White man car bombs a bank on US soil, but its ok he is white and he had a reason

:sarcasm:

Does anyone believe if this guy was a person of color, especially of Middle Eastern heritage, he would have only be charged with " arson and criminal damage to property with an incendiary device."

Man arrested after car explodes at Lockport bank

Picture from: http://www.wgntv.com/wgntv-lockport-bank-car-bomb-jul17,0,3038861.story

July 17, 2010

SUN-TIMES MEDIA WIRE

A south suburban man was arrested after allegedly driving a vehicle that contained fireworks up to the PNC Bank in southwest suburban Lockport Friday evening and intentionally triggering an explosion, officials said.

About 7:50 p.m., David A. Whitesell, 48, of Blue Island, drove his car that contained aerial fireworks onto the front entryway of a PNC Bank, located at 955 E. 9th St in Lockport, according to a release from Lockport Police.

Whitesell walked away from the vehicle and the car exploded and blew open the roof of the vehicle, according to the release. The explosion also caused minor damage to the bank by blowing out the building’s doors and windows.

The explosion seemed to be intentional, Lockport Fire Dept. Batallion Chief John Kure said.

Whitesell was arrested for arson and criminal damage to property with an incendiary device, which are both felonies, according to the release. The motive is still unknown.
-snip-

http://www.suntimes.com/news/24-7/2505700,car-explodes-lockport-bank-071610.article

Lockport Man Tries to Blow Up Bank With Car
Man's home was in foreclosure, witness says
By SUSAN RIVERA

The threat of a home foreclosure may have been the reason a southwest suburban Lockport man tried to blow up a bank with his car Friday night.

David A. Whitesell, 48, was arrested for felony arson and felony criminal damage to property with an incendiary device when police say he parked his car, which was rigged with explosives, outside the front entrance of the PNC Bank near 9th and Read streets in Lockport at about 8:30 p.m. Friday.

The explosion blew off the roof of the vehicle and shattered several windows including windows on the bank, according to Lockport Police.

The bank was closed at the time and there weren't any employees inside when the bomb went off. No injuries have been reported.

He was arrested at a nearby Speedway convenience store, said store employee Mary Craig.

"His house was foreclosed and his car repossessed," she said.
-snip-

Source: http://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local-beat/Lockport-Man-Tries-to-Blow-Up-Bank-With-Car-98660894.html#ixzz0txuTxGBy

by some crooked ass bank system that gets its money for free from the govt can make you crazy. I hope they get him some help.

All those criminal laws only exist in a social contract that isn't in breech. Its possible there is no credible institution with the authority to deem such activity even criminal.

if and when a government becomes sufficiently criminal, then there may be an argument for a proper resistance movement.
but the key is that the government is being criminal and the resistant is trying to enforce proper fairness and order.

this case is nothing like that, you can't run a revolution solo. you're only likely to kill innocent people.

even if you think our government has gotten to the point where some form of violent resistance is appropriate, simply adding to the criminality does help.

Which is why I prefer to cultivate my own garden, personally (even if that means stealing the seeds I need)

they had it coming?

Who "deserves" death?

i mean, what's the real difference between that case and this one, aside from the body count?

each one features a personal idea of justice being manifested violently and pointlessly against buildings and the people inside, with little, if any, hope of effecting useful change.

is there a real difference between the cases, or was post #24 just meant to say that, theoretically, volence could at some point be justified if the government lost "sufficient credibility"?

Do you think I was talking theoretical, or not, in a much more abstract form?

"All those criminal laws only exist in a social contract that isn't in breech. Its possible there is no credible institution with the authority to deem such activity even criminal."

When those conditions are met, and death is a consequence, it has no "justification", but rather, an explanation. Human savagery and depravity will know of no bounds, but rarely is the origin of such independent & isolated from the state and actions of the governing institution

i'm sure many murders and assaults are the result of people feeling that their actions were justified and that they were wronged and that the government can't or won't help them in the situation so that they feel the need to act on their own.

i'm sure that many thieves are only trying to survive and/or feed their family.

i'm sure there's much frustration that civil remedies only work when there's a preponderance of evidence in one's favor, and it's often hard to get that. i'm sure this explains a lot of drug-related violence, as you can't just go to the police with your complaint.

so what's the point? sure, it may explain what drives people to commit violent acts, but what of it? it doesn't justify it and it does little to advance the political argument in favor of helping people in need.

Who said anything about people feeling? Im talking about dominoes falling...not their internal monologue. IOW, shit happens...especially in a world of shit.


"it does little to advance the political argument in favor of helping people in need."

Tell that to the rich who depend on stable markets to grow their wealth.

that statement needs clarification. Is parking a truck with 55 gallon drums containing a mix of diesel fuel and ammonium nitrate the way that problem is solved? If there were no kids there thin?

To me you comment is walking a razor edge between decency and human filth. If I said something that could very easily be interpreted as condoning mass murder I would clarify my position.

"To me you comment is walking a razor edge between decency and human filth"

Thanks. Thats my specialty. I guess it depends on who is listening and if their brain is functioning.


"If I said something that could very easily be interpreted as condoning mass murder I would clarify my position."

"Condoning"....here we go again


:rofl:

If they were alive, they should be made at the world for being so shitty. I am a bit.

unless you are getting raped in the congo and having your hands cut off your existence is not all that shitty (dying of ALS, pancreatic cancer, etc). But hey reality exists in the mind of the beholder.

