6 ms·

Facebook chose not to act on militia complaints before Kenosha shooting

32 points by alex_young 6y ago

holtkam2 6y ago
I used to think the good created by social media outweighed the bad. Now I firmly believe the opposite. I actually think I hate Facebook more than any other commercial operation, ever.
aaron695 6y ago
Looks like self defence to me, why would we think otherwise at this stage? We have clear evidence he was fired at by protesters https://twitter.com/trbrtc/status/1298839097923063809 https://twitter.com/trbrtc/status/1298839097923063809 So should have Facebook shut down the protesters page instead if this is the case?
- alex_young 6y ago
  > We have clear evidence he was fired at by protesters The link you provided doesn’t seem to support that conclusion.
  - rasz 6y ago
    Other than videos of people with pistols running after the kid and shooting in the air? I have no clue WTF is happening in US, and what is the source of constant escalation, but Im pretty sure Putin is laughing his ass off right now. This is classic old KGB destabilize and weaken procedure in action.
    - alex_young 6y ago
      What videos are you referring to?
      - aaron695 6y ago
        The multiple linked videos above in the Twitter thread that the New York Times analysed of the timeline.
        alex_young 6y ago
        That’s not what those videos show, nor is it what the NYTimes said they show.
        aaron695 6y ago
        Sorry, but at this stage I assume you are a troll. But one last time in case you are not. From the thread, from the New York Times reporter - "At 23:19, Rittenhouse is seen in this YouTube livestream. He's being chased into a parking lot. While he is being pursued, an unknown gunman fires the first shot into the air."
        alex_young 6y ago
        You: “ We have clear evidence he was fired at by protesters” You’re calling me a troll? Please. The comma is important here. The person chasing is not the same person shooting. You and others keep conflating this and it appears to be intentional. Whatever happened at that moment, this individual decided not only not to order assistance to the person he shot in the head, but to run into an unarmed crowd waving around a rifle.
        aaron695 6y ago
        You could have stated this on my first comment if you were being in good faith. rasz then corrected what I said, early in this thread, which you and I are replying on. This is quite bad faith on your behalf.
        alex_young 6y ago
        Please do not continue to personally attack me. It violates the principals of this community. I have not acted in bad faith, we simply appear have a disagreement about the English language.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
core-questions 6y ago
There are an awful lot of people who believe that Rittenhouse shot in self-defence, fearing for his life, as a part of a militia trying to defend their community against burning and looting and rioting, which is not an unreasonable thing to want to do after months of this activity across the USA. Expecting Facebook to have a role in policing this is just silly, it's armchair politics at its finest. Even if Facebook didn't exist, these people would have gotten together to defend their city. The solution here isn't to stop people from defending their city, it's to stop people from crossing state lines to terrorize communities for the actions of police officers, especially when there's a grey area as to the illegality of the policing action. Media companies that pretend otherwise are throwing fuel on the fire by covering for the mob. Do they hope they'll be spared? The number of burnt businesses with BLM signs on the front in Kenosha should be a pretty good indication that you can't prostrate yourself before the mob and assume that it will result in your property being spared.
- alex_young 6y ago
  > There are an awful lot of people who believe that Rittenhouse shot in self-defence Self defense after running into an unarmed crowd swinging around a rifle? I'm not going to say he's guilty just yet, but the police charged him with first-degree intentional homicide. I think it's fair to say the people who believe it was self defense have a lot of explaining to do given the facts as we know them.
  - core-questions 6y ago
    > Self defense after running into an unarmed crowd swinging around a rifle? I'm not a judge, I'm not a lawyer, I'm just telling you a lot of people are mad about this. Apparently a Molotov was thrown at him (have not seen this), and in the video I did see, he was on the ground about to have his face stomped in when he shot. There's an argument for self-defense there; it'll be up to a court to decide, but for now, it's not clear that these murder charges are going to hold up.
    - ideals 6y ago

32 points by alex_young 6y ago

I used to think the good created by social media outweighed the bad. Now I firmly believe the opposite. I actually think I hate Facebook more than any other commercial operation, ever.

aaron695 6y ago

Looks like self defence to me, why would we think otherwise at this stage? We have clear evidence he was fired at by protesters https://twitter.com/trbrtc/status/1298839097923063809 https://twitter.com/trbrtc/status/1298839097923063809 So should have Facebook shut down the protesters page instead if this is the case?

alex_young 6y ago
> We have clear evidence he was fired at by protesters The link you provided doesn’t seem to support that conclusion.
- rasz 6y ago
  Other than videos of people with pistols running after the kid and shooting in the air? I have no clue WTF is happening in US, and what is the source of constant escalation, but Im pretty sure Putin is laughing his ass off right now. This is classic old KGB destabilize and weaken procedure in action.
  - alex_young 6y ago
    What videos are you referring to?
    - aaron695 6y ago
      The multiple linked videos above in the Twitter thread that the New York Times analysed of the timeline.
      - alex_young 6y ago
        That’s not what those videos show, nor is it what the NYTimes said they show.
        aaron695 6y ago
        Sorry, but at this stage I assume you are a troll. But one last time in case you are not. From the thread, from the New York Times reporter - "At 23:19, Rittenhouse is seen in this YouTube livestream. He's being chased into a parking lot. While he is being pursued, an unknown gunman fires the first shot into the air."
        alex_young 6y ago
        You: “ We have clear evidence he was fired at by protesters” You’re calling me a troll? Please. The comma is important here. The person chasing is not the same person shooting. You and others keep conflating this and it appears to be intentional. Whatever happened at that moment, this individual decided not only not to order assistance to the person he shot in the head, but to run into an unarmed crowd waving around a rifle.
        aaron695 6y ago
        You could have stated this on my first comment if you were being in good faith. rasz then corrected what I said, early in this thread, which you and I are replying on. This is quite bad faith on your behalf.
        alex_young 6y ago
        Please do not continue to personally attack me. It violates the principals of this community. I have not acted in bad faith, we simply appear have a disagreement about the English language.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

core-questions 6y ago

There are an awful lot of people who believe that Rittenhouse shot in self-defence, fearing for his life, as a part of a militia trying to defend their community against burning and looting and rioting, which is not an unreasonable thing to want to do after months of this activity across the USA. Expecting Facebook to have a role in policing this is just silly, it's armchair politics at its finest. Even if Facebook didn't exist, these people would have gotten together to defend their city. The solution here isn't to stop people from defending their city, it's to stop people from crossing state lines to terrorize communities for the actions of police officers, especially when there's a grey area as to the illegality of the policing action. Media companies that pretend otherwise are throwing fuel on the fire by covering for the mob. Do they hope they'll be spared? The number of burnt businesses with BLM signs on the front in Kenosha should be a pretty good indication that you can't prostrate yourself before the mob and assume that it will result in your property being spared.

alex_young 6y ago
> There are an awful lot of people who believe that Rittenhouse shot in self-defence Self defense after running into an unarmed crowd swinging around a rifle? I'm not going to say he's guilty just yet, but the police charged him with first-degree intentional homicide. I think it's fair to say the people who believe it was self defense have a lot of explaining to do given the facts as we know them.
- core-questions 6y ago
  > Self defense after running into an unarmed crowd swinging around a rifle? I'm not a judge, I'm not a lawyer, I'm just telling you a lot of people are mad about this. Apparently a Molotov was thrown at him (have not seen this), and in the video I did see, he was on the ground about to have his face stomped in when he shot. There's an argument for self-defense there; it'll be up to a court to decide, but for now, it's not clear that these murder charges are going to hold up.
  - ideals 6y ago