Post: #1

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morni...-suspects/

Quote:MINNEAPOLIS — Simmering racial tensions boiled over yet again when several men shot five people here who had been protesting the recent police killing of an African American man in Minneapolis. Police said late Tuesday morning that they had arrested one suspect and were still seeking additional suspects in connection with the incident.

The previous night, police said five people suffered non-life-threatening gunshot injuries when at least one person opened fire in the crowd. At the time, police were searching for “3 white male suspects” who fled the scene, police said on social media. Police said Tuesday the suspect, a 23-year-old white man, was arrested in nearby Bloomington. He was not immediately identified, but police said his name would be released after he is charged.

A police spokesman confirmed to The Washington Post that those shot had been protesting outside the police station before the incident.

“Tonight, white supremacists attacked the ‪#‎4thPrecinctShutDown‬ in an act of domestic terrorism,” Black Lives Matter Minneapolis said on Facebook. “We won’t be intimidated.”

Although the family of the man killed by the police called for an end to the protests following the shooting, Black Lives Matter Minneapolis vowed to return to the police station Tuesday for another demonstration. Throughout the morning, protesters continued to gather outside the Minneapolis Police Department’s 4th Precinct, where demonstrators have been each day since the Nov. 15 police shooting of 24-year-old Jamar Clark.

And here's one video where the BLM protestors admit to attacking the White men who were recording them.




I just find this all to be strange that there's racial tensions heating up in Minneapolis . Considering that Minneapolis is quite a social liberal city and one of the friendliest to interracial dating in the US.

Post: #2

Betcha those cops are putting a lot of effort into this investigation.

Post: #3

Very, very strange story, all the more so because of the location. I'd wager it's either a false flag or-far more likely- rather than being "white supremacists" who assembled to assault the protesters, these guys came under attack by the protesters and fired their gun(s) to effect an escape.

Or I guess it really could be a bunch of white guys in Minnesota who decided to go assemble in a tiny 3 man army and open fire on the black people before fleeing. That would be basically unprecedented since about the 20's...

Post: #4

The whole protest is stupid anyways since Jamar(guy they are protesting for) attacked an EMT who had responded to a domestic violence call about him beating up his girlfriend. That was the reason he was shot; attacking a neutral party for no reason

Post: #5

The guy in the original story deserved to be shot.

These people should have stayed home.

Post: #6

I thought only one black guy lived in Minneapolis?

Post: #7

The BLM movement is ridiculous. I agree that in some cases, the crime did not warrant the individual to be shot. But they jump on EVERY single one. In some cases, the cops are actually doing the right thing.

Post: #8

http://edition.cnn.com/2015/11/21/us/min...-shooting/

Quote:Wilson said he had just walked out of the Elks Lodge as it was closing when he saw the officers with Clark on the ground. The lodge is across the street, about 35 feet from where the incident happened. It was dark, about 10 minutes before 1 a.m.

"I saw a still body laying on the ground restrained. Like I said, maybe about a minute after that, that's when the shot went off." Wilson said he couldn't see which officer shot Clark. "There was no reason to shoot him."

Quote:Spicer told CNN as the second group of EMS workers came, police removed the handcuffs.

"They went back and took the handcuffs off because they didn't want the EMS team seeing that this man was still in handcuffs," he said. "He just shot him. That's more s--- you gotta deal with."

That doesn't say "he deserved to die" to me.

Post: #9

"White supremacists", what a bunch of BS. I was watching a live stream of the events and saw how the protesters there quickly changed their story to this.

Basically, there has been a few counter protesters there for the past few days, off to the side not causing any problems. Note, this protest is in front of a police station, not exactly a location one would intend to go shoot people. Last night a dozen or so BLM protesters went over and started harassing the three counter protesters. Things escalated which led to the counter protesters needing to run away as the mob began to attack. BLM mob chases them for a few blocks trying to attack them further, eventually converges around them again, counter protesters are armed and fire at them in an obvious self defense scenario.

Immediately after, the guy doing the live stream from his phone interviews some of the BLM thugs involved about what happened and they proceed to say what I wrote above, that they attacked and chased them down (they were proud of it, they see that as 'justice'), and the three guys eventually turned and fired when the mob converged around them again. A few more people repeat a similar story. By about 30 min after however, you start hearing people telling the story different, now they say they didn't chase them, the guys were "white supremacists" and initiated the attack. I saw in real time a couple of the same people change their story to this version that suits their narrative better, it was unbelievable.

You see, in the eyes of people that don't understand personal responsibility and consequences for actions, the fact they attacked and chased the guys, threatening great bodily harm, is irrelevant to them. It's only what happens to themselves that matters.

Just as with "Jamar" , the dead criminal who they are protesting in support of, it doesn't matter that he beat the shit out of his girlfriend, or interfered with the paramedics so he could fuck her up more, or that he resisted arrest and allegedly tried to grab the cops gun.. none of those actions matter either.

