Armed BLM "Protester" Shot Dead in Austin, TX

[Shelzin]

Who are “all these leftists” defending violence? I don’t. But I absolutely defend the rights of peaceful protesters.

I think this says more about our gun liberal gun laws than protests. Why where either of them armed?

Peaceful protesters don't shoot.

I absolutely defend peaceful protesters as well... However peaceful protesters don't hang around with gunfire goes off. A great many of these people don't seem to do that... Hell... Some of them barely flinch.. Like they knew there was a gun there, and just assumed it was not aimed at them.

 

[iceberg]

Some of them are surprisingly well-armed: AR's and AK's, Glocks, and body armor.

the arms race is on

thats why liberals who claim to be for peace should put a end to these nightly riots before it goes too far

It looks that way.

View attachment 367645

Promoting terrorism?

not me .... but .... are you on the side of domestic terrorists waving AK47s on the faces of innocent drivers?

That is really kind of funny because normally you all would have no problem and defending the guy with a gun. If you REALLY had a problem with you would have spoken up when armed protesters forced their way into Michigan Statehouse.

that's really funny cause normally you ***** endlessly at the ones with the guns..

apply these things to yourself please.

Says Mr. Hypocrite.

I think it is stupid to carry a gun in a protest, but he didn’t shoot it. The other guy did and some one else in the crowd fired back Mr. Expert.

Go back and listen to the APD briefing. He pointed the AK at the driver. That in itself is reasonable and legal grounds for the use of deadly force.

Hmmm....then someone should have shot the McCloskey’s in St. Louis.

The driver was reported by witnesses as accelerating into the crowd.

under missouri law the mccloskys had every right to shoot the rioters,,,,

They pointed guns at people passing, no riot was occurring. That, according to you, gives some the right to shoot them. Or do you pick and choose?

Does a guy have the right to point his gun at
a car driving into a crowd?

they were not people passing by,,they were rioters with a history of violence entering private property and threatening the property owners with physical harm,,,

under missouri law they could have shot them,,,

and no the rioter with the AK didnt have a right to point his gun at a passing car on a public street,,,

Car wasn’t passing. It was driving into the crowd.

prove it

Can’t, just as you can’t (unless you have a different video). That is why I said, repeatedly, that I will wait to see what tbe police say.

all I know is an AK fired 5 times. those are AK shots.

We will see from there.

 

[progressive hunter]

Some of them are surprisingly well-armed: AR's and AK's, Glocks, and body armor.

the arms race is on

thats why liberals who claim to be for peace should put a end to these nightly riots before it goes too far

It looks that way.

View attachment 367645

Promoting terrorism?

not me .... but .... are you on the side of domestic terrorists waving AK47s on the faces of innocent drivers?

That is really kind of funny because normally you all would have no problem and defending the guy with a gun. If you REALLY had a problem with you would have spoken up when armed protesters forced their way into Michigan Statehouse.

that's really funny cause normally you ***** endlessly at the ones with the guns..

apply these things to yourself please.

Says Mr. Hypocrite.

I think it is stupid to carry a gun in a protest, but he didn’t shoot it. The other guy did and some one else in the crowd fired back Mr. Expert.

Go back and listen to the APD briefing. He pointed the AK at the driver. That in itself is reasonable and legal grounds for the use of deadly force.

Hmmm....then someone should have shot the McCloskey’s in St. Louis.

The driver was reported by witnesses as accelerating into the crowd.

under missouri law the mccloskys had every right to shoot the rioters,,,,

They pointed guns at people passing, no riot was occurring. That, according to you, gives some the right to shoot them. Or do you pick and choose?

Does a guy have the right to point his gun at
a car driving into a crowd?

they were not people passing by,,they were rioters with a history of violence entering private property and threatening the property owners with physical harm,,,

under missouri law they could have shot them,,,

and no the rioter with the AK didnt have a right to point his gun at a passing car on a public street,,,

Car wasn’t passing. It was driving into the crowd.

prove it

Can’t, just as you can’t (unless you have a different video). That is why I said, repeatedly, that I will wait to see what tbe police say.

but youre not waiting and making assumptions ,,,

 

[Coyote]

Who are “all these leftists” defending violence? I don’t. But I absolutely defend the rights of peaceful protesters.

I think this says more about our gun liberal gun laws than protests. Why where either of them armed?

Peaceful protesters don't shoot.

I absolutely defend peaceful protesters as well... However peaceful protesters don't hang around with gunfire goes off. A great many of these people don't seem to do that... Hell... Some of them barely flinch.. Like they knew there was a gun there, and just assumed it was not aimed at them.

