search results matching tag: bystander

» channel: learn

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.000 seconds

    Videos (70)     Sift Talk (0)     Blogs (4)     Comments (309)   

Nov 3rd, 202, Atlanta’s State Farm Arena Fulton County

White supremacist Kenosha County Sheriff david beth

newtboy says...

Sorry, you seem to have bought the right wing antifa lie. Where did you get this explanation?

Most people caught shooting or committing arson were dressed as antifa but were in fact right wingers, largely boogaloos boys, who's plan is to commit crimes and blame antifa and BLM in hopes of sparking a civil (and race) war. Nearly 100% of shootings and fully 100% of attempted bombings fit that model.

Because someone wears a black facemask is no indication they support antifa. If they're armed, it's a near guarantee they are anti antifa.

1) the kid came from out of state with armed friends intent on confronting unarmed protesters with guns, you don't do this to protect a random gas station, you do this in hopes of shooting someone.
2) he sure didn't look like he had been sprayed as he ran from the murder he just committed, hands were on his weapon or above his head, not covering his face like a sprayed person.
3) white pedophile? Explain please....how would you know...because he had a 17 year old girlfriend?
4) white guy in a crowd of black men shouting "nigger"?! Doesn't sound right, and I haven't heard it in any videos, but are you saying that excuses the militia boy shooting him and others?
5) gunshot from Antifa?!? Now I know you're duped by right wing media. Antifa is pretty hard to identify unless you're dishonest and just call any black mask wearing person antifa. Also, what evidence is there of this single gunshot from the BLM crowd?
6) he was NOT running to police lines, he was running past them. He didn't stop at them and say "btw, I just shot at least 3 people and maybe more when I just shot into the crowd.", he just walked on by, still carrying the smoking gun.
7) again, where are you getting this info?

8 ) in short, a cowardly murderer who crossed state lines heavily armed who shouldn't have been there but went looking for trouble, started a fight, murdered another man, ran away armed pointing his gun at many uninvolved bystanders, shot and killed those trying to stop an armed murderer (should have emptied that glok if it existed) so he shot one, murdered another and fled the scene, the city, and the state without ever reporting that he had shot at least three people and killed at least two.

I hope he gets sentenced to life in prison, his dad too if they went together, he went heavily armed to a protest hoping to shoot some liberals, he did, now he wants to use the fact that some citizens tried to disarm and citizens arrest him after he shot someone in the head as an excuse for both murders and the other shootings?! And you buy it?!?

I'm so extremely disappointed you would buy such obvious self serving slant where the out of state multiple murderer who travelled armed looking for conflict is the victim.
That's totally asinine. I have much higher expectations for you.

Again, references for these claims please.

Mordhaus said:

I don't agree with him, but there are normal protesters and then there are Antifa people.

If you dig a bit deeper into the whole Kyle Rittenhouse thing, you find out a lot that is being flat out ignored.

1. The kid was protecting a business that had already been vandalized by Antifa.
2. He was pepper sprayed by Antifa 'protesters' for guarding the site.

3. Then a white pedophile started attacking him while saying the n word, "Cmon and shoot ME, N****!"

4. In the ensuing conflict, which included at least one gunshot from the Antifa folks, Kyle shot that guy and then tried to run to the police lines as multiple Antifa people tried to chase him down to beat him/take away his gun.
5. He tripped and a person with a skateboard, as well as a rap sheet for assaults a mile long, started beating him with the skateboard as he lay prone. This was the second person who got shot.

6. The final 'protester' was carrying a Glock 17 and later said (paraphrasing) "I wish I would have just mag dumped the Glock into him while he was laying there". This protester also had a massive rap sheet and shouldn't even have had the Glock, but in his intelligence he started trying to wrestle the AR-15 from Kyle...from the business end. He was the last person shot and lost a bicep.

So, in short, a scared kid who shouldn't have been there was attacked, shot at, and mauled by several 'peaceful' protesters. He defended himself and then tried to run to the police, but they weren't having that, so some more people got shot.

Now he will probably get sentenced to life in a highly politicized trial because he stood up and tried to guard property that 'peaceful Antifa protesters' were trying to burn to the ground.

Grandma steps in front of police guns to protect grandson .

newtboy says...

It's probably so they can release a body cam that doesn't show him with his hands up but has the audio of the cop screaming to "prove" they weren't up and visible when he shoots. Grandma and bystanders screwed that normal M.O. up.

00Scud00 said:

Why does he keep screaming "show us your hands!" when they are already out where they can see them? Morons.

Pet owner struggles in vain to shift her huge hound...

Cop Pepper Spraying Teenage Girl

BSR says...

No. the black man in the background was correct when he said the police let the badge go to their heads.

He could have been an asset to the police in calming the girl down if the police saw and took the opportunity.