The most idiotic part of the whole incident though was the three guys fleeing after shooting. They should have called 911 immediately after shooting and reported that they were being attacked and forced to defend themselves. As anyone who carries should know, they guy who calls the police first and reports an incident is seen as the victim, the 'complainant'. Instead, they flee, they now look guilty, few will believe their version of events, and will likely be convicted of something.

The BLM, the three guys, just a cluster of moronic people.

Post: #10

^ But come on...shoot 5 people? Just the act of brandishing the weapon would be enough to break off a group who are following you. Even firing a warning shot in the air would've cleared them out. Why would you even bring a gun to a counter protest if you had no intention on using it? Like if you felt it would be that dangerous that you'd need a gun to get out alive, why would you even show up in the first place?

edit -

I also wouldn't be shocked if it was a false flag. Like some guys paid off by George Soros to force a racial incident. I do think there are powerful people behind the scenes stoking this shit.

Post: #11

(11-24-2015 02:01 PM)Fast Eddie Wrote:  Very, very strange story, all the more so because of the location. I'd wager it's either a false flag or-far more likely- rather than being "white supremacists" who assembled to assault the protesters, these guys came under attack by the protesters and fired their gun(s) to effect an escape.

Or I guess it really could be a bunch of white guys in Minnesota who decided to go assemble in a tiny 3 man army and open fire on the black people before fleeing. That would be basically unprecedented since about the 20's...

I call bs also.

False flag or total misstatement of facts.

Smells like BS, looks like BS.


The BLM movement and the broader movement to nit pick every time a police officer sneezes wrong is part of a subversive communist attempt to nationalize the police in the US. Wake up people, your police are your local servants, even if many are flawed. You can elect a new mayor or commissioner or locally appropriate action. If the BLM communists have their stated goals your local police would be a soldier from another town, state or country and you will be powerless to participate.

Let's call a spade a spade and expose their own statements and goals to see what they actually want.

Post: #12

(11-24-2015 03:44 PM)speakeasy Wrote:  ^ But come on...shoot 5 people? Just the act of brandishing the weapon would be enough to break off a group who are following you. Even firing a warning shot in the air would've cleared them out. Why would you even bring a gun to a counter protest if you had no intention on using it? Like if you felt it would be that dangerous that you'd need a gun to get out alive, why would you even show up in the first place?

Black people make the mistake of bringing logic into a discussion about a topic that is always illogical.

Episodes like this one used to really make me hot, but I just can't go there anymore.

At the end of the day, I live somewhere where people who have the same culture as mine are the majority, I date nothing but exoticals, live in a newly-built high-rise, and just got another new Benz.

Fuck all this shit. I'm not broke and have two passports from other countries, if shit ever goes hard left, I know what to do and where to go.

I just can't sit here and be mad about this shit anymore, every time it happens, the people who are the victims had it coming to them, and the perpetrators are made out to be victims.

Bringing logic to an illogical fight is futile; people believe what they want to believe, and no argument that you can present will change their minds or convince them to be reasonable, they don't want to be reasonable, they want to see it their way, it's their own version of comfort food.

Post: #13

(11-24-2015 03:44 PM)speakeasy Wrote:  ^ But come on...shoot 5 people? Just the act of brandishing the weapon would be enough to break off a group who are following you. Even firing a warning shot in the air would've cleared them out.

You are picturing something from a movie. A real self defensive shooting doesn't work like that. You don't shoot in the air, you shoot only if you are in danger of great bodily harm or death, a last resort. You shoot to stop the threat. In fact the word you used is a great illustration of what you don't do- brandishing. It is a crime to brandish your weapon as a 'warning'. The only time your weapon should be drawn is if you're going to pull the trigger to save yourself from grave injury or death. A citizen is not a police officer. It's not a tool to use for intimidation when you feel threatened.

(11-24-2015 03:44 PM)speakeasy Wrote:  Why would you even bring a gun to a counter protest if you had no intention on using it?

Speakeasy, millions of people carry a firearm, legally. Myself included. If I was going to be around a large group of people counter protesting them (which I wouldn't), of course I'd have a means to defend myself, just as I always do, sipping a coffee at the corner cafe, shopping at Target, makes no difference. There's nothing wrong with always being prepared. It's a completely normal part of a normal life for millions of Americans.

Post: #14

Yep. My daily norm, keys, wallet, sunglasses, 1911.

Post: #15

delete

Post: #16

(11-24-2015 04:06 PM)offthereservation Wrote:  Yep. My daily norm, keys, wallet, sunglasses, 1911.

But if you were off down the bar for the evening, would you leave it at home?

Sorry for the slight derail, but I always wondered that.

Post: #17

(11-24-2015 04:28 PM)Surreyman Wrote:  

(11-24-2015 04:06 PM)offthereservation Wrote:  Yep. My daily norm, keys, wallet, sunglasses, 1911.

But if you were off down the bar for the evening, would you leave it at home?

Sorry for the slight derail, but I always wondered that.

