believe that the judge has erred in fact or law, there are levels of appeal to pursue.

It's not prudent to fault one side when you've only heard the other side's account.