zlacker

[flagged]

>>fzeror+(OP)
> Frankly if you don't change your opinion after this, then I'm going to either assume you're a federal agent attempting to maintain the propaganda line or so absolutely psychotic that you belong well and away from proper society.

I am not watching your videos just because you said this. I approached the situation with a respectful disagreeing opinion and the information available to me. Everyone else here is being unreasonable and completely in violation of commenting guidelines.

>>zahlma+z
> I am not watching your videos

Oooph. Just watch it.

>>fzeror+(OP)
Thanks. I watched the videos. It's a horrific event. But I can't see that either of the videos shows a gun being removed from a protester. At the end of [2], someone does seem to walk away from the scene holding a gun, just a fraction of a second before the shooting begins. But I can't see any point at which a gun is removed from a protester.

>>zahlma+z
Although I normally avoid these videos I did sit through all the ones I could find, and I strongly recommend watching them.

>>fzeror+(OP)
[flagged]

>>zahlma+z
Not OP, and not going to call you a fed or psychotic, but I recommend watching the videos if you'd like to form an educated opinion on this situation.

>>zahlma+z
When everyone else is incorrect, perhaps it is time to reevaluate your understanding.

>>gusgus+Av
You say that as if there were something inherently wrong with offering such a defense. That is simply not so.

It is, in fact, possible for shootings by LEO to be justified. And the federal ICE agents are, in fact, law enforcement. Walz and/or Frey are factually incorrect when they assert otherwise, it's trivially looked up, relevant legal statues like 8 U.S. Code § 1357 (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1357) are quite clear about the agents' powers (which as an objective matter of fact do include situations where they may arrest US citizens without a warrant), and Walz and Frey have no real excuse for their false assertions.

You don't have to like laws that entitle law enforcement to use lethal force in limited circumstances (which seem to be only slightly broader than those extended to ordinary citizens), but the US does in fact have such laws, at both state and federal level. And the consequence of not having them, practically speaking, is that criminals kill officers and/or go free.

And as it happens, there's a clear defense in the Good case. I've already pointed at actual lawyers saying the same and explaining it in detail. And my submission of that (>>46596055 ) got flagged for no good reason.