Yes you leave it. Depends on the locality but most states are strict about that. Some states allow you to be in a bar but you can't consume, some allow you to drink in a bar but have a very low BAC limit, others don't allow you to even be in a restaurant that serves alcohol. And all states have a limit on blood alcohol level if you're carrying, regardless of where you are in public. If I'm going to drink, I don't carry.

Even if there weren't laws about it, it would be a bad idea.

Post: #18

There are plenty of examples of police misconduct against black men (and white men for that matter) but it is usually the most borderline that go viral.

I'm not saying this occurrence is borderline (I don't know enough about it yet) but rather that since the media is jumping all over this with knee jerk reporting - it makes me suspicious.

Also makes me suspicious that to many BLM protestors, any dissenter who disagrees with their message comes from "white supremacist". In that context, labeling the shooter a white-supremacist carries absolutely no meaning to me.

Long, but incitefull article about why the least reliable narratives are often the ones that go viral
http://www.newstatesman.com/sci-tech/201...nline-rage

Post: #19

(11-24-2015 01:48 PM)Clemmo Wrote:  

To sum up what they said:

"We saw three guys recording us, we starting punching them, we see one guy has a gun, we punch them more, they flee to get away from the beating, we followed them to attack them more, then they shoot us"

It doesn't get any more clear when the people themselves admit to attacking the three men unprovoked for simply recording the protest. Just like with they guy the are protesting for, nothing that is done prior to getting shot matters.

Post: #20

I'm going based on GlobalMan's post on what happened here.

(11-24-2015 03:44 PM)speakeasy Wrote:  ^ But come on...shoot 5 people? Just the act of brandishing the weapon would be enough to break off a group who are following you. Even firing a warning shot in the air would've cleared them out. Why would you even bring a gun to a counter protest if you had no intention on using it? Like if you felt it would be that dangerous that you'd need a gun to get out alive, why would you even show up in the first place?

I don't understand this line of questioning when looking at a larger group of people attacking 3 or 4 others. They decided to attack these people. No one made them do it. They just picked on the wrong people and got shot for their attacks.

It doesn't matter why they had guns as long as they were carrying legally. Luckily they were carrying otherwise they may be dead themselves.

I don't consider these types of questions to be logical. As far as I'm concerned, it's putting the blame on the victims.

I could care less what color the larger group was. If the races were switched, I would be saying the same thing. They thought they had the numbers and was going to whip some people only to find out they picked on the wrong people.

Post: #21

(11-24-2015 05:18 PM)worldwidetraveler Wrote:  I'm going based on GlobalMan's post on what happened here.

(11-24-2015 03:44 PM)speakeasy Wrote:  ^ But come on...shoot 5 people? Just the act of brandishing the weapon would be enough to break off a group who are following you. Even firing a warning shot in the air would've cleared them out. Why would you even bring a gun to a counter protest if you had no intention on using it? Like if you felt it would be that dangerous that you'd need a gun to get out alive, why would you even show up in the first place?

I don't understand this line of questioning when looking at a larger group of people attacking 3 or 4 others. They decided to attack these people. No one made them do it. They just picked on the wrong people and got shot for their attacks.

It doesn't matter why they had guns as long as they were carrying legally. Luckily they were carrying otherwise they may be dead themselves.

I don't consider these types of questions to be logical. As far as I'm concerned, it's putting the blame on the victims.

I could care less what color the larger group was. If the races were switched, I would be saying the same thing. They thought they had the numbers and was going to whip some people only to find out they picked on the wrong people.

You're absolutely right.

A few people were attacked by a large mob, attempted to leave and were followed while being attacked, then shot in self defense and didn't kill anyone.

Had Roosh been attacked at the Georgetown protest he went to, or had the Asian cameraman been attacked in Missouri, no one here would be questioning them for using a concealed carry in self defense. And rightfully so, because they would have been justified.

If an angry mob attacks you, you shoot them. Pulling out your gun and waving it around is not a viable form of self defense. It's a good way to get yourself beaten to death.

Post: #22

(11-24-2015 04:00 PM)jariel Wrote:  Episodes like this one used to really make me hot, but I just can't go there anymore.

At the end of the day, I live somewhere where people who have the same culture as mine are the majority, I date nothing but exoticals, live in a newly-built high-rise, and just got another new Benz.

Fuck all this shit. I'm not broke and have two passports from other countries, if shit ever goes hard left, I know what to do and where to go.

Damn. That just about sums it up, as I see it now.

I can only get outraged about something so many times before I just get worn out.

Post: #23

(11-24-2015 05:33 PM)RioNomad Wrote:  Pulling out your gun and waving it around is not a viable form of self defense. It's a good way to get yourself beaten to death.

Yep, I would be pissed if they took my gun away from me and shot me with it.

Post: #24

Hispanic male arrested ..

Post: #25

(11-24-2015 05:43 PM)GlobalMan Wrote:  Hispanic male arrested ..

Don't let facts get in the way of a good fake outrage, GlobalMan!

They were light skinned Hispanics, so BLM, the media, and other SJWs can still make their "White Supremacist" angle work.