To think that they're lawyers. it pleases me to no end to think that they could be convicted of felonies, and then be disbarred... never mind not be allowed to own guns every again.
Everything about their actions were intentionally and blatantly reckless. That woman pointed a gun at people like She was in some 60’s spy show. On full display, they behaved in the exact opposite way a logical person should have behaved. I understand that throngs of people showing up on your street would make anybody nervous, I get that 100%. But perhaps before looking at that giant wood-carved tapestry with the second amendment wood burned into it over your fireplace, consider that there are these wonderful inventions called doors...
On the topic of names I look at it like this.. The changes that people are looking for aren’t things that can be made overnight so if it’s a first step or gesture of good will then sure, change the names. But it can’t be the only thing. Washington didn’t solve racism by getting rid of the name Redskins. Also, when these things are happening the question “why now?” should be asked until an actual answer is given. Using Washington as an example the owner said in 2013: “We’ll never change the name. It’s that simple. NEVER — you can use caps.” He should have to explain why he views it differently now than he did before and why he feels the name should be changed. Or he could give the answer that he truly doesn’t care and was backed into a corner by sponsors, which if nothing else is at least honest. But short of that I generally feel like everything with names ends up getting off track and being a distraction to what could be more important and productive discussions.
Y'all got them all wrong. The pictures were shopped. Here's the unedited pic, they were just practicing their new act: Lady Anti BLM.
and he looks like someone who orders a steak by firmly but flirtatiously telling the waitress "just knock its horns off, wipe its ass and bring it out here!" meanwhile what he actually wants is a medium well hamburger.
I'm not not saying there's anything wrong with it per-se, I'm just saying you're wrong for enjoying it.
They have doors just like Target in Minneapolis did, these protesters already broke through a gate in a private community so they showed that they were willing to destroy some things but from what I can tell were otherwise peaceful. It was reckless of her to handle her gun the way she did and she should be cited for it, though not a felony unless all of the protesters get a felony breaking and entering charge. I don't agree with the way she pointed her gun at the protesters, especially with her finger on the trigger, but I have no issue with them using guns as a deterrent on their own property. I don't know that I would have done the same, but put yourself in their shoes for a minute and tell me you wouldn't be concerned if not outright frightened. If you can do that, I'm pretty sure you know in the back of your mind you're lying.
If they wanted to use their guns as deterrent, they would have stood inside their house or on the porch by their door, with their guns pointed at the ground. The fact that they approached the crowd and brandished their weapons is a clear violation of law. There's also the fact that this isn't the first time they've brandished their guns at people (without the convenient "scary black mob" as a cover story to be swallowed by the Governor and President).
As I mentioned, I have a few issues with what they did and I'm not a lawyer so I'm not up on the law surrounding protecting your own property so approaching the crowd, even if on their own property was probably a bad move, but acting like the protesters had any right to be there is also incorrect.
I get a little tired of the justifications. "But but but the protesters..." doesnt mean you can commit crimes, or ignore gun safety. This seems to come up a LOT with the BLM movement as a way of offsetting responsibility, and it needs to stop. "That unarmed black man we beat and shot to death? He was a criminal! He got high in '95! He didnt tuck in his shirt at church one time! Totally justifiable use of force." You dont need to be a saint to deserve justice, and you cant just shoot guilty people. The fact that protesters dared enter their gated community does not mean that those two can endanger them by waving around a firearm like a a goddamned sparkler, any more than graffiti is an offense worthy of an extraordinary rendition style abduction and arrest. My main issue is...well, if you are a gun owner, you better know the law when you take that gun out of the safe and outside. If you dont, err on the side of caution. Also, those are American citizens you're brandishing a gun at, asshole. Your fellow Americans, in your community. I can't understand the mentality of "ima grab my gun, but not put on shoes". It makes me think those guns are toys to them, not instruments capable of killing. It's a pussy masquerading as a cock because it had a gun. Those cunts have never been shot at, never saw the aftermath of a shooting, and were not taught to respect the weapon. You think those two sad fucks are able to deal with the aftermath of taking a life? I don't. If you want to deter someone from making you a victim, you behave differently.
They just should have stayed in their fucking house. It was THAT easy. Nothing is easier than not doing something.
I get the thinking behind this, even if I don't agree with it. If these protesters were also brandishing guns and threatening to burn down their house, then by all means, protect your life and property. These people broke a gate to a gated community to protest at the mayor's house because the mayor read the names and addresses of a bunch of protesters on a live stream. She is either breathtakingly stupid or evil for disseminating information that people could use to harass or even murder people for protesting policy brutality. If that isn't protest-worthy behavior, I don't know what is. That being said, threatening people with guns for exercising their constitutionally protected rights is in nowhere near proportional to breaking down a gate to a gated community. I think there needs to be serious conversations about blaming people for the bad behavior of others. Maybe instead of asking what a person did to deserve something, we should be telling people to stop doing bad things.
I've read numerous reports that the gate was not broken by the protesters, so I'm leaving that element of it up in the air until all the facts are known and verified in the court of law. Also, EVEN IF they were in their lawful rights to do what they did (pointing the guns at protesters), we need to stop asking ourselves if we can, and rather should be guided by if we "should." They may be found not guilty on the basis of the facts. That doesn't mean they aren't assholes.
Found guilty or not, the governor has already said on record that if they are convicted of any crimes he will give them a full pardon. From there the legal questions open up, such as: is accepting a pardon considered an admission of guilt and IF SO, does that still cause them to technically be considered felons therefore revoking their rights to own firearms, will they be immediately disbarred, not to mention the almost slam-dunk civil suit they'd have brought against them by one or more of the protesters.
What happened to calling two groups of assholes who ran into each other assholes? I'm not trying to diminish the legitimate problems the protests are addressing, but they stormed a neighborhood. Wall off city hall with a human barricade and force the issue for sure, but you ended up with a rowdy mob storming through a residential area and people reacted. I just don't get why people can't say so those people are horrible for pointing guns at people while not also saying those people are horrible for storming through a neighborhood.