Anarchism

I'm remembering back to the story just a couple of days ago and I'm thinking about all the commenters who immediately accepted the story of the 'peacekeeper' guy - and the official line from the police - that Arturo was raising his weapon and heading towards the crowd, so the 'peacekeeper' shot "in defence of the crowd". Many commenters repeated the line he had been, "likely about to do a mass murder - it's very sad that a bystander died, but they just prevented a shooting spree". Anyone saying 'wtf why is the actual killer not arrested' and suggesting that we only had one side of the story (the killer's, who the cops were suspiciously immediately siding with) and that there is no proof beyond biased witness claims yet - was being downvoted.

Remember this shit next time you take the word of the police at face value when very few facts are available.

Glad I took the advice of my brown activist friends and didn't support 50501. They're a sketch organization from the start.

Why is the name of the victim everywhere but the killer gets anonymity?

I understand the need to not give the jackboots an excuse, but WTF is this HOA nonsense at a protest?

There's not much that's more fascist than cops killing people and then prosecuting the surviving victims. Totally normal in USA.

Zero surprise that normies eat it up. We're indoctrinated into copaganda our while lives.

I've kept quiet about this online so far, but my local 50501/no kings organizers are dangerously uninformed about organizing protests and haven't taken any of the experienced local organizer's advice about security at these events. They're literally primarily organized on a "liberal women's" Facebook group. At least in my area, experienced community organizers have been staying well clear of their mess. Let them gather all the white liberals from the suburbs to go kettle themselves on a pedestrian bridge and yell at cars passing them by. They'll learn why the experienced community defenders don't want anything to do with them after it's too late, but it's not like any of us are surprised by right wingers coopting and declawing a protest movement.

A single blurry still doesn't pose a convincing argument that he was or wasn't pointing the weapon towards the crowds.

I've not seen enough to conclude either way. So many contradicting things.

If you were wanting to assist with security, when someone obviously doing security addresses you then you'd try and comply, and explain your intent. But did the security actually address him? Or did he just run away from a gun pointed at him? Or did he have his gun pointed in the direction of the crowd while moving towards the crowd and ignoring security? Much of this doesn't make sense.

Yeah send Venmo money to this random QR code! Clowns.

Edit: reports say he was seen move away from the crowd, hid behind a low wall where he removed his rifle from his backpack, and "assumed a firing position" and moved back towards the crowd. No amount of Open Carry allows you to raise that rifle into a ready to shoot position without repercussions.

DAMN. Yeah that story slipped past me. Thanks for the post.

This explains the convulated reporting I suppose