Looked like a lot of scrambling around to me,

 

[Shelzin]

Some of them are surprisingly well-armed: AR's and AK's, Glocks, and body armor.

the arms race is on

thats why liberals who claim to be for peace should put a end to these nightly riots before it goes too far

It looks that way.

View attachment 367645

Promoting terrorism?

not me .... but .... are you on the side of domestic terrorists waving AK47s on the faces of innocent drivers?

That is really kind of funny because normally you all would have no problem and defending the guy with a gun. If you REALLY had a problem with you would have spoken up when armed protesters forced their way into Michigan Statehouse.

that's really funny cause normally you ***** endlessly at the ones with the guns..

apply these things to yourself please.

Says Mr. Hypocrite.

I think it is stupid to carry a gun in a protest, but he didn’t shoot it. The other guy did and some one else in the crowd fired back Mr. Expert.

he fired 5 times Coyote!!! those 5 rounds you hear are AK47 shots.

You then hear the return fire of the driver.

God damn you will warp reality to fit your agenda.

Calm down. Maybe you should consider YOUR agenda instead of accusing others.

WHAT did the police say about what guns were fired?

Google it.

kinda funnu don'

Some of them are surprisingly well-armed: AR's and AK's, Glocks, and body armor.

the arms race is on

thats why liberals who claim to be for peace should put a end to these nightly riots before it goes too far

It looks that way.

View attachment 367645

Promoting terrorism?

not me .... but .... are you on the side of domestic terrorists waving AK47s on the faces of innocent drivers?

That is really kind of funny because normally you all would have no problem and defending the guy with a gun. If you REALLY had a problem with you would have spoken up when armed protesters forced their way into Michigan Statehouse.

that's really funny cause normally you ***** endlessly at the ones with the guns..

apply these things to yourself please.

Says Mr. Hypocrite.

I think it is stupid to carry a gun in a protest, but he didn’t shoot it. The other guy did and some one else in the crowd fired back Mr. Expert.

Go back and listen to the APD briefing. He pointed the AK at the driver. That in itself is reasonable and legal grounds for the use of deadly force.

Hmmm....then someone should have shot the McCloskey’s in St. Louis.

The driver was reported by witnesses as accelerating into the crowd.

under missouri law the mccloskys had every right to shoot the rioters,,,,

They pointed guns at people passing, no riot was occurring. That, according to you, gives some the right to shoot them. Or do you pick and choose?

Does a guy have the right to point his gun at
a car driving into a crowd?

they were not people passing by,,they were rioters with a history of violence entering private property and threatening the property owners with physical harm,,,

under missouri law they could have shot them,,,

and no the rioter with the AK didnt have a right to point his gun at a passing car on a public street,,,

Car wasn’t passing. It was driving into the crowd.

video link of proof please. I mean you questioned my account of it.

That was what witness’ reported. Let’s see what the police say.I question your account because the police That the AK was not fired. The video shows the car driving into the crowd, but it is hardly clear or definitive.

It doesn't matter if the gun was fired or not. They aggressively attacked him and his property, he protected himself. I wouldn't wait for the guy with the gun to fire at me first either. Get these idiots out of the streets. They do not have the right to impede travel by anyone. They do not have the right to intimidate anyone. They are not peaceful with aggressive action.

Pretty straight forward.

 

[Coyote]

Some of them are surprisingly well-armed: AR's and AK's, Glocks, and body armor.

the arms race is on

thats why liberals who claim to be for peace should put a end to these nightly riots before it goes too far

It looks that way.

View attachment 367645

Promoting terrorism?

not me .... but .... are you on the side of domestic terrorists waving AK47s on the faces of innocent drivers?

That is really kind of funny because normally you all would have no problem and defending the guy with a gun. If you REALLY had a problem with you would have spoken up when armed protesters forced their way into Michigan Statehouse.

that's really funny cause normally you ***** endlessly at the ones with the guns..

apply these things to yourself please.

Says Mr. Hypocrite.

I think it is stupid to carry a gun in a protest, but he didn’t shoot it. The other guy did and some one else in the crowd fired back Mr. Expert.

Go back and listen to the APD briefing. He pointed the AK at the driver. That in itself is reasonable and legal grounds for the use of deadly force.

Hmmm....then someone should have shot the McCloskey’s in St. Louis.

