Facebook Ignored 455 Complaints About Militia Page Urging Weapons at Kenosha Protest (buzzfeednews.com) 432
BuzzFeed News reports:
In a companywide meeting on Thursday, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg said that a militia page advocating for followers to bring weapons to an upcoming protest in Kenosha, Wisconsin, remained on the platform because of "an operational mistake." The page and an associated event inspired widespread criticism of the company after a 17-year-old suspect allegedly shot and killed two protesters Tuesday night.
The event associated with the Kenosha Guard page, however, was flagged to Facebook at least 455 times after its creation, according to an internal report viewed by BuzzFeed News, and had been cleared by four moderators, all of whom deemed it "non-violating." The page and event were eventually removed from the platform on Wednesday — several hours after the shooting.
"To put that number into perspective, it made up 66% of all event reports that day," one Facebook worker wrote in the internal "Violence and Incitement Working Group" to illustrate the number of complaints the company had received about the event... The internal report seen by BuzzFeed News reveals the extent to which concerned Facebook users went to warn the company of a group calling for public violence, and how the company failed to act.
After BuzzFeed news published its story about Facebook's internal report, Mark Zuckerberg made the same comments in a public forum, reports CNN: The page clearly violated Facebook's rules against violent militias, Zuckerberg acknowledged in a video posted Friday to his Facebook profile, and that "a bunch of people" had even reported the page prior to the killing of two protesters, Joseph Rosenbaum and Anthony Huber.
Just last week, Facebook announced it would crack down on militia organizations that advocated for violence or spoke about the potential for violence. But in its first week of implementation, the policy's lack of enforcement led to the spread of violent messages on the platform directly linked to the events in Kenosha, where protests erupted after the police shooting of Jacob Blake.
The event associated with the Kenosha Guard page, however, was flagged to Facebook at least 455 times after its creation, according to an internal report viewed by BuzzFeed News, and had been cleared by four moderators, all of whom deemed it "non-violating." The page and event were eventually removed from the platform on Wednesday — several hours after the shooting.
"To put that number into perspective, it made up 66% of all event reports that day," one Facebook worker wrote in the internal "Violence and Incitement Working Group" to illustrate the number of complaints the company had received about the event... The internal report seen by BuzzFeed News reveals the extent to which concerned Facebook users went to warn the company of a group calling for public violence, and how the company failed to act.
After BuzzFeed news published its story about Facebook's internal report, Mark Zuckerberg made the same comments in a public forum, reports CNN: The page clearly violated Facebook's rules against violent militias, Zuckerberg acknowledged in a video posted Friday to his Facebook profile, and that "a bunch of people" had even reported the page prior to the killing of two protesters, Joseph Rosenbaum and Anthony Huber.
Just last week, Facebook announced it would crack down on militia organizations that advocated for violence or spoke about the potential for violence. But in its first week of implementation, the policy's lack of enforcement led to the spread of violent messages on the platform directly linked to the events in Kenosha, where protests erupted after the police shooting of Jacob Blake.
How many Complaints about pages urging Riots (Score:5, Informative)
More than 450, That's for sure
Re:How many Complaints about pages urging Riots (Score:5, Informative)
Content that is sensational, controversial and/or inflammatory attracts more viewers, and that makes more money for Facebook. It is their business model and they will never change it.
2003 - 2018: 15 years of the Mark Zuckerberg Apology Tour
November 2003
After creating Facemash, a Harvard 'hot-or-not' site.
“This is not how I meant for things to go and I apologize for any harm done as a result of my neglect.”
September 2006 ... We did a bad job of explaining what the new features were and an even worse job of giving you control of them.”
After introducing News Feed, which exposed updates to friends in one central place.
“We really messed this one up.
December 2007
After launching Beacon, which opted-in everyone to sharing with advertisers what they were doing in outside websites and apps.
“We simply did a bad job with this release, and I apologize for it. People need to be able to explicitly choose what they share.”
February 2009
After unveiling new terms of service that angered users.
“Over the past couple of days, we received a lot of questions and comments. Based on this feedback, we have decided to return to our previous terms of use while we resolve the issues.”
May 2010
After reporters found a privacy loophole allowing advertisers to access user identification.
“Sometimes we move too fast. We will add privacy controls that are much simpler to use. We will also give you an easy way to turn off all third-party services.”
