kreetx

8 ms·

121.
by kreetx 9mo ago
You do have the right to bear arms but bearing arms conveys a meaning, that you'd see a reason to use it, so if you have a gun at an event where there are ample amounts of law enforcement present, against who would you be protecting yo
122.
by kreetx 9mo ago
I think he did have his hand(s) on the officer right after he raised it. To me this "protective raise of the hand" looked like taking his hands off of the officer. Also, while Alex may have had protectiveness as a thought in his h
123.
by kreetx 9mo ago
If you approve of interfering with police work then we won't be finding middle ground here. Perhaps the special ingredient in the US is the popularity of carrying weapons, it's know to cause other shootings as well. As for approva
124.
by kreetx 9mo ago
In my comments, I add opinions after the facts. Nor have I been donwvoted to oblivion. IMO, the people who I reply to aren't really acquainted with the facts. I on the other hand happen to be a "bootlicker", while their opi
125.
by kreetx 9mo ago
Yes, because the woman was following the agent around, whistling.
126.
by kreetx 9mo ago
The current version appears to be that the victims gun went off (in the hands of the police officer), by which the rest of them thought that it was the victim who was shooting, so they shot back. It's the opposition to the current pres
127.
by kreetx 9mo ago
The people involved can't recreate the past, now with better information. But I can tell you that showing up in a protest with a gun, and also putting your hands on a law enforcement officer aren't good ideas. Overall, restricti
128.
by kreetx 9mo ago
You should not carry a gun to a protest, not engage physically with an officer nor resist when they start arresting you after that. You should watch the video. While seem to be an accident, a way to avoid it would have just been not bring a
129.
by kreetx 9mo ago
The confiscated gun went off and the officers thought it came from the person being detained so they shot him. Waiting out to be shot would have been incompetent had he really been shooting. Alex put hands on the officers first so there was
130.
by kreetx 9mo ago
There was a reason if you watched the video, it was the "help" of putting his hands on one of the officers. And bringing a gun into a situation like this. There was a lot of whistlers, but I think the woman being helped was one
131.
by kreetx 9mo ago
These people wouldn't be dying if they weren't out there picking a fight with the officers.
132.
by kreetx 9mo ago
How it went down was while the gun was taken away, somebody yelled "gun", then guns were drawn, then the victims gun went off which triggered police starting shooting. If this were the events, the first shot was what unfortunately
133.
by kreetx 9mo ago
The police is just as human as you and me. This person was carrying one gun - he might have more weapons on him. He was also resisting the takedown while the gun was found. You make it seem as this was just a random guy walking with a pho
134.
by kreetx 9mo ago
Should one wait to be get shot first until you are allowed to shoot back?
135.
by kreetx 9mo ago
Well, exactly. My recommendation would be not to carry a gun where there is law enforcement already there. Or if you do, don't resist capture. I.e, I maintain that this was an accident. The police didn't want to shoot this perso
136.
by kreetx 9mo ago
It's not about people carrying a gun at all, it's that should you carry a gun to a protest and should you engage in resisting to law enforcement while doing that. Had this person been perfectly still, he'd be still alive. (An
137.
by kreetx 9mo ago
The "bystander" was walking along with the officers blowing a whistle, and the guy that got between that bystander ("bystander") carried a gun. I don't think it's wise to interfere with police work by walking w
138.
by kreetx 9mo ago
I think you can shoot someone if you have reason to believe that somebody has a gun. In this particular occasion the guy did not have another gun. (Hence I'm calling it an accident, where the police officer may be at fault. Though, oth
139.
by kreetx 9mo ago
He was apparently grabbing something, which was said to be a phone. I personally would have just been entirely still right from the moment the detainment process started.
140.
by kreetx 9mo ago
As should you refrain from making assesments on human psychology if you are not able to do so.
141.
by kreetx 9mo ago
(to the sibling, mmustapic) What I'm saying is that he did have a gun, this particular gun was taken away, then he was apparently reaching for something else, which may have been mistaken for a gun, hence the shot. Or, the officer fire
142.
by kreetx 9mo ago
I'm here indeed. How bad is it, objectively?
143.
by kreetx 9mo ago
The shooting part was the accident. Of course you draw and aim a gun if you're detaining someone who also has a gun.
144.
by kreetx 9mo ago
I did see the videos, that was what made me come to that conclusion. I don't need any forgiveness from you. You should forgive yourself instead, become part of the grown-ups!
145.
by kreetx 9mo ago
If only take sides and don't make any actual arguments, then unfortunately you won't convince anyone either.
146.
by kreetx 9mo ago
These were accidents, not court proceedings where you have weeks or months to think things over. My prediction is that if you investigate them, then in the case where the woman was trying to drive away, the officer likely has no fault at al
147.
by kreetx 9mo ago
Yet, he was. Are there any points in the list that aren't correct. ("Like for real?")
148.
by kreetx 9mo ago
You spend too much time on the internet.
149.
by kreetx 9mo ago
It's funny how people use the lawfulness argument for carrying a gun to protest, but don't use the same argument against deporting illegals.
150.
by kreetx 9mo ago
It's famously peaceful if you carry a gun to a protest and it famously drives no officer around you even more to their edge.

More ›