User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 11/25/2015 11:30:15 AM EDT
[#1]
Pretty solid evidence of exactly how the 2nd Amendment protects the 1st Amendment. I still can't believe the United States has fallen this far, and it's only going to get worse while FBHO and company run their fucking show. What's the feasibility of body cams for civilians? Seems like at this point, any "non-color" person that carries a firearm for self defense might need one... |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/25/2015 11:45:00 AM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Just heard on our local talk station (KTLK-FM) that the county prosecuter will not charge the three people arrested. Information came from a local civil rights activist who also claims the 'supremisists' actions were premeditated and baited the BLM folks. If the three are released today, I'll wager that the Feds will do something.  Why is it, that nobody ever expects black people to not commit crimes? That's racism at it's core. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/25/2015 11:46:13 AM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted: One of the BLM video's stated that one of them was Asian. Of the 3 people detained by police, one was Hispanic. There is also discussion on 4chan /k/ about this. But the veracity, as with most things that happen there, may be hard to ascertain. More info this morning from local radio, apparently there is video of the guys planning on this from their home. Ie; going to the BLM protest to bait them into doing exactly what they did. Still waiting to see if said video surfaces. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: So where did the information come from that one of the "supremacists" was Asian and another was Hispanic? Because ALL over the news today, its being stated that they were three white males... There is also discussion on 4chan /k/ about this. But the veracity, as with most things that happen there, may be hard to ascertain. More info this morning from local radio, apparently there is video of the guys planning on this from their home. Ie; going to the BLM protest to bait them into doing exactly what they did. Still waiting to see if said video surfaces. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/25/2015 11:46:20 AM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Hispanic 'white supremacist'. You learn something new every day. http://i.4cdn.org/k/1448395375251.jpg Tell it to George Zimmerman, he is probably lounging by the pool as we speak. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/25/2015 11:48:18 AM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted: "Baiting" someone to commit a crime is only good if the FBI does it. Why is it, that nobody ever expects black people to not commit crimes? That's racism at it's core. Why is it that certain demographics always seem to live down to their stereotypes? Be it White trailer trash, corrupt politicians, or BLM thugs... Everyone knows how to act like an Adult. No one seems to want to though... |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/25/2015 11:49:07 AM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The video shot days / weeks earlier than this event? That one? |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/25/2015 12:30:37 PM EDT
[#7]
It's not quite a party yet... but it's close.
Clearly self-defense. A baited criminal is still a criminal so no fucks given on whether they intended to bait, which apparently consists of "standing on the sidewalk". Holy fuck, stop the presses! |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/25/2015 12:44:29 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The video shot days / weeks earlier than this event? That one? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
So where did the information come from that one of the "supremacists" was Asian and another was Hispanic? Because ALL over the news today, its being stated that they were three white males... There is also discussion on 4chan /k/ about this. But the veracity, as with most things that happen there, may be hard to ascertain. More info this morning from local radio, apparently there is video of the guys planning on this from their home. Ie; going to the BLM protest to bait them into doing exactly what they did. Still waiting to see if said video surfaces. the one of them in the car in camo and dancing in front of BLM was filmed earlier? |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/25/2015 12:48:12 PM EDT
[#9]
Minneapolis police said Tuesday that they have arrested three men in connection with the shooting. Allen Lawrence “Lance” Scarsella III, 23, was arrested in Bloomington. Sources said Nathan Gustavsson, 21, of Hermantown, and Daniel Macey, 26, of Pine City, were taken into custody after they turned themselves in. All three suspects are white. Earlier Tuesday, police arrested a 32-year-old Hispanic man in south Minneapolis, but he was later released because, police said, he was not at the scene of the shooting. StarTribune Sounds like he was just a 4chan tard. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/25/2015 12:52:34 PM EDT
[#10]
Needs more Beta C mag
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/25/2015 12:57:36 PM EDT
[#11]
lol..has the "its happening " gif come out yet?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/25/2015 1:01:00 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
What if the shooting was self-defense after being attacked by a mob? Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
This crap is counterproductive for everyone. The shooters need to be arrested and prosecuted to the fullest extent. Attempted murder for all, shooting into a crowd of protestors, however vile and racist they may be themselves, is still unacceptable. We live in a country where everyone has a right to speak their mind freely and without fear of reprisal. If you disagree then have a counter protest, but shooting one another solves nothing and just makes problems worse. As for the reporting in this article, and in most cases regarding BLM, the canonization of this group is disgusting. The presumption that the shooters are automatically a group of white supremacists and labeling them as such, while wholly disregarding the message and stance of BLM, is ludicrous. If you're going to claim your reporting is balanced and unbiased, then either label both for what they are or simply keep your opinion out of the article. Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile What if the shooting was self-defense after being attacked by a mob? Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile sounds much more plausible than 5 people going into/confronting several 100 angry racists |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/25/2015 1:09:42 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I hope I helped a little by clapping at the screen and yelling "Stay Woke" Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Shit getting real: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WS3di5XS8l8 Video is immediately before and after shooting <snip> Comments under the video are priceless.  Those comments are refreshing. The media might have their work cut out for them spinning this one. I hope I helped a little by clapping at the screen and yelling "Stay Woke" They are deleting comments.  . I posted a link to the kids saying the punched and hit the suspected doers before they cashed them. Wonder why they would delete that. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/25/2015 1:26:19 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
lol no. 2010 Census: Blacks in Texas: 11.8% Blacks in MN: 5.2% Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Minnesota has black people? Probably more than Texas by a large margin. lol no. 2010 Census: Blacks in Texas: 11.8% Blacks in MN: 5.2% Yea and that's part of a much larger overall population. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/25/2015 1:30:36 PM EDT
[#15]
Oh well.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/25/2015 1:47:38 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Minnesota has black people? Somalis |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/25/2015 1:47:43 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It's not quite a party yet... but it's close. Clearly self-defense. A baited criminal is still a criminal so no fucks given on whether they intended to bait, which apparently consists of "standing on the sidewalk". Holy fuck, stop the presses! Baiting, via language, someone to hit you while carrying is a felony in MN. So which POS do you support there? Assuming they taunted them verbally of course. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/25/2015 1:51:39 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So whenever a bunch of hoodrats get together it's a black lives matter event? got it  Pretty much any occasion will do. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/25/2015 1:53:29 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Baiting, via language, someone to hit you while carrying is a felony in MN. So which POS do you support there? Assuming they taunted them verbally of course. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/25/2015 1:54:11 PM EDT
[#20]
I thought the prosecutor is not bringing forth any charges.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/25/2015 1:54:56 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I thought the prosecutor is not bringing forth any charges. Maybe not state but Federal are always a possibility.... |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/25/2015 2:01:20 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Maybe not state but Federal are always a possibility.... Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: I thought the prosecutor is not bringing forth any charges. Maybe not state but Federal are always a possibility.... Curious as to what those charges would be. Can you provide enlightenment? |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/25/2015 2:03:53 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Maybe not state but Federal are always a possibility.... Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I thought the prosecutor is not bringing forth any charges. Maybe not state but Federal are always a possibility.... That wouldn't be considered double jeopardy? |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/25/2015 2:10:47 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Please cite the relevant MN statute. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Baiting, via language, someone to hit you while carrying is a felony in MN. So which POS do you support there? Assuming they taunted them verbally of course. The reason I ask is that 609.6 subdiv 1(3) would seem to suggest otherwise. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/25/2015 2:11:34 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted: That wouldn't be considered double jeopardy? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: I thought the prosecutor is not bringing forth any charges. Maybe not state but Federal are always a possibility.... That wouldn't be considered double jeopardy? For instance, you could be charged with "aggravated robbery" at the state level and "bank robbery" at the federal level. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/25/2015 2:13:19 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
That wouldn't be considered double jeopardy? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I thought the prosecutor is not bringing forth any charges. Maybe not state but Federal are always a possibility.... That wouldn't be considered double jeopardy? No. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/25/2015 2:15:21 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
That wouldn't be considered double jeopardy? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I thought the prosecutor is not bringing forth any charges. Maybe not state but Federal are always a possibility.... That wouldn't be considered double jeopardy? No. These guys haven't even been charged yet, as I understand it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/25/2015 2:15:53 PM EDT
[#28]
2 of the 3 white guys arrested look pretty damn similar to scumbag racists in the car video.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/25/2015 2:45:48 PM EDT
[#29]
Quoted:
According to Noor, the white men “opened fire on about six protesters,” after the protesters attempted to herd the men away from the protest area. Good shoot. ZFG |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/25/2015 3:09:53 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Please cite the relevant MN statute. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Baiting, via language, someone to hit you while carrying is a felony in MN. So which POS do you support there? Assuming they taunted them verbally of course. Showing up just to film may satisfy 609.72(2) these days. They wouldn't even have to say anything. 609.72 DISORDERLY CONDUCT.
