Violation of this term is a violation of 18 U.S.C. It especially may not be read by those who approve of the 1/6/21 coup attempt. This blog may not be read by those who think that SARS-CoV-2 (the "Coronavirus") is just the flu. 5: Terms of Service: Political appointees of the Trump Administration may not read this blog unless they (i) post a comment confessing same and (ii) acknowledge that he is a Russian asset. Sooner or later, everyone will be offended here. 4: Trigger warning: Adult language is used herein. Read this before making comments on politics. 3: If you feel the need to whine on and on about something I wrote and that I am just an angry, mean, snarky, gun-toting Democratic old bitch, do it on your own blog. 2: Read this before you comment on anything. If you can’t see that the kid had a majority of the responsibility of the events that occurred, then nothing I or anyone else can say will change your closed mind. Did the kid’s second amendment rights supersede the protesters first amendment rights? Are YOU the one to decide who gets their rights upheld and who gets theirs trampled? Again, three people would have been fine. IF he was carrying a concealed weapon, no one would have known and would have left him alone. IF he was not brandishing a long gun, those three would have no idea to try to disarm him. IF he had stayed away, those three would have been fine. The kid being there WAS the cause of the deaths of two people and injuring a third.
A disingenuous argument at least.įinally, yes. Many would view that as the pot calling the kettle black. The inference is that the left alone is to decide what and who are allowed to do whatever they want. You like to use the phrase “approved people” here and on your own blog. Can’t you see the similarities?Īnd before you try to put words in my mouth, and use “whataboutism”, any protesters that vandalize or create destruction SHOULD be prosecuted. Your side has berated those that question the actions of police departments that are taken against people of color. Your side made the claims that the Democrats and Clinton were running a child prostitution ring in the basement of a New York pizza shop, remember? And those statements encouraged a North Carolina MAN to drive up and attempt to ‘free’ the children. Jeez, this isn’t the Wild West.Ī valid argument can be made that those on the right should bear some responsibility for inciting the kid’s behavior. He decided it would be a good idea to go in ‘lone wolf’, brandishing a long gun (cause he certainly didn’t conceal it). The kid’s reason to be there? To keep the peace? Really? He wasn’t trained for that job. Their reason to be there? Um, they were protesting the the police shooting of Jacob Blake four times in the back. How many did THEY kill and wound with their weapons?
I’m not saying he has to be incarcerated for eternity, but perhaps some jail time, as well as some type of restitution to the families may have been in order. I AM challenging the decision made by the kid to insert himself into that volatile situation without the training to do so as well as questioning the judgement of the “adults” in his life that influenced his state of mind (thinking, yeah, let’s get a 17year old kid a rifle and turn him loose in a city in another state unsupervised).Īctions have consequences, correct? And if we could somehow magically remove the kid from the situation, they’d most likely still be alive.
I’m not debating his “right” to walk the streets that night. The fact that he was open carrying a rifle, while not in any kind of regulation uniform, among a crowd of “protesters” seems like a poor personal choice, don’t ya think? The vigilante action I refer to is the kid “protecting” property that he had no ownership or interest in, and “assisting” the police in crowd control.