Jiheisho wrote:
Wolfram87 wrote:
This is entirely your own bias.
No, it isn't. The police don't think so either, which is why he was arrested. He purposely placed himself in harms way and armed himself. Self defense requires retreat first before taking violent action. He went to the protest anticipating violence. He should of stayed home if he believed that his life would have been threatened.
Pretty disturbing that people are defending the instigator. I wonder what this conversation would have been if a black person turned up to a right-wing protest and did the same thing...
He did retreat. He was pursued. He does not appear to be a strong runner. And again; he did not shoot first.
If a black person with a black rifle showed up to a right wing protest to put out fires, scrub grafitti and give first aid, while calmy practising proper trigger and muzzle discipline? I have a hard time imagining much would happen.
Quote:
He appears to be what 10 feet+ away.
Yet, he claims self-defense against a man 10+ feet away with no weapon
In self defense terms, 10 feet is nothing. 10 feet is a short enough distance that a person with a knife will kill you unless you've already got your weapon drawn.
And again, he was shot in multiple areas, one of which was the back. Without knowing how he moved, this means nothing.
Quote:
. When you engage in a protest and assume you will need to use force, then there is no self-defense claim.
If you go to a riot to render aid, you'd be an idiot not to be armed.
Quote:
The police don't think so either, which is why he was arrested.
He was arrested on suspicion of culpability in the shooting. It will be hard to be cleared of wrong-doing without first being charged.
Also, everyone there should have been arrested, as there was a curfew in effect.
_________________
I'm bored out of my skull, let's play a different game. Let's pay a visit down below and cast the world in flame.
29 Aug 2020, 12:49 pm