Subdivision 1.Crime. Whoever does any of the following in a public or private place, including on a school bus, knowing, or having reasonable grounds to know that it will, or will tend to, alarm, anger or disturb others or provoke an assault or breach of the peace, is guilty of disorderly conduct, which is a misdemeanor: (1) engages in brawling or fighting; or (2) disturbs an assembly or meeting, not unlawful in its character; or (3) engages in offensive, obscene, abusive, boisterous, or noisy conduct or in offensive, obscene, or abusive language tending reasonably to arouse alarm, anger, or resentment in others. 609.71 RIOT. Subdivision 1.Riot first degree. When three or more persons assembled disturb the public peace by an intentional act or threat of unlawful force or violence to person or property and a death results, and one of the persons is armed with a dangerous weapon, that person is guilty of riot first degree and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than 20 years or to payment of a fine of not more than $35,000, or both. Subd. 2.Riot second degree. When three or more persons assembled disturb the public peace by an intentional act or threat of unlawful force or violence to person or property, each participant who is armed with a dangerous weapon or knows that any other participant is armed with a dangerous weapon is guilty of riot second degree and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than five years or to payment of a fine of not more than $10,000, or both. Subd. 3.Riot third degree. When three or more persons assembled disturb the public peace by an intentional act or threat of unlawful force or violence to person or property, each participant therein is guilty of riot third degree and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than one year or to payment of a fine of not more than $1,000, or both. Quoted:
The reason I ask is that 609.6 subdiv 1(3) would seem to suggest otherwise. Going by 609.6 wouldn't BLM protestors be justified in "herding" or even pushing the people illegally violating their "meeting, not unlawful in its character"? The wording of the "no opposing views at the same time, cuz that'd be scary" bullshit law would seem to act in BLM's favor because they were acting like idiots in that area first. 609.06 AUTHORIZED USE OF FORCE.
Subdivision 1.When authorized. Except as otherwise provided in subdivision 2, reasonable force may be used upon or toward the person of another without the other's consent when the following circumstances exist or the actor reasonably believes them to exist: (1) when used by a public officer or one assisting a public officer under the public officer's direction: (a) in effecting a lawful arrest; or (b) in the execution of legal process; or (c) in enforcing an order of the court; or (d) in executing any other duty imposed upon the public officer by law; or (2) when used by a person not a public officer in arresting another in the cases and in the manner provided by law and delivering the other to an officer competent to receive the other into custody; or (3) when used by any person in resisting or aiding another to resist an offense against the person; or EDIT: Changed degree highlighted. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/25/2015 3:16:24 PM EDT
[#31]
nvm: already covered
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/25/2015 3:22:22 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Baiting, via language, someone to hit you while carrying is a felony in MN. So which POS do you support there? Assuming they taunted them verbally of course. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
It's not quite a party yet... but it's close. Clearly self-defense. A baited criminal is still a criminal so no fucks given on whether they intended to bait, which apparently consists of "standing on the sidewalk". Holy fuck, stop the presses! Baiting, via language, someone to hit you while carrying is a felony in MN. So which POS do you support there? Assuming they taunted them verbally of course. So if I stand on the sidewalk and call someone an asshole, then they attack me, I'm a felon? It's clear which side you are supporting. Oh, and if I wasn't clear earlier, I still don't give a shit, even if they were "baiting". If I set a TV on my front porch and someone steals it, I know what the says but a thief is still a thief. A criminal is still a criminal. Making laws that are apologetic towards them doesn't change that. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/25/2015 3:26:10 PM EDT
[#33]
These guys aren't racists. They were defending themselves from a mob that attacked them almost immediately from when they arrived by the fence, they were punched, and then chased for several blocks when they fired in self defense as a last resort. /k/ is a weapons board on 4chan that is mostly devoted to guns. There are very few rules there for posting other than staying on topic and not posting illegal things. Since most of the posting is anonymous people are free to express and discuss unpopular subjects and opinions. As much as I like ARF, discussion here is stymied by CoC and the ability to ban dissenters very easily. /k/ is probably the most open minded and welcoming gun board on the net. 4chan is really one of the few remaining places for \free speech on the internet, and yes that includes racist topics and humor. Hang out at one of our meets sometime and you will see how welcoming we are to anybody that likes guns.
