ConHog
Rookie
- Jun 4, 2010
- 14,538
- 952
- 0
- Banned
- #41
Okay. How? (Specifics, please.)I said LONG ago, including on this board, that the rioters precipitated that event.
I'm not biased for or against either side. That was an ugly incident and I'd like to find there was good reason for what happened. So far I haven't.
Now I'm reading that four pistol shots were heard seventy seconds before the Guardsmen opened up on unarmed protesters with M-1 rifles. Seventy seconds for a presumptive return fire response? I don't have to tell you how that sounds.
But I'm open to new information and I'm always eager to learn.
Well, let's not confuse things here. There was NO good reason for it to happen. There were however thing done by the rioters which led to the shootings.
First of all it is important to remember that they had been rioting including burning building and beating up people who opposed them, for THREE days before the day of the shooting. Further they ignored a lawful order by the police to disperse. Some argue that it was no a legal order, but the fact is that the rioters forfeited their status as peaceful protesters long before the police ordered them to disperse. Then when the commander of the national guard unit approached them to order them to disperse they responded by throwing rocks at him and chasing his Jeep off. Then of course there is evidence that shots were fired out of the crowd, but we'll leave that as conjecture since we do not have definitive proof.
Now is all that enough to warrant opening fire? Probably not, but when judging one has to remember the times. The crowd at that school undoubtedly hated the military, so perhaps the decision to send in the military was a stupid one to begin with. An FBI SWAT team might have been more appropriate. Be that as it may, military members are humans, I'm sure they equally hated the students. Both sides no doubt also feared the other side. People do stupid things when they are scared. Stupid things were done on BOTH sides.