With good reason she was very afraid to be in the situation she was in. She needed someone she could trust and it may have very well been the bystander who the police told to stand back.

The mace was certainly uncalled for. They could have pulled her in from the otherside of the car.

Quit looking for reasons to punish. Their job is to protect her. That's why they tell criminals to "watch your head" getting into the car. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

BTW, I was raised by a good cop and Marine.

bobknight33 said:

What was clearly shown was proper respect b the action of the police. She made the situation worse and received the results.

She was given every opportunity of respect from police.

Quit making excuses for wrong choices.

Cart Narcs Catch A Dumb Hag

newtboy says...

I can't say I disagree, but the public shaming is less for them and more for bystanders who might think twice now before repeating her behavior, lest they get a repeat of his.

moonsammy said:

Eh, I agree in theory but think that in practice it's a rather pointless endeavor. The type of person who is self-centered and entitled enough to make the "it's someone else's job to clean up my shit" argument is not the type of person who, in my experience, is remotely likely to change. Narcissism precludes negative judgments on one's self. Plus most of the time calmly explaining anything to a person who already feels you've wronged them is not going to result in the outcome you'd like. You might say that some of the time it'll have a positive impact, but I think on balance the amount of strife I'd put myself through for that rare "win" isn't nearly worth it.

I do feel this approach might work if there's a friend or family member with the offender, but even then at best it's a dice roll. Maybe the other party will point out that the asshat was in fact in the wrong, and that may alter their behavior in the future just to avoid an argument. However, if the 3rd party spends a lot of time around the entitled asshole in question then there's a good chance they either behave similarly themselves, or are well aware of the asshattery and know it's pointless to fight them on it. So... yeah. Maybe a semi-public shaming? Don't think filming would ever help things stay cool though.

Bodycam shows the fatal shooting of Danquirs Franklin

BSR says...

The black man looked hopeless or careless. My first thought was suicide by cop. When I saw the woman in the car I suspect it was a relationship problem.

They took way too long to tell the bystander to step away.

Burglary In Progress

scheherazade says...

Reply to multiple previous comments:



Re:
"Literally no different from a pistol other than it can have better accuracy and sometimes higher caliber"

.38 (9mm), .40, .45 are the calibers you will see used by police pistols

.223 (5.56mm), .300, .308, are the calibers you will see used by police rifles

Unless an officer is using a personal firearm at work, the pistols should all be higher caliber.

The major difference is muzzle velocity damage.
The pistol cuts a tunnel the diameter of the [expanded] bullet.
The rifle leaves an exit wound multiple inches across, and at point blank will grenade the exit side of the target, painting the wall with gibs.





Re:
"Can you tell me why you believe it's "not a great idea" when the criminals already all have guns too?"

Because police should be there to protect citizens lives, at the cost of their own if needed. (Hence the "hero"/"Public Servant" status they so like to remind us of)

If they protect their own lives, at the cost of citizens if needed, then they become a part of the problem they are supposed to be solving.

Just imagine the uninvolved bystander down the street struck down for no fault of their own.

The better path forward is full head to toe level 4 body armor for police, not heavier police firepower in packed suburbs.

That way they have the option to hold fire and assess the situation without shitting their pants and hosing the place down with lead "just in case, so they minimize the risk of getting hurt".

Full L4 body armor means that when things like the VT shooting happen, the police don't pitch tents outside and wait for SWAT (who actually has armor) to show up while people are likely getting killed inside.

Full L4 body armor means that when police open a door to a bathroom with an intruder inside (or a vacuum), they don't have to be thinking "kill or be killed".





Re:
"You are assuming it's a high velocity rifle. It's likely only 9mm, meaning minimal impact and penetration"

The video shows shots of the rifle magazine. It's not a 9mm pcc (pistol caliber carbine) magazine. It's the standard form factor. Meaning it is likely to be one of common the off the shelf calibers for that form factor :
.223/5.56
.300 blackout
6.8 spc
.224 valkyrie
6.5 grendel
None are 9mm. And other than a subsonic .300 blackout variant (used with suppressors/silencers), all pack a world more hurt than a 9mm.






It's true that a faster/heavier round will pass through more walls, and more houses.

Not sure it matters though, as 9mm ball will go through plenty of sheetrock layers, and rifle ammo stands a chance at fragmenting on impact with obstacles.
Which goes farther for any given shot will depend on what each one strikes along the way, and if it's bullet is of type FMJ/ball or HP or frag or penetrator or whatever.

-scheherazade

Life - Stoat kills rabbit ten times its size - BBC One

Tesla Towing Silverado Truck Out Of A Charger Station

Payback says...

Sorry, I'm definitely only referring to the coal-rolling shitstains that have nothing better to do than passive-aggressively bully other people.

If you don't like electric vehicles, don't buy one.