Don't judge a book by its cover. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/25/2015 3:27:38 PM EDT
[#34]
Stupid, but probably legal shoot. Nobody has the right to "herd" anybody away from a public area.
Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/25/2015 3:33:59 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
*snip* None of that matches the info we have right now.  Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/25/2015 3:34:54 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So if I stand on the sidewalk and call someone an asshole, then they attack me, I'm a felon? It's clear which side you are supporting. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
It's not quite a party yet... but it's close. Clearly self-defense. A baited criminal is still a criminal so no fucks given on whether they intended to bait, which apparently consists of "standing on the sidewalk". Holy fuck, stop the presses! Baiting, via language, someone to hit you while carrying is a felony in MN. So which POS do you support there? Assuming they taunted them verbally of course. So if I stand on the sidewalk and call someone an asshole, then they attack me, I'm a felon? It's clear which side you are supporting. If you have 2 buddies with you, at least one of you is carrying, you know that, and your intention was to be attacked, under MN law, possibly. That looks like 2nd degree inciting riot. But if it's just 2 of you, by all means continue. Just to be clear, I have no problem with 2 groups simultaneously protesting each other. Minnesota does, thus they come up with laws to stop it, or at least to criminalize whomever shows up second. I'd even say the law violates the First Amendment, but what does that matter these days? I really don't want to support either side. BLM are for the most part crazy. Half the time I don't know what they're complaining about, and all the time I don't know what their solution is other than "space to destroy" to burn themselves and their anger out which is insane. But 4chan's /pol/ and /k/ aren't benefiting anyone. Read a few threads which 25-50% of their posts would be CoC violations here, and you'll see the people potentially involved in this shooting are no better than the people they were trying to "troll." |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/25/2015 3:37:16 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Pretty much any occasion will do. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
So whenever a bunch of hoodrats get together it's a black lives matter event? got it Pretty much any occasion will do. The idea behind the #blm shitshow is that black people should be immune from the law. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/25/2015 3:37:20 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
These guys aren't racists. They were defending themselves from a mob that attacked them almost immediately from when they arrived by the fence, they were punched, and then chased for several blocks when they fired in self defense as a last resort. /k/ is a weapons board on 4chan that is mostly devoted to guns. There are very few rules there for posting other than staying on topic and not posting illegal things. Since most of the posting is anonymous people are free to express and discuss unpopular subjects and opinions. As much as I like ARF, discussion here is stymied by CoC and the ability to ban dissenters very easily. /k/ is probably the most open minded and welcoming gun board on the net. 4chan is really one of the few remaining places for \free speech on the internet, and yes that includes racist topics and humor. Hang out at one of our meets sometime and you will see how welcoming we are to anybody that likes guns. Don't judge a book by its cover. How many were there? |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/25/2015 3:41:47 PM EDT
[#39]
Are they college students?
Bloomington is south of the city, Pine City is about an hour north of the city, and Hermantown is about two and a half hours north of the city. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/25/2015 3:41:55 PM EDT
[#40]
The fact that something is legal under the constitution, state law, etc. doesn't necessarily make it a good idea or a wise way of representing gunowners and carry community to the public.
Or put more simply, sometimes assholes collide. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/25/2015 3:46:37 PM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
"Baiting" someone to commit a crime is only good if the FBI does it.
Why is it, that nobody ever expects black people to not commit crimes? That's racism at it's core. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Just heard on our local talk station (KTLK-FM) that the county prosecuter will not charge the three people arrested. Information came from a local civil rights activist who also claims the 'supremisists' actions were premeditated and baited the BLM folks. If the three are released today, I'll wager that the Feds will do something.
