Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I don’t know why ICE doesn’t wait to put out a statement. They knew the video was going to come out. The domestic terrorist line is absurd.
You can see it in the comments in the first 10 minutes on this thread...get their adherents to buy into whatever they put out so they maintain that line despite any evidence that follows. Orwell warned us of this, or at least those of us who read his books.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The suspect was armed with a gun which the federal agents recovered.
Which is everyone's constitutional right. Doesn't prove anything. It's like saying he was carrying a baguette and the police recovered it. So what?
Was he just walking down the street? If he was protesting with a gun, that’s concerning
He's a lawfully registered gun owner. He never touched the gun during the incident and was shot after the gun was taken from him.
This. Never pulled his gun out, never a threat. Bad, sloppy and very dangerous police work.
Anonymous wrote:The most simplistic explanation of the incident is agents had Alex subdued, one agent sees gun in waistband and yells “he has a gun! He has a gun!” while REMOVING THE GUN. Another agent hears “he has a gun” and immediately unholsters his weapon and starts shooting Alex in the back.
Anonymous wrote:The most simplistic explanation of the incident is agents had Alex subdued, one agent sees gun in waistband and yells “he has a gun! He has a gun!” while REMOVING THE GUN. Another agent hears “he has a gun” and immediately unholsters his weapon and starts shooting Alex in the back.
Anonymous wrote:I don’t know why ICE doesn’t wait to put out a statement. They knew the video was going to come out. The domestic terrorist line is absurd.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The suspect was armed with a gun which the federal agents recovered.
Which is everyone's constitutional right. Doesn't prove anything. It's like saying he was carrying a baguette and the police recovered it. So what?
Was he just walking down the street? If he was protesting with a gun, that’s concerning
He's a lawfully registered gun owner. He never touched the gun during the incident and was shot after the gun was taken from him.
Anonymous wrote:The most simplistic explanation of the incident is agents had Alex subdued, one agent sees gun in waistband and yells “he has a gun! He has a gun!” while REMOVING THE GUN. Another agent hears “he has a gun” and immediately unholsters his weapon and starts shooting Alex in the back.
Anonymous wrote:The most simplistic explanation of the incident is agents had Alex subdued, one agent sees gun in waistband and yells “he has a gun! He has a gun!” while REMOVING THE GUN. Another agent hears “he has a gun” and immediately unholsters his weapon and starts shooting Alex in the back.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The suspect was armed with a gun which the federal agents recovered.
Which is everyone's constitutional right. Doesn't prove anything. It's like saying he was carrying a baguette and the police recovered it. So what?
Was he just walking down the street? If he was protesting with a gun, that’s concerning
He's a lawfully registered gun owner. He never touched the gun during the incident and was shot after the gun was taken from him.