3 ms·
So I'm looking at the site. Lots of links to go through. Lets just start at link 1 of credibility. Follow the story... it says they took the guns based on the g
by sleepysysadmin 8y ago
So I'm looking at the site. Lots of links to go through. Lets just start at link 1 of credibility. Follow the story... it says they took the guns based on the guy open-carrying a gun. Which they explain the red-flag-law and such.
Like it makes sense. The cops always overreact at these douchebag open-carry people. Youtube has loads of these videos where people open carry looking to sue the cops under 1984 lawsuits if the cops take their guns.
This is a credible story.
Then I keep going down the list and they have nothing to do with zerohedge.
Sorry but you cant provide a boatload of non-zerohedge articles and assert zerohedge is illegitimate and should be banned off the internet because of not-zero hedge articles.
- tzs 8y agoZH said the seizure was without a warrant. There was a warrant. ZH's source updated their story to reflect this, but ZH did not. > Then I keep going down the list and they have nothing to do with zerohedge The links in the source section include links to ZH stories, links to the sources ZH used, links to fact checking sites, and so on. They are references for the assertions in the text above in the corresponding section.