Why is it, that nobody ever expects black people to not commit crimes? That's racism at it's core. Counter-protest soon to be directly synonymous with "bait" |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/25/2015 3:47:52 PM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistorySo... two misunderstood yutes in masks talking about a crowd of like-minded individuals demanding some other guys take off THEIR masks. Other guys say no - so two of the BLM guys punch two of these other individuals while a crowd apparently begins to chase them; before said other guys draw and shoot after being punched and apparently chased? Can't wait to see the investigative journalism on MSMBC tonight. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/25/2015 3:50:02 PM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Showing up just to film may satisfy 609.72(2) these days. They wouldn't even have to say anything. Going by 609.6 wouldn't BLM protestors be justified in "herding" or even pushing the people illegally violating their "meeting, not unlawful in its character"? The wording of the "no opposing views at the same time, cuz that'd be scary" bullshit law would seem to act in BLM's favor because they were acting like idiots in that area first. EDIT: Changed degree highlighted. Quote HistoryQuoted: Showing up just to film may satisfy 609.72(2) these days. They wouldn't even have to say anything. 609.72 DISORDERLY CONDUCT. Subdivision 1.Crime. Whoever does any of the following in a public or private place, including on a school bus, knowing, or having reasonable grounds to know that it will, or will tend to, alarm, anger or disturb others or provoke an assault or breach of the peace, is guilty of disorderly conduct, which is a misdemeanor: (1) engages in brawling or fighting; or (2) disturbs an assembly or meeting, not unlawful in its character; or (3) engages in offensive, obscene, abusive, boisterous, or noisy conduct or in offensive, obscene, or abusive language tending reasonably to arouse alarm, anger, or resentment in others. 609.71 RIOT. Subdivision 1.Riot first degree. When three or more persons assembled disturb the public peace by an intentional act or threat of unlawful force or violence to person or property and a death results, and one of the persons is armed with a dangerous weapon, that person is guilty of riot first degree and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than 20 years or to payment of a fine of not more than $35,000, or both. Subd. 2.Riot second degree. When three or more persons assembled disturb the public peace by an intentional act or threat of unlawful force or violence to person or property, each participant who is armed with a dangerous weapon or knows that any other participant is armed with a dangerous weapon is guilty of riot second degree and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than five years or to payment of a fine of not more than $10,000, or both. Subd. 3.Riot third degree. When three or more persons assembled disturb the public peace by an intentional act or threat of unlawful force or violence to person or property, each participant therein is guilty of riot third degree and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than one year or to payment of a fine of not more than $1,000, or both. Quoted: The reason I ask is that 609.6 subdiv 1(3) would seem to suggest otherwise. Going by 609.6 wouldn't BLM protestors be justified in "herding" or even pushing the people illegally violating their "meeting, not unlawful in its character"? The wording of the "no opposing views at the same time, cuz that'd be scary" bullshit law would seem to act in BLM's favor because they were acting like idiots in that area first. 609.06 AUTHORIZED USE OF FORCE. Subdivision 1.When authorized. Except as otherwise provided in subdivision 2, reasonable force may be used upon or toward the person of another without the other's consent when the following circumstances exist or the actor reasonably believes them to exist: (1) when used by a public officer or one assisting a public officer under the public officer's direction: (a) in effecting a lawful arrest; or (b) in the execution of legal process; or (c) in enforcing an order of the court; or (d) in executing any other duty imposed upon the public officer by law; or (2) when used by a person not a public officer in arresting another in the cases and in the manner provided by law and delivering the other to an officer competent to receive the other into custody; or (3) when used by any person in resisting or aiding another to resist an offense against the person; or EDIT: Changed degree highlighted. No. None of the above. Standing on a public sidewalk doesn't rise to that. Nor can their very existence be "offensive" without the BLM falling subject to the same as their presence and premise offends me mightily... |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/25/2015 3:51:04 PM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted: If you have 2 buddies with you, at least one of you is carrying, you know that, and your intention was to be attacked, under MN law, possibly. That looks like 2nd degree inciting riot. But if it's just 2 of you, by all means continue. Just to be clear, I have no problem with 2 groups simultaneously protesting each other. Minnesota does, thus they come up with laws to stop it, or at least to criminalize whomever shows up second. I'd even say the law violates the First Amendment, but what does that matter these days? I really don't want to support either side. BLM are for the most part crazy. Half the time I don't know what they're complaining about, and all the time I don't know what their solution is other than "space to destroy" to burn themselves and their anger out which is insane. But 4chan's /pol/ and /k/ aren't benefiting anyone. Read a few threads which 25-50% of their posts would be CoC violations here, and you'll see the people potentially involved in this shooting are no better than the people they were trying to "troll." End of story. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/25/2015 3:52:34 PM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