November 2011
After Facebook reached a consent decree with the Federal Trade Commission for deceiving consumers about privacy.
“I’m the first to admit that we’ve made a bunch of mistakes. Facebook has always been committed to being transparent about the information you have stored with us — and we have led the internet in building tools to give people the ability to see and control what they share.”
July 2014
After an academic paper exposed that Facebook conducted psychological tests on nearly 700,000 users without their knowledge. (Apology by Facebook COO Sheryl Sandberg)
“It was poorly communicated. And for that communication we apologize. We never meant to upset you.”
December 2016
After criticism of the role of Facebook in spreading fake news about political candidates.
“I think of Facebook as a technology company, but I recognize we have a greater responsibility than just building technology that information flows through. Today we’re making it easier to report hoaxes.”
April 2017
After a Cleveland man posted a video of himself killing 74-year-old Robert Godwin.
“Our hearts go out to the family and friends of Robert Godwin Sr., and we have a lot of work — and we will keep doing all we can to prevent tragedies like this from happening.”
September 2017
While revealing a nine-step plan to stop nations from using Facebook to interfere in one another’s elections, noting that the amount of “problematic content” found so far is “relatively small.”
“I care deeply about the democratic process and protecting its integrity. It is a new challenge for internet communities to deal with nation states attempting to subvert elections. But if that’s what we must do, we are committed to rising to the occasion.”
September 2017
After continued criticism about the role of Facebook in Russian manipulation of the 2016 election.
“For the ways my work has been used to divide rather than to bring us together, I ask for forgiveness and I will work to do better. ”
January 2018
Announcing his personal challenge for the year is to fix Facebook.
“ We won’t prevent all mistakes or abuse, but we currently make too many errors enforcing our policies and preventing misuse of our tools. This will be a serious year of self-improvement and I’m
Re: How many Complaints about pages urging Riots (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Why is it okay to use violence to prevent property damage, but not use property damage to prevent violence?
Re: (Score:3)
Because for the most part, the people whose property is being damaged are NOT the people who were doing violence. In some cases they are the very people the violence is too frequently done against, making them double victimized.
For the ones doing the damage, apparently Black Lives Matter but black livelihoods don't.
Re: How many Complaints about pages urging Riots (Score:3)
Not commenting on the Rittenhouse kid, but a business owner shooting an arsonist to prevent the destruction of his livelihood would be rationally and morally more justified than a protester setting fire to unrelated businesses as a means to prevent police violence.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: Straw man (Score:5, Insightful)
Literally every time criticism is laid against rioters or the media's portrayal of Fiery But Largely Peaceful® protests, the replies have been "property destruction isn't violence".
Imagine a single MAGA hat guy burning a single building... journalists would be hyperventilating for days.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Imagine a single MAGA hat guy burning a single building... journalists would be hyperventilating for days.
Imagine a MAGA hat guy going out and killing police and Federal officers. It was merely a footnote for journalists and Fox Noose didn't even mention it.
Re: Straw man (Score:5, Interesting)
Oh? Which incident was that?
While you're answering, perhaps you could also tell us who shot David Dorn.
Re: (Score:2)
If property destruction is violent, then car crashes are also violent, and are the reason why "People in the US who live in low-density sprawl are more likely to die violently than their inner-city cousins." [thewalrus.ca]
So what do you think? Are property destruction and car crashes violent or not?
Re: Straw man (Score:2)
Cars are sentient now and can decide to crash on their own?
Re: (Score:2)
Tesla?
Re: Straw man (Score:4, Interesting)
If property destruction is violent, then car crashes are also violent, and are the reason why "People in the US who live in low-density sprawl are more likely to die violently than their inner-city cousins." [thewalrus.ca]
So what do you think? Are property destruction and car crashes violent or not?
Are you incapable of distinguishing between intentional destruction of property, against the owner's wishes, and a car accident?
Re: (Score:2)
Will you provide a link to a definition of "violent" that says intention is required for something to be violent?
Re: (Score:2)
So what do you think? Are property destruction and car crashes violent or not?
I think a monkey spent a few minutes pressing random keys and just by chance happened to press spell check followed by submit.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
If the closest you can come to demonstrating that white supremacists are involved is that some officials "suspect antifa or white supremacists" did something, you don't have any evidence.
