I've been wrong about something and I'd like to show you what I've been wrong about. If you do not wish to see violence don't click the link I'll be posting below.
Due to recent discussions about ICE agents in Minneapolis (wearing masks, because that's somehow the worst part of the events... 🙄), I've been poking about the most infamous incident lately: the shooting of the woman driving the Honda pilot.
I broadly believed reports that the woman had hit the agent with her vehicle. If that was the case, it's clear cut self-defense.
However, on further review, this does not seem to be the case. As such, I have changed my opinion based on more facts and deem the actions of the agent to be outside the bounds of self defense and would label this as murder.
The video floating around, and that I've posted here on nostr showing a clear hit has been fairly certainly found to be a fabrication.
Below, you'll find a link to reddit. I know, I know... but it contains a video that is compiled and synced from videos that do seem to be legitimate, and they clearly show malice of forethought by the agent in question as he drew his weapon before the woman had turned her wheels to move her vehicle.
https://www.reddit.com/r/minnesota/comments/1q71k0w/all_angles_of_minneapolis_ice_shooting_synched/
As such, the agent broke with all known SOPs regarding firing at a "fleeing vehicle" thus, IMO, is guilty of murder, at least until I am presented evidence otherwise.
That being said, it doesn't change my opinion on:
-Agents wearing face coverings
-ICE is doing a job that is necessary as long as there are national borders and unwelcome, criminal miscreants
-Ending the welfare state will solve nearly all of these issues without the descent into martial law
-Agents of the government operating with carte blanche immunity will only be emboldened to do more of this
So, I was wrong, evidently, about this particular shooting which I will call a murder now. That's fine. (Me being wrong, not the murder.) I'm still open to discussing it and being presented with other evidence on either side. I'd even appreciate it.
This post is Proof of Work. 🫡 Massive respect to you, man. I came to the same conclusion, he saw her moving and leaned into the front of the vehicle to have an excuse to shoot. It was convincing, but with all the angles, it's quite obvious that he was clear of the vehicle when he opened fire.
https://cdn.nostrcheck.me/cb79422e4577cde3618226b6ae338e36e98cd70671024b8692e9e872a58bcb1c.webp
Look, only God know what was in that man’s head.
he was dragged by another car earlier.
everyone trying to treat this as a clear cut this or that case should be sitting at the kids table and not contributing to the discussion.
She created a messy situation, and he responded to the messy situation.
That’s what being in the arena is about. laws are written for the man in the arena. if he clearly walked up to her and blasted when she wasn’t spinning her tires out, then yes, it’s clear and cut.
but it wasn’t .
it’s a mess.
i don’t like that it happened
i would not like a world where we hold men in the messy arena to a sterile standard.
in fact, if you try enforcing impossible standards, that just incentivizes people to abandon civilization and return to the law of the jungle
It seems to me like you are implying that not shooting a civilian in the head 3 times - two of them from the side of her vehicle when in zero danger - is an "impossible standard". I think it's a pretty basic standard, along with not calling citizens "fucking bitch" after you killed them. Along with allowing medics to provide aid to the person you just shot. And not leaving the scene immediately with your firearm. Along with the entire Federal government not dragging her name through the mud and calling her a terrorist before an investigation even began.
I think these should be considered bottom of the fucking barrel standards. And neither the agent nor the Federal government lived to to these basic standards. It's not just about the (senseless and evil) shooting, it's the entire shit sandwich.
I will agree with this take a bit more than the nym you are responding to's take.
Think more, emote less.
Until then, just 🤫
The only emotion I have emoted is vast amusement.
How about you just hush yourself if you have nothing either amusing or interesting to say. heh
I understand why this is difficult for you: you don’t understand the difference between rhetoric and dialectic, passion and principle, thinking and feeling.
Read Aristotle’s “Rhetoric”
You will find it a most helpful first step to treat your state of ignorance.
good news, it’s curable!
Your aloofness is laughable.
I have rather fun with my ignorance, you arrogant twit.
Go find another classician to pick the bones of the long dead with.
Or do I need to say that in Latin for you to figure out that I actually might know about all that but don't choose to bother with it.
You speak incoherently.
Out both sides of your mouth.
The load bearing joists of society aren’t something to “have rather fun with.”
Stick to your lane.
If he was, in fact, dragged by another car earlier, then he is, in fact a really bad kinda retard for getting in front of another vehicle. That is a hugely stupid thing to do and one of the most basic faux pas anyone in a stupid, tense, angry situation can make. Geez.
It isn't super clear cut, but I am not going to give him that much benefit of the doubt.
I hope if you ever have to respond to an absolutely absurd situation, the standard you advocate holding him to is not applied to you.
It’s an odd type of hypocrisy you are displaying.
Good lord you guys are gay.
