• TechyDad
    link
    fedilink
    389 months ago

    Right. A counter protestor would be holding a sign, not aiming a gun. This wasn’t “counter protesting” in any sense of the word.

    • @Rivalarrival
      link
      -229 months ago

      Article claimed he was flying flags from his truck. I would argue that “flying flags” is reasonably comparable to “holding a sign”. “Counter protester” seems an apt description.

      Article further claims he didn’t “aim a gun” until after his truck was attacked with him inside. That “gun” was quickly determined to be an air gun.

      • FfaerieOxide
        link
        fedilink
        19 months ago

        Article further claims he didn’t “aim a gun” until after his truck was attacked with him inside.

        The alleged attack did not happen until after he tried to run marchers over at the intersection of E. 8th Ave. and Pearl St.

        • @Rivalarrival
          link
          19 months ago

          suddenly pulled into the intersection of E. 8th Ave. and Pearl St., blocking the march.

          Article claims “blocking”, not “running over”, and it is demonstrably biased against him. I reject your “running over” allegation. If there were any truth to it, this writer would have made that claim.

          If he was impeding a lawful use of the road, jail him for that. I’m on record supporting the free use of roadways, and that I believe 3 years imprisonment is an incredibly lenient punishment for deliberately obstructing lawful traffic.

          However, “obstructing traffic” does not invite or justify any use of force attacking either him or his vehicle, nor does it negate a self defense claim by a person who has been so attacked.

          • FfaerieOxide
            link
            fedilink
            19 months ago

            How were these demonstrators to know if he was intending to run them over prior to his doing so?

            It was a credible threat, given the history of fash killing people with their cars at demonstrations and any step taken to protect themselves from that potential threat would be justified.

            • @Rivalarrival
              link
              19 months ago

              Not even the overtly biased author of the article was willing to make that claim. You’ll need a primary source before you can reasonably make such a claim.

                • @Rivalarrival
                  link
                  19 months ago

                  Why stop there? He’s got a dick, so by your personal evidentiary standard, he must have been raping the protesters as well.

                  • FfaerieOxide
                    link
                    fedilink
                    19 months ago

                    If he had been getting his dick out I’d certainly condone kicking it before he could.

                    …not that you have any proof he does have a dick.

                    Why are you defending a guy who shot at protesters and refers to himself as “a domestic terrorist” on his own youttube channel though?