Exactly. The word "linked" is one of those weasel words that people use - it describes any kind of connection at all, but still implies that there must be something "real" there. I mean even Snopes (when
Re: (Score:2)
https://i.redd.it/ldhz3bsixjj5... [i.redd.it]
Re: (Score:2)
They just call it Fiery, but mostly peaceful
Re:Straw man (Score:4, Interesting)
Nobody is calling burning down buildings "peaceful protesting".
CNN calls Kenosha riot a ‘fiery but mostly peaceful' protest
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
First Amendment right to speak freely (Score:2, Interesting)
Thanks for changing the (racist) troll's Subject. I still think some form of FP moderation would be a better solution approach. However you're still letting the troll frame the discussion.
What is REALLY going on there is that protests about REAL social problems are being used for FAKE threats. And the fakers don't care when deliberate escalation and provocations result in REAL deaths as long as it advances their agenda. Solving the REAL social problems is not on their agenda, just in case you were wondering
Re: (Score:3)
Nobody is calling burning down buildings "peaceful protesting".
Well, CNN ain't calling it rioting. They either refer to "peaceful protests" or to "protests", both of which are incorrect in describing a rioting mob.
Lie (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Lie (Score:5, Informative)
Then you are walking around with a blindfold.
The media constantly say peaceful protest. You can see all the images with Chyrons saying "Mostly peaceful protest" with burning building in the background.
To say no one is saying the protests are peaceful while murder, assault, violence and arson is going on is disingenuous.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
So far it's 22 to 2 dead, Democrat's winning
Re:Lie (Score:5, Insightful)
Reality and perception don't match. You could have a million people at a protest, and one violent person with a gun or molotov - yet footage of that one is going to be plastered all over the news, especially on news services hostile to the cause of the protest. Thus the viewer can easily conclude that the protest is an orgy of violence.
Journalism or Disaster Porn? (Score:3, Insightful)
Mod parent up, but I'll elaborate.
There are various economic models for journalism. You [SuricouRaven] are talking about the Disaster Porn model used by such sources as CNN. However it has a long history going back to the newspaper days of "If it bleeds, it leads."
There was a brief flowering of journalism under a public service model. Essentially the government licensed frequency-based monopolists with a requirement that they provide some amount of news. That model got sick and then the Internet killed it.
T
Re:Journalism or Disaster Porn? (Score:4, Interesting)
I have heard a modern version of the expression: "An enraged audience is an engaged audience." Keeping the audience angry is good for business - if you keep them stirred up they will come back to the site for updates, and post links to the site on all their social media feeds as well. The easiest way seems to be use of exaggerated caricatures of opposing political positions as a target for hate. American political culture has a very convenient left-right divide that can serve as the basis for that strategy. Left-wing sites run stories about how the right-wingers all want to destroy the education system and burn down America's forests to turn into strip mines, and right-wing sites run stories about how the left-wing are all marxists who want to close down all churches and rape children. The resulting angry mob is very profitable for the media, but not at all good for social stability.
Re: (Score:2)
People would also get the impression that Portland is a smouldering crater
Re:Lie (Score:4, Interesting)
Depends where you read. The top front-page story on Fox News right now is "Speaker at apparent Antifa gathering heard cheering shooting death of Patriot Prayer backer." Right beneath you have this lot:
"Small business owners speak out amid riot destruction: ‘We’re just afraid’"
"Bullets in broad daylight: One dead, five injured in shooting at Chicago restaurant."
"Chicago shootings leave at least 5 dead; 2 city cops among the wounded"
"Arrest announced in mugging of Chicago woman, 85, caught on video"
"Brazen attack: SEE HIM: NYPD hunts creep who tried to rape woman on subway platform"
Now compare to CNN's violent stories:
"1 person is dead after a shooting during protests in downtown Portland"
That's it. One story. Most of their front page is election coverage. It's almost as if they are reporting a completely different world. In Foxland, the country is breaking down in civil unrest. Antifa mobs cheer the death of Christian patriots. Chicago is a warzone. Muggers lurk in the subways. While in CNN land, things are calm and economists discuss poll results.