These guys aren't racists. They were defending themselves from a mob that attacked them almost immediately from when they arrived by the fence, they were punched, and then chased for several blocks when they fired in self defense as a last resort. /k/ is a weapons board on 4chan that is mostly devoted to guns. There are very few rules there for posting other than staying on topic and not posting illegal things. Since most of the posting is anonymous people are free to express and discuss unpopular subjects and opinions. As much as I like ARF, discussion here is stymied by CoC and the ability to ban dissenters very easily. /k/ is probably the most open minded and welcoming gun board on the net. 4chan is really one of the few remaining places for \free speech on the internet, and yes that includes racist topics and humor. Hang out at one of our meets sometime and you will see how welcoming we are to anybody that likes guns. Don't judge a book by its cover. The guys that were arrested look very similar to the guys in this video: 
If you don't think that video was racist, or meant to incite, I don't know what to tell you. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/25/2015 3:52:39 PM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The fact that something is legal under the constitution, state law, etc. doesn't necessarily make it a good idea or a wise way of representing gunowners and carry community to the public. Or put more simply, sometimes assholes collide. This. Absolutely true. I've judge /k/ by 1 thread and that was enough to make me think better (or at least more equally between the two groups) of the BLM people involved. Just a cesspool of useless racist free speech, because it's without individual consequences but there are collective consequences. It needs to be said that they represent gun owners poorly. But I guess the next time any of us are stereotyped because of the actions of 4chan, we can just yell #BlackRiflesMatter . That's clearly how this works. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/25/2015 3:54:10 PM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Counter-protest soon to be directly synonymous with "bait" Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Just heard on our local talk station (KTLK-FM) that the county prosecuter will not charge the three people arrested. Information came from a local civil rights activist who also claims the 'supremisists' actions were premeditated and baited the BLM folks. If the three are released today, I'll wager that the Feds will do something.
Why is it, that nobody ever expects black people to not commit crimes? That's racism at it's core. Counter-protest soon to be directly synonymous with "bait" Counter protest is currently synonymous with "disorderly conduct" under Minnesota state law. So there's that. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/25/2015 3:59:59 PM EDT
[#48]
If you look at the videos from both sides you will see that the three accused were not doing anything visibly proactive. They had every right to be there and were not causing trouble.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/25/2015 4:00:41 PM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The guys that were arrested look very similar to the guys in this video: http://img.huffingtonpost.com/asset/scalefit_630_noupscale/565484111700005300e1a702.png If you don't think that video was racist, or meant to incite, I don't know what to tell you. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
These guys aren't racists. They were defending themselves from a mob that attacked them almost immediately from when they arrived by the fence, they were punched, and then chased for several blocks when they fired in self defense as a last resort. /k/ is a weapons board on 4chan that is mostly devoted to guns. There are very few rules there for posting other than staying on topic and not posting illegal things. Since most of the posting is anonymous people are free to express and discuss unpopular subjects and opinions. As much as I like ARF, discussion here is stymied by CoC and the ability to ban dissenters very easily. /k/ is probably the most open minded and welcoming gun board on the net. 4chan is really one of the few remaining places for \free speech on the internet, and yes that includes racist topics and humor. Hang out at one of our meets sometime and you will see how welcoming we are to anybody that likes guns. Don't judge a book by its cover. The guys that were arrested look very similar to the guys in this video: http://img.huffingtonpost.com/asset/scalefit_630_noupscale/565484111700005300e1a702.png If you don't think that video was racist, or meant to incite, I don't know what to tell you. Yea that video was fairly racist. If it's the same people that were arrested it sounds like two racist groups were counter-protesting each other. The question is who broke the law (i.e., assaulted) who first. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/25/2015 4:03:56 PM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The fact that something is legal under the constitution, state law, etc. doesn't necessarily make it a good idea or a wise way of representing gunowners and carry community to the public. Or put more simply, sometimes assholes collide. The basic elements of this event (as I understand it ) are: 1) Filming BLM 2) Wearing masks 3) CCW It is very worthwhile to record such events. Look at the good work done by Zombietime on the various protests. I understand why they would want to wear masks. Many BLMers were wearing masks. The decision to CCW seems to also have geen a good decision. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