The driver was reported by witnesses as accelerating into the crowd.

under missouri law the mccloskys had every right to shoot the rioters,,,,

They pointed guns at people passing, no riot was occurring. That, according to you, gives some the right to shoot them. Or do you pick and choose?

Does a guy have the right to point his gun at
a car driving into a crowd?

they were not people passing by,,they were rioters with a history of violence entering private property and threatening the property owners with physical harm,,,

under missouri law they could have shot them,,,

and no the rioter with the AK didnt have a right to point his gun at a passing car on a public street,,,

Car wasn’t passing. It was driving into the crowd.

prove it

Can’t, just as you can’t (unless you have a different video). That is why I said, repeatedly, that I will wait to see what tbe police say.

all I know is an AK fired 5 times. those are AK shots.

We will see form there.

Read the police statement.

 

[iceberg]

Who are “all these leftists” defending violence? I don’t. But I absolutely defend the rights of peaceful protesters.

I think this says more about our gun liberal gun laws than protests. Why where either of them armed?

Peaceful protesters don't shoot.

I absolutely defend peaceful protesters as well... However peaceful protesters don't hang around with gunfire goes off. A great many of these people don't seem to do that... Hell... Some of them barely flinch.. Like they knew there was a gun there, and just assumed it was not aimed at them.

peaceful protesters are not out looking for fights nor should need a gun.

either action moves you from peaceful protest to riot.

no excuses
no reasons to justify.

you crossed the line. deal with the consequences.

 

[iceberg]

Some of them are surprisingly well-armed: AR's and AK's, Glocks, and body armor.

the arms race is on

thats why liberals who claim to be for peace should put a end to these nightly riots before it goes too far

It looks that way.

View attachment 367645

Promoting terrorism?

not me .... but .... are you on the side of domestic terrorists waving AK47s on the faces of innocent drivers?

That is really kind of funny because normally you all would have no problem and defending the guy with a gun. If you REALLY had a problem with you would have spoken up when armed protesters forced their way into Michigan Statehouse.

that's really funny cause normally you ***** endlessly at the ones with the guns..

apply these things to yourself please.

Says Mr. Hypocrite.

I think it is stupid to carry a gun in a protest, but he didn’t shoot it. The other guy did and some one else in the crowd fired back Mr. Expert.

Go back and listen to the APD briefing. He pointed the AK at the driver. That in itself is reasonable and legal grounds for the use of deadly force.

Hmmm....then someone should have shot the McCloskey’s in St. Louis.

The driver was reported by witnesses as accelerating into the crowd.

under missouri law the mccloskys had every right to shoot the rioters,,,,

They pointed guns at people passing, no riot was occurring. That, according to you, gives some the right to shoot them. Or do you pick and choose?

Does a guy have the right to point his gun at
a car driving into a crowd?

they were not people passing by,,they were rioters with a history of violence entering private property and threatening the property owners with physical harm,,,

under missouri law they could have shot them,,,

and no the rioter with the AK didnt have a right to point his gun at a passing car on a public street,,,

Car wasn’t passing. It was driving into the crowd.

prove it

Can’t, just as you can’t (unless you have a different video). That is why I said, repeatedly, that I will wait to see what tbe police say.

all I know is an AK fired 5 times. those are AK shots.

We will see form there.

Read the police statement.

Stop pretending I have not.

 

[Shelzin]

Looked like a lot of scrambling around to me,

I should have been more clear... I meant in more than just this situation... The person that got shot and drove themselves to the hospital for example.

 

[Coyote]

Some of them are surprisingly well-armed: AR's and AK's, Glocks, and body armor.

the arms race is on

thats why liberals who claim to be for peace should put a end to these nightly riots before it goes too far

It looks that way.

View attachment 367645

Promoting terrorism?

not me .... but .... are you on the side of domestic terrorists waving AK47s on the faces of innocent drivers?

That is really kind of funny because normally you all would have no problem and defending the guy with a gun. If you REALLY had a problem with you would have spoken up when armed protesters forced their way into Michigan Statehouse.

that's really funny cause normally you ***** endlessly at the ones with the guns..

apply these things to yourself please.

Says Mr. Hypocrite.

I think it is stupid to carry a gun in a protest, but he didn’t shoot it. The other guy did and some one else in the crowd fired back Mr. Expert.

Go back and listen to the APD briefing. He pointed the AK at the driver. That in itself is reasonable and legal grounds for the use of deadly force.

Hmmm....then someone should have shot the McCloskey’s in St. Louis.