Re:Lie (Score:4, Interesting)
Only two of your stories are related to the protests. And you ignore that Fox loves to highlight stories about crime, any crime story they make into a national news headline instead of a local news story.
Violent crime rates had been dropping up until 2015/2016. Fox News wants to portray the image of Democrats of not being tough on crime, and Democrat run cities as being highly dangerous lawless places. It's the narrative they push to show that modern Republicans are the only people you can trust. They ignore that crime was dropping most of the years Obama was in power, because that is inconvenient to their narrative.
Note, I am neither Republican nor Democrat.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
@DogDude
We are at 30+ dead from the protests in 3 months.
2 of those from the kid in Kenosha, all others from the BLM/Antifa protestors.
1 Last night in Portland, straight up murder of someone just for being a Trump supporter.
I think you are uninformed and or do not know how to count.
Trump supporter are not going out there and murdering people. The other side is.
Re: (Score:3)
While we have 30 deaths and murders directly linked to ANTIFA and BLM in last 3 months.
Citation needed. Just saying this doesn't make it true. Not even Fox News has been making this claim.
Re: (Score:3)
At least one member of said militia group isn't licensed to be an armed security guard. According to one company's website, licensees must be 21 years old and submit to in-state security training [securityresources.net].
They also don't have liability insurance in case they injure the wrong person, because there's no way an insurance company would want to give away money on a certainty.
Re:Lie (Score:5, Informative)
Then you haven't been watching any mainstream media coverage. For the most recent example:
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/aug/27/cnns-fiery-but-mostly-peaceful-protests-chyron-as-/ [washingtontimes.com]
Similar (though not quite so egregious) headlines and clips have been around since the riots started. E.g., reporters talking about peaceful protests when gunshots ring out in the background audio, etc.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I linked an article rather than a simple screencap (I thought you might doubt a screencap), but you can find the original CNN footage on youtube, etc. The source is there, make your own judgements rather than just stereotyping organizations.
Re:Lie (Score:5, Interesting)
So who's firing the guns? The protests have mostly been peaceful, but the response to the protests has mostly been violent.
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
With the sheer number of businesses burned, stores looted, acts of vandalism committed, etc., I'm shocked you can claim that.
One of the most poignant to me: https://www.gofundme.com/f/let-us-help-save-uncle-hugo039s [gofundme.com]
A beloved local science fiction store was looted and burned down. They weren't burned down for "responding" to protestors, for being alt-right shitlords, or anything else. Just innocent bystanders. Multiple stores last night looted in Raleigh, NC. The owners still profess support for BLM and so f
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The owners presumably understand that while criminals will take advantage of the chaos it doesn't diminish the legitimate protests.
This is the oldest trick in the book. Back in the 1930s German fascists would go to places where the communists were protesting, start a fight, burn some stuff down and then proclaim that the fascists are the only ones who can restore Law & Order. If criminals do it for them then even better, especially these days when it's harder to just straight up lie about not being ther
Re: (Score:2)
Perhaps it is. I will not rule out the likelihood that, as I said in another post:
It's clear to me that the riots attract a certain kind of person (on both sides), and that no doubt, some are using them as cover for violent and antisocial behavior.
Looking at the arrest patterns thus far, and police reports such as the two you linked (which are the only two I am aware of--there are possibly more, but those are the only two allegations I know), my best guest is the number of anti-left agitators is vanishingly small (but not zero).
Re: (Score:2)
That's literally an allegation based on one anonymous post online, and none of the supporting activities happened (storming the MN capital, burning, etc.). Could be a reverse false flag too if we're really playing the speculation game.
That's why I prefer to rely on video of looting and protests and arrests.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Just fuck off. You guys can vote for whoever you want, but stop lying. Just stop.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Lie (Score:5, Insightful)
I know you're just setting up a strawman to fallaciously make a false equivalency argument, but I've been a supporter of the Cato Institute for decades, and they have long taken a stand against police unions, protection of bad officers, and police brutality. I--and many others--were there before it was cool.
I would argue that the most internally consistent position is to advocate against violent looting, destruction of public and private property, and vandalism, AND against public union bad employee protection, qualified immunity, and police brutality. This doesn't have to be an exclusive or.
Don't get wrapped up in the "us vs them" narrative that many, including the media, are putting out there.