Don't see anyone blocking diesel pumps.

Ps. I don't own or want an EV, and my Mustang definitely gets worse mileage than any diesel, by design. If someone looks down their nose at me, I'm not going to do shit to innocent bystanders just because I'm a whiny little bitch like the ICEing dicks.

ChaosEngine said:

That seems a little harsh given the vast majority of the car owning public can’t afford a BEV.

Although parking in a charging station is definitely a dick move.

Sky turns blue over NYC from arc flash/ vaporized aluminum

eric3579 says...

Not the sharpest tool in the shed

cameraman: "looks like a tornado or something, and my power just flickered"

bystander: "yeah it's the plant, the power plant is going out"

cameraman for the next two minutes: "wow I have no idea what's going on. weird weather. must be a tornado or the end of the world"

Woman steps into the line of fire to save a homeless man

newtboy says...

"He's got a knife!" (Points to discarded knife 20 ft away and continues to point his gun at bystanders, not just his suspect)
You've got a gun, asshole, and you're endangering the public with it. Should someone shoot you....for safety?
Having had a knife in their possession doesn't make a person criminal, dangerous, or threatening. It's simply an excuse to treat them that way.

Yep, she saved his life. That cop was clearly itching to shoot him....or someone. Dude needs retraining or reassigning to parking enforcement.

Lazy Nashville Police Fatally Shoot Black Man

newtboy says...

Please. The Cartmanesque mental gymnastics you're doing are professional level.

No one said running is legal or right, I noted how it's understandable given the likely outcome of being detained, guilty or not. I also noted how deadly force is not an acceptable response to fleeing. It's far from the only option. Edit: I also noted that, if one is responsible for other people's overreaction that goes both ways, and they would be responsible for the outcome of not fleeing.....including false charges, beatings, and death.

Yes, if they, and other officers, and good Samaritan bystanders, and helicopters, and the radio can't catch up, and they aren't posing an ongoing significant threat of death or serious bodily harm to the officer or others, the answer isn't shoot them in the back, it is
Let
Them
Go.

See, you're wrong again, I could say it. ;-) Not only that, the law says it too.
The answer you seem to want is "go ahead and kill them if they won't comply", that's immoral and illegal and completely ignores the reality of what happens to many innocent people when they do comply.

Sagemind said:

Okay - So help me understand - If a police officer tells you to freeze, and you run, that's a perfectly okay response, and the officer should let you do so?

I'm not trying to be a smart ass, but what is "any" officer's response supposed to be, if they can't catch up - just let them go?
Because if that's the new rule, why would anyone ever stop when running means a free ticket?

I mean this sincerely. What is an officer supposed to do in this situation? And you can't say, let him go....

Unarmed child shot in the back while running from police

newtboy says...

Just the start of the investigation, and they released security video of the drive by.....and this car was just driving behind the car with the actual, now charged shooter, not involved but simply a bystander that was hit with crossfire.
Cop was today charged with criminal homicide (why not manslaughter or murder I wonder).
So much for "if".

Edit: they're now reporting he was in the front seat of the shooters car, not the second car in the video. He's not the shooter, but was involved.
Damn it, news organizations, get your story straight before you put it on the air please.

MilkmanDan said:

@greatgooglymoogly -- "Lethal force is only for when someone's life is actively being threatened."

and @Mordhaus -- "You can't shoot a fleeing suspect in the back unless the officer has probable cause to believe the suspect 'poses a significant threat of death or serious bodily harm'."


A fair investigation absolutely needs to happen. BUT, it is at least possible that it was reasonable for the officer to make the judgement call that the kid was an active and significant threat of death or bodily harm to other people.

If he's running away from a car that was clearly used in a drive-by, with weapons in the car... I dunno, man. However questionable the officer's actions are, the kid getting himself into that situation requires a rather longer and even more questionable chain of life decisions.

I'm not saying that stuff is known (I haven't read or watched anything beyond the video), and again a fair investigation into the officer's actions is absolutely necessary. But at some point, I think @transmorpher makes a solid counter argument -- again, IF the stuff about him clearly having just been involved with a drive-by is true. Live by the gun, expect to die by it.

Unarmed child shot in the back while running from police

transmorpher says...

Let him run away to get a bigger gun, to get a hostage, or to harm someone else?

Given that they were in a car with weapons and bullet holes, all of those things were likely to occur. The officer did the right thing to protect the public.

Can you imagine if they didn't shoot, and an innocent bystander got killed? Everyone would be asking why they didn't shoot when they had the chance. It's a tough gig to be a cop.

The kid played with fire and got burnt.

greatgooglymoogly said:

Even if he had a gun in his back pocket, police shouldn't be shooting him running away. Not following police orders should not equal a death sentence. Lethal force is only for when someone's life is being actively threatened.



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Beggar's Canyon