The driver was reported by witnesses as accelerating into the crowd.

under missouri law the mccloskys had every right to shoot the rioters,,,,

They pointed guns at people passing, no riot was occurring. That, according to you, gives some the right to shoot them. Or do you pick and choose?

Does a guy have the right to point his gun at
a car driving into a crowd?

they were not people passing by,,they were rioters with a history of violence entering private property and threatening the property owners with physical harm,,,

under missouri law they could have shot them,,,

and no the rioter with the AK didnt have a right to point his gun at a passing car on a public street,,,

Car wasn’t passing. It was driving into the crowd.

prove it

Can’t, just as you can’t (unless you have a different video). That is why I said, repeatedly, that I will wait to see what tbe police say.

but youre not waiting and making assumptions ,,,

Nope. I am going by what is reported so far. No assumptions. A witness stated the car drove into them. That isn’t an assumption. It is what that person stated. At this time we don’t know who did, or why, Or if it was justified or if it was not.

 

[iceberg]

Some of them are surprisingly well-armed: AR's and AK's, Glocks, and body armor.

the arms race is on

thats why liberals who claim to be for peace should put a end to these nightly riots before it goes too far

It looks that way.

View attachment 367645

Promoting terrorism?

not me .... but .... are you on the side of domestic terrorists waving AK47s on the faces of innocent drivers?

That is really kind of funny because normally you all would have no problem and defending the guy with a gun. If you REALLY had a problem with you would have spoken up when armed protesters forced their way into Michigan Statehouse.

that's really funny cause normally you ***** endlessly at the ones with the guns..

apply these things to yourself please.

Says Mr. Hypocrite.

I think it is stupid to carry a gun in a protest, but he didn’t shoot it. The other guy did and some one else in the crowd fired back Mr. Expert.

Go back and listen to the APD briefing. He pointed the AK at the driver. That in itself is reasonable and legal grounds for the use of deadly force.

Hmmm....then someone should have shot the McCloskey’s in St. Louis.

The driver was reported by witnesses as accelerating into the crowd.

under missouri law the mccloskys had every right to shoot the rioters,,,,

They pointed guns at people passing, no riot was occurring. That, according to you, gives some the right to shoot them. Or do you pick and choose?

Does a guy have the right to point his gun at
a car driving into a crowd?

they were not people passing by,,they were rioters with a history of violence entering private property and threatening the property owners with physical harm,,,

under missouri law they could have shot them,,,

and no the rioter with the AK didnt have a right to point his gun at a passing car on a public street,,,

Car wasn’t passing. It was driving into the crowd.

prove it

Can’t, just as you can’t (unless you have a different video). That is why I said, repeatedly, that I will wait to see what tbe police say.

but youre not waiting and making assumptions ,,,

Nope. I am going by what is reported so far. No assumptions. A witness stated the car drove into them. That isn’t an assumption. It is what that person stated. At this time we don’t know who did, or why, Or if it was justified or if it was not.

there was a honk. you never seems to acknowledge that the driver honked at them.

do people often honk a warning before running people with AKs over?

 

[iceberg]

and AGAIN the AK owner is already on record as calling people too ***** to stop him.

people, ANY people, with a gun tend to get stupid. esp when inserting themselves in situations looking for conflict.

 

[Shelzin]

and AGAIN the AK owner is already on record as calling people too ***** to stop him.

people, ANY people, with a gun tend to get stupid. esp when inserting themselves in situations looking for conflict.

Yeah... If the gun is loaded... Then the risk of death is high... Both for the people who have one, and the people who don't who are around them. Don't stand with people who have guns unless you agree that whoever they are going to shoot deserves to die... Because you are risking your life just being near him/her/it. If you want to be a shield for them, go ahead... I won't.

 

[Unkotare]

Blame the parentless children, whose Mom and Dad are their friends and not their parents. One generation of misfits is raising another.

...As we know, many, many, teachers hate America...

No, you don’t know that. It is merely your obsession.

 

[iceberg]

and AGAIN the AK owner is already on record as calling people too ***** to stop him.

people, ANY people, with a gun tend to get stupid. esp when inserting themselves in situations looking for conflict.

Yeah... If the gun is loaded... Then the risk of death is high... Both for the people who have one, and the people who don't who are around them. Don't stand with people who have guns unless you agree that whoever they are going to shoot deserves to die... Because you are risking your life just being near him/her/it. If you want to be a shield for them, go ahead... I won't.

if you are standing in front of a police station cussing out the officers and flipping them off, how is this action alone a "peaceful" protest that needs a gun?