Re:Lie (Score:4)
It's not 100% peaceful, so what? Time for the national guard to come in and start shooting? Time for secret police to arrest and detain people? Because it's every so slightly sad that we have rampant racism in this country where people can be shot by the police with impunity, but that problem can wait because a few looters mean we need to take action now!
The problem here is status quo. The protesters are upsetting folks, and we can't have that. But people getting shot is probably ok because they looked like criminals and probably have a bad background if we dig into it. Status quo - things are just fine in my neighborhood so don't rock the boat!
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Lie (Score:5, Insightful)
Actually, here's where there is a difference and it is where I do fault ALL the police: The code of silence. Yes, there are only a few bad actors that give cops a bad name, but the fact that the police have an unofficial policy that you don't turn in your fellow cops for bad behavior condemns them all and, as long as they have this code of silence, I will hold them all accountable. The cops that stood there and did nothing while a cop openly tortured and murdered a black man are just as guilty as the cop that had his knee to the guys throat.
Re: (Score:2)
Evidence or it didn't happen.
Re: (Score:2)
Wrong. The peaceful protesters were called peaceful protesters. It is still a minority of people in the crowd who are there to riot and blow off steam. Then there are the outside agitators, those coming just to cause trouble intentionally, they hear that there's a chance to shout or shoot at some liberals so they come running. It was never a volunteer's "job" to protect property. Then the spreading of the lies that BLM is a marxist organization bent on overthrowing the US government only causes more pe
Re: (Score:3)
The Democrats aren't going to save us. Even when they have control they fight amongst themselves because most of them are corporate centrists. For all their failings, Republicans vote together, and that is why they are more effective. If they even have a dissenting vote it is only when it doesn't matter.
Re: (Score:2)
Just fuck off. DO YOU NOT REALIZE WHEN YOU LIE LIKE THIS YOU GET TRUMP MORE VOTES? When you say nonsensical, untruthful things people notice. Then their ears close and they STOP LISTENING TO PEOPLE LIKE YOU. Fuckers like you are going to get Trump re-elected. You can't possibly be stupid enough to believe that Republicans have been in control of the US. Jesus Christ.
Re:Straw man (Score:5, Informative)
https://web.education.wisc.edu... [wisc.edu]
So if you had to pick which of the two parties has had more control over the last 20 years, it would be very hard to find a metric under which the answer was the Democrats. It's entirely unsurprising you had a clearly emotional reaction and flipped out to reject and call false a true fact that didn't support your world view, being a Republican troll and all.
Re:Even the OP is biased (Score:5, Informative)
This, despite the fact that images on other news outlets show Kyle Rittenhouse clearly being hit on the head with a skateboard
You are mixing up events! Rittenhouse was chased and there was an attempt to hit him with a skateboard but that was AFTER he shot Rosenbaum. You don't get to start shooting people and when people react claim self-defense. What next? Do school shooters get to claim self-defense after someone tries to stop them?
BTW this is the problem with allowing citizen militia cosplay wanna-be-cops "helping" out... it leads to absolute chaos when the shooting starts.
Re: Even the OP is biased (Score:2)
Some asshole tries to grab my gun as part of mob baying at my heels and I'm assuming imminent threat and pulling the trigger too. Especially when someone in said mob is firing a weapon.
Re: Even the OP is biased (Score:4, Interesting)
Some asshole tries to grab my gun as part of mob baying at my heels and I'm assuming imminent threat and pulling the trigger too. Especially when someone in said mob is firing a weapon.
You want us to feel sympathy for you being barrel-grabbing distance form an angry mob with guns when that ends badly?
That is so stupid on so many levels, you could take a recruit out of Space Force basic training and find more common sense around weapon handling than that.
The order of the Events don't matter (Score:3)
It's working. Donald Trump is up in the polls and the BLM movement is down. The suburbanites are turning against it. They don't care who shot first they just don't want violence in their cities.
No Justice, No Peace is not a good strategy. It's just go
Re: (Score:2)
No news site is "trying to be fair any more". They are all part of the propaganda war between the left and right. Objective news is dead and has been dead for a long time, if it ever existed at all.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Let's take a step back here. This child (age 17) got hold of an automatic weapon and travelled to another state apparently in order to defend a car dealership. He encountered police who offered him water, rather than questioning why an armed 17 year old was in a dangerous area.