I would rather be alive than blown up by some asshole. That just me..

Done baiting me yet?

:)

Cheers...have a good night

In my book, the banksters deserve whatever they get. Kharma is a bitch. They stole my house too so I have alot more sympathy for a guy who has lost everything and cracked under the pressure than I do for the criminals at his bank. If that makes me a bad bad bad man, what-the-fuck-eva. I'm touched that your sympathy isn't for the mentally ill guy, it is for the bank. That is very new dem of you.

to whatever extent the banks did anything improper, they deserve APPROPRIATE punishment. having their properly low-level employees of the company potentially blown up and having actual property damage to their buildings (which may actually merely be leased by the bank, i don't know) does very little actual damage to the bank itself, as these things are insured and/or easily replaced.

APPROPRIATE punishment for the banks, IF they did anything illegal, would involve LEGAL and REGULATORY action, seizing assets, exacting fines, possibly even imprisoning workers and/or executives, again, IF they did anything illegal. regardless, to whatever extent we think it's bad public policy to have so many foreclosures, we should have a more aggressive mortgage restructuring program and also better aid for the homeless.

i'm in favor of all these things.

what i'm NOT in favor of is letting anyone who feels wrongs go about acting as judge, jury, and semi-random executioner, putting innocent passers-by at risk of a violent death for the sake of a petty personal greivance. i have no idea how you can possibly reconcile that with democratic ideals or goals.


we know very little about this particular case. we have no idea if the banks did anything improper. we do know that some banks lent imprudently; we also know that some borrowers were victims of a terrible economy. but we don't know what's at play in this particular case. YOU know the details of YOUR case, but it certainly sounds like your projecting your situation onto this guy. i don't think you know the details of that case any more than i do.

plus, where did you get that he was mentally ill? i didn't see that anyway (although it's certainly a possibility).


i'm in favor of mentally ill people getting help and governments helping in that effort.
i'm in favor of the homeless getting help and governments helping in that effort.
i'm in favor of those in mortgage trouble getting help and governments helping in that effort.
i'm in favor of banks being properly and aggressively regulated so they don't do improper things.

i'm NOT in favor of vigilanteism.

call me whatever kind of democrat you want, but i'll not support criminal activity.

Those criminals have a thing or two to say on the issue of violent crime.

many of those same violent criminals who started the revolution later created a government that enforced law and order. it's not for random individuals to decide on their own to launch private revolutions.

if and when our the situation is such that an actual revolution is called for, then individuals who want to participate would be far better served to unite and do something proper, well-directed, and effective.

personal vigilanteism has nothing to do with revolution on a national scale. it's simply fantasy to believe otherwise. i understand the appeal of that fantasy, it's wonderfully liberating to think you can break the law and be justified in doing so, but if it's not in the context of an actual revolution, it's simply a cowardly act of personal criminality with the stench of delusion and denial.

Ill let the States decide if they want their own fuckn revolution. Ill be in an armchair with a case of beer and a whole lot of understandin.

Anyone remember that story/movie? The movie starred Michael Douglas.

When laws don't serve man and are written only by corrupt men, does that make them moral, ethical or right?

guesses as to the charges for anyone else is just that - guesses, conjecture, speculation.

Report says no injuries.

Why the hell aren't there any?

shutting down a very large Army base, terrorizing multitudes of persons nearby as well as friends and families of those on base, occupied news networks nonstop for a couple of days, and even killing people was not charged with any terrorist crimes, essentially simply a disgruntled employee.

ETA this old DU link with many responses saying the Ft Hood shooter was not a terrorist, but just a guy with an agenda:

http://demopedia.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x6966089

Uff da!

:nuke:

:thumbsup:

So I need you to get specific and explain it to me. With links.

however, I see down thread that you are jumping the gun as well. We don't know the motive yet and that is the key.

That fellow who tried to detonate one in Times Square and failed miserably. I mean really now, you give me a couple of alarm clocks, propane tanks and gas, I can guaran damn tee you I could make that sucker blow. Al-Qaeda trained my ass.

Now this guy uses fireworks, FIREWORKS, to try and blow something up. Frankly it's a miracle that he blew open his car, much less cause a bit of damage to the bank.

I'm not advocating violence or bombing here, but damn, in this country with as many freely available substances that you can buy to make big BOOMS, there is no excuse for this sort of failure. Hell, you can go down to your local hardware store and find enough material there to bring down the entire bank. Make a stop by your local gun store on the way back and you'll have enough explosive material to bring down not only the first bank and the one on the next block.

I'm not, repeat NOT encouraging people to blow things up. I just find the ineptness of these people galling.

Otherwise you may be getting a knock at your door.

Sad but true.

nevermind that there's some actual engineering involved, planning, all the parts have to work together properly, essentially on the first attempt, etc.

often people who have the skills to engineer a bomb have the skills to keep a decent job and are therefore far less likely to want to throw everything away in some criminal act.

You seem to be spinning it for a very strong agenda it does not support.

Let me know when we find out he had militia training. Or even friends cheering him on.

His dance card will be booked for the next few Decades.

Different rules for different folks.

I'm surprised there hasn't been more of it.


Lookout gated communities. Your next.

but that's okay because he reeeeally hates the IRS."

This is just misdirected, targeting branch workers and not CEO's or the board of directors.

What a neanderfuck.

Amazing what white guys can get away with.

Rec'd

Idiot looks like my cousin Timothy!