 

[elektra]

BTW, I'll bet I know ten thousand times as any teachers as you do.

I bet you I own a 1000x's as many books as you? You think who you know qualifies you above me? That is your argument, you know more teachers? Ten thousand teachers visit your home, weekly? You are so full of shit.

Black Lives Matter at School Week of Action: Feb. 3 – 7, 2020

Teachers and students will observe the Black Lives Matter at School Week of Action nation-wide February 3-7, 2020.

www.zinnedproject.org

Although there are many ways to participate in the week of action, we hope educators will commit to teach a wide variety of lessons centering Black history and literature.


The Zinn Education Project, Teaching for Change, and Rethinking Schools can help.

 

[Shelzin]

if you are standing in front of a police station cussing out the officers and flipping them off, how is this action alone a "peaceful" protest that needs a gun?

I'm confused by the question. Are you saying police shouldn't have guns?

 

[skye]

Who are “all these leftists” defending violence? I don’t. But I absolutely defend the rights of peaceful protesters.

I think this says more about our gun liberal gun laws than protests. Why where either of them armed?

Peaceful protesters don't shoot.

I absolutely defend peaceful protesters as well... However peaceful protesters don't hang around with gunfire goes off. A great many of these people don't seem to do that... Hell... Some of them barely flinch.. Like they knew there was a gun there, and just assumed it was not aimed at them.

peaceful protesters are not out looking for fights nor should need a gun.

either action moves you from peaceful protest to riot.

no excuses
no reasons to justify.

you crossed the line. deal with the consequences.

Absolutely agree with you!

 

[iceberg]

Some of them are surprisingly well-armed: AR's and AK's, Glocks, and body armor.

the arms race is on

thats why liberals who claim to be for peace should put a end to these nightly riots before it goes too far

It looks that way.

View attachment 367645

Promoting terrorism?

not me .... but .... are you on the side of domestic terrorists waving AK47s on the faces of innocent drivers?

That is really kind of funny because normally you all would have no problem and defending the guy with a gun. If you REALLY had a problem with you would have spoken up when armed protesters forced their way into Michigan Statehouse.

that's really funny cause normally you ***** endlessly at the ones with the guns..

apply these things to yourself please.

Says Mr. Hypocrite.

I think it is stupid to carry a gun in a protest, but he didn’t shoot it. The other guy did and some one else in the crowd fired back Mr. Expert.

Go back and listen to the APD briefing. He pointed the AK at the driver. That in itself is reasonable and legal grounds for the use of deadly force.

Hmmm....then someone should have shot the McCloskey’s in St. Louis.

The driver was reported by witnesses as accelerating into the crowd.

under missouri law the mccloskys had every right to shoot the rioters,,,,

They pointed guns at people passing, no riot was occurring. That, according to you, gives some the right to shoot them. Or do you pick and choose?

Does a guy have the right to point his gun at
a car driving into a crowd?

they were not people passing by,,they were rioters with a history of violence entering private property and threatening the property owners with physical harm,,,

under missouri law they could have shot them,,,

and no the rioter with the AK didnt have a right to point his gun at a passing car on a public street,,,

Car wasn’t passing. It was driving into the crowd.

prove it

Can’t, just as you can’t (unless you have a different video). That is why I said, repeatedly, that I will wait to see what tbe police say.

but youre not waiting and making assumptions ,,,

Nope. I am going by what is reported so far. No assumptions. A witness stated the car drove into them. That isn’t an assumption. It is what that person stated. At this time we don’t know who did, or why, Or if it was justified or if it was not.

Driver honked trying to turn onto congress.
Ak47 dude went at driver
"peaceful protesters" started beating on the car
Foster pointed gun at driver
Driver opened fire (so I was wrong on AK being fired first)
Driver spedcaway
Someone shot at driver
Driver pulled over to call 911 and have police come get him.

Yes he sounds like a man speeding into a crowd.

 

[iceberg]

Who are “all these leftists” defending violence? I don’t. But I absolutely defend the rights of peaceful protesters.

I think this says more about our gun liberal gun laws than protests. Why where either of them armed?

Peaceful protesters don't shoot.

I absolutely defend peaceful protesters as well... However peaceful protesters don't hang around with gunfire goes off. A great many of these people don't seem to do that... Hell... Some of them barely flinch.. Like they knew there was a gun there, and just assumed it was not aimed at them.

From the zoom press conference the driver honked to get by and they attacked his car. Pointed a gun at him.

Coyote, still here after the zoom conf?