There are so many things wrong with that it's hard to know where to begin.
Re:Even the OP is biased (Score:4, Insightful)
This child (age 17) was given a semi-automatic weapon after he travelled twenty miles to another state where his job is apparently in order to defend a car dealership at the behest of the owner. There, fixed most of that for you.
Why did they not stop to question a person with a firearm, medical kit, and (at least part of the time) a fire extinguisher who politely interacted with them while there were large groups of people committing arson just down the street? Do I really need to answer that question?
Re:Even the OP is biased (Score:4, Informative)
1) Semi-automatic
2) He travelled to another state...20 miles from where he lived
3) He got the rifle after arriving in Kenosha
4) He was a police cadet and certified EMT who went there to help clean up, give medical aid and guard the business he worked at
5) It is legal for a 17 year old to possess a hunting rifle in the area
Re: (Score:2)
The NYT is not even trying to be fair any more. They're completely unreliable.
You linked a CLEARLY marked opinion column, and you have a problem with the opinion.
Opinion
Kenosha Tells Us More About Where the Right Is Headed Than the R.N.C. Did
The conservative media’s embrace of Kyle Rittenhouse speaks volumes about its priorities.
Jamelle Bouie
By Jamelle Bouie
Opinion Columnist
This is a complicated situation, but a few things are clear. Wisconsin isn’t a “Stand Your Ground” state, and Rittenhouse was in illegal possession of a weapon — under Wisconsin law, it is a Class A misdemeanor for a minor to carry a deadly weapon in the open.
What's unfair about that?
I think this is all a moot point (Score:2)
The protests are full of provocateurs. It's the Reichstag Fire all over. Worse, a lot of the "protestors" are just there because they're unemployed, angry and would otherwise be stuck at home sheltering in place. This makes it easy for guys like Rittenhouse to find th
Re:How many Complaints about pages urging Riots (Score:4, Interesting)
Besides the fact that Wisconsin is an open carry state. What part of organizing a legally entitled individuals to take their weapons is necessarily inciting violence. Had property owners done the same with the protests that spawned looting, there would be significantly less loss of property.
Oh let's not forget that the ''17 year old suspect'' wasn't legally carrying the weapon in the first place. He broke the law before he killed people. Law abiding citizens that are armed tend to create very safe environments.
Re: How many Complaints about pages urging Riots (Score:3)
The militia is every able-bodied male between the ages of 18 and 45. Though that asshole Wilson did try to do an end run around the entire system by designating the NG as the militia.
Re: (Score:2)
Surely then the legal definition of militia would violate equality laws, e.g. age and gender.
In any case he is 17.
Re: (Score:2)
Surely then the legal definition of militia would violate equality laws, e.g. age and gender.
In any case he is 17.
Federal law defines the militia age range to be 17-45, not 18.
Re: (Score:2)
And for those of you who throw around the term 'militia', that has an actual legal constitutional definition. Unless your state selected your officers, it's not a militia.
Wrong. Federal law defines the militia to be composed of two components. The first is the organized which includes but is not entirely the National Guard. The second is the everyone else not in the organized. So most of those 17-45 have no officers, are under no obligation to show up for training, etc.
Re: (Score:2)
We are working harder than ever and yet our wages and standard of living keep declining. My grandfather supported a family of 7 and owned a house with one blue collar income. You cannot do that today.
Can you cite any relevant statistical data supporting this assertion? The data I've been able to find supports the opposite with standards of living having risen substantially at the scale and period.
From what I've been able to gather relative wealth gaps started accelerating at the tail end of the 1980s after federal tax rates went from 70% to less than 30% in just a few years time by the end of the 80s. I don't know about causation yet seems this is the point where gini coefficients really started getti
Re: How many Complaints about pages urging Riots (Score:2)
And the GOP fixed it by giving tax breaks to the wealthy and not investing in infrastructure or education?
Good (Score:2)
RIOTERS (Score:3)
"allegedly shot and killed two protesters"
Argh. Rioters. Using glocks and molotovs means it's a riot. Rioters. Say it after me, news media. Rioters.
And Antifa's organizing too (Score:3)
Antifa uses FB to coordinate their riots as well.
Yet they're given a complete pass.
Overcharging (Score:3)
Looks like the prosecutor *may* be sympathetic to his case. You overcharge the heck out of the suspect knowing most of the charges will get tossed, but it still makes you look good to those who want him prosecuted. When the charges get tossed the prosecutor can throw up their hands in a press conference and say "Well, I tried." and lay the blame on a judge who will probably not get voted out of office for doing so.
Re: (Score:2)
From a purely legal standpoint it's going to be hard to argue self defence on this one. Travelling to another state with a loaded gun implies he expected trouble that he could easily have avoided by not going there. Since none of the property being defended was his and he wasn't under contract for security it very much looks like he inserted himself into a volatile situation expecting to have to use deadly force, which negates any self defence argument.
Re:Prosecutor's Case (Score:5, Insightful)
Weapon charges could stick, but it's pretty clear-cut self defense.
Going out and actively searching for a fight means that it's not a self defense.
Re:Prosecutor's Case (Score:5, Interesting)
Conceivably, if you took out your long gun in response to a disturbance in *your* town could be construed as an intent to defend yourself or your community. Packing it in your car and driving across state lines is looking for an opportunity to use it.
Re: Prosecutor's Case (Score:2)
Except that never happened. He was a lifeguard in Kenosha, after work he went and cleaned graffiti off a local high school, and then after that went to the protests to defend local businesses at the behest of the business owner. The gun never crossed state lines that day in the first place.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: Prosecutor's Case (Score:4, Informative)
Do you have a source for the owner of the gas station where he originally was with the militia asking them to defend it?
There is no source for this other than the criminal's attorney planting the idea in people's head to garner sympathy. It should be noted this supposed gas station owner has yet to come forward and corroborate the comments.
Also conveniently left out by those trying to defend the murderer is he then went up to police who stood by and did nothing when he approached with his weapon, who did nothing when they told him to put the gun down, who did nothing when he then left the scene of the crime. The same police who had no problem putting seven bullets into the back of someone who was unarmed and told police he did have a knife in the car.
Don't worry, this will turn out to be another case of white privilege and this terrorist will be lauded as a hero by those on the right.
Oh, and P.S., if this terrorist considered himself part of the "militia" he is required under the Constitution to be well regulated. I doubt we'll find any instance of him being regulated in the use of the weapon which also, he wasn't legally able to use.
Re: Prosecutor's Case (Score:2)
He was at the gas station after being told to leave the first mechanic's shop by the police because they were clearing people out of the area. It was on the way to the second shop owned by the same guy that the mob started chasing him. He had stopped by the gas station to render medical aid. He was not protecting it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
''He had an adult present to be in possession of the rifle''
Incorrect. Aside from hunting, the only permissive possession by a minor is for target practice or a course of instruction on proper usage of weapons both supervised by an adult..
https://docs.legis.wisconsin.g... [wisconsin.gov]
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If it's people like you on the command of the democrat party, well sorry to say, but the republicans will stay in power for quite a long time.
There is something pretty similar between Trump and Hitler that is the fact they won by promising (and delivering) jobs.
People seem to give priority to not starving over anything else, so you're not winning this or any election by brushing it off as "not the most important problem".
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: militias (Score:2)
In the case of NFAC one of their members accidentally shoots themselves and another member and are treated by medics. Other than that? Nothing much.
Re: (Score:3)
Ok.
https://www.theguardian.com/us... [theguardian.com]
https://www.politico.com/news/... [politico.com]
https://www.washingtontimes.co... [washingtontimes.com]
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/ne... [dailymail.co.uk]
https://www.usnews.com/news/to... [usnews.com]
Sorry, I'm really not sure what your point is.
If Democracy loses (Score:2)
In the end every country will be entirely devastated, the leaders tortured and hung like we did to Saddam Hussein. Millions dea
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
You do understand you'll be coming with me, right? (Score:2)
It doesn't matter where you, me or anyone goes. The United States as it crumbles will go looking for new enemies. We'll engage in classic empire building. When you're rotting from within you do foreign conquests to keep it going. You strike out and take from other countries so you don't have to solve the problems at home (which you can't solve, because your ideo
Re: You do understand you'll be coming with me, ri (Score:3)
Liar (Score:3, Informative)
You literally live in the safest and richest country on the planet
That's literally two lies.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Re: Liar (Score:2, Insightful)