Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Peaceful protesters don't shoot.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?
all I know is an AK fired 5 times. those are AK shots.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.prove itCar wasn’t passing. It was driving into the 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,,,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?under missouri law the mccloskys had every right to shoot the rioters,,,,Hmmm....then someone should have shot the McCloskey’s in St. Louis.Says Mr. Hypocrite.that's really funny cause normally you bitch endlessly at the ones with the guns..Promoting terrorism?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
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.
apply these things to yourself please.
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.
The driver was reported by witnesses as accelerating into the crowd.
Does a guy have the right to point his gun at
a car driving into a crowd?
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,,,
but youre not waiting and making assumptions ,,,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.prove itCar wasn’t passing. It was driving into the 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,,,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?under missouri law the mccloskys had every right to shoot the rioters,,,,Hmmm....then someone should have shot the McCloskey’s in St. Louis.Says Mr. Hypocrite.that's really funny cause normally you bitch endlessly at the ones with the guns..Promoting terrorism?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
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.
apply these things to yourself please.
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.
The driver was reported by witnesses as accelerating into the crowd.
Does a guy have the right to point his gun at
a car driving into a crowd?
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,,,
Peaceful protesters don't shoot.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?
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.
Google it.he fired 5 times Coyote!!! those 5 rounds you hear are AK47 shots.Says Mr. Hypocrite.that's really funny cause normally you bitch endlessly at the ones with the guns..Promoting terrorism?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
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.
apply these things to yourself please.
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.
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?
kinda funnu don'
video link of proof please. I mean you questioned my account of it.Car wasn’t passing. It was driving into the 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,,,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?under missouri law the mccloskys had every right to shoot the rioters,,,,Hmmm....then someone should have shot the McCloskey’s in St. Louis.Says Mr. Hypocrite.that's really funny cause normally you bitch endlessly at the ones with the guns..Promoting terrorism?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
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.
apply these things to yourself please.
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.
The driver was reported by witnesses as accelerating into the crowd.
Does a guy have the right to point his gun at
a car driving into a crowd?
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,,,
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.
Read the police statement.all I know is an AK fired 5 times. those are AK shots.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.prove itCar wasn’t passing. It was driving into the 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,,,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?under missouri law the mccloskys had every right to shoot the rioters,,,,Hmmm....then someone should have shot the McCloskey’s in St. Louis.Says Mr. Hypocrite.that's really funny cause normally you bitch endlessly at the ones with the guns..Promoting terrorism?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
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.
apply these things to yourself please.
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.
The driver was reported by witnesses as accelerating into the crowd.
Does a guy have the right to point his gun at
a car driving into a crowd?
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,,,
We will see form there.
peaceful protesters are not out looking for fights nor should need a gun.Peaceful protesters don't shoot.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?
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.
Stop pretending I have not.Read the police statement.all I know is an AK fired 5 times. those are AK shots.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.prove itCar wasn’t passing. It was driving into the 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,,,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?under missouri law the mccloskys had every right to shoot the rioters,,,,Hmmm....then someone should have shot the McCloskey’s in St. Louis.Says Mr. Hypocrite.that's really funny cause normally you bitch endlessly at the ones with the guns..Promoting terrorism?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
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.
apply these things to yourself please.
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.
The driver was reported by witnesses as accelerating into the crowd.
Does a guy have the right to point his gun at
a car driving into a crowd?
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,,,
We will see form there.
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.but youre not waiting and making assumptions ,,,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.prove itCar wasn’t passing. It was driving into the 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,,,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?under missouri law the mccloskys had every right to shoot the rioters,,,,Hmmm....then someone should have shot the McCloskey’s in St. Louis.Says Mr. Hypocrite.that's really funny cause normally you bitch endlessly at the ones with the guns..Promoting terrorism?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
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.
apply these things to yourself please.
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.
The driver was reported by witnesses as accelerating into the crowd.
Does a guy have the right to point his gun at
a car driving into a crowd?
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,,,
there was a honk. you never seems to acknowledge that the driver honked at them.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.but youre not waiting and making assumptions ,,,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.prove itCar wasn’t passing. It was driving into the 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,,,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?under missouri law the mccloskys had every right to shoot the rioters,,,,Hmmm....then someone should have shot the McCloskey’s in St. Louis.Says Mr. Hypocrite.that's really funny cause normally you bitch endlessly at the ones with the guns..Promoting terrorism?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
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.
apply these things to yourself please.
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.
The driver was reported by witnesses as accelerating into the crowd.
Does a guy have the right to point his gun at
a car driving into a crowd?
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,,,
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.and AGAIN the AK owner is already on record as calling people too pussy to stop him.
people, ANY people, with a gun tend to get stupid. esp when inserting themselves in situations looking for conflict.
No, you don’t know that. It is merely your obsession....As we know, many, many, teachers hate America...Blame the parentless children, whose Mom and Dad are their friends and not their parents. One generation of misfits is raising another.
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?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.and AGAIN the AK owner is already on record as calling people too pussy to stop him.
people, ANY people, with a gun tend to get stupid. esp when inserting themselves in situations looking for conflict.
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.BTW, I'll bet I know ten thousand times as any teachers as you do.
www.zinnedproject.org
I'm confused by the question. Are you saying police shouldn't have guns?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?
peaceful protesters are not out looking for fights nor should need a gun.Peaceful protesters don't shoot.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?
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.
either action moves you from peaceful protest to riot.
no excuses
no reasons to justify.
you crossed the line. deal with the consequences.
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.but youre not waiting and making assumptions ,,,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.prove itCar wasn’t passing. It was driving into the 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,,,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?under missouri law the mccloskys had every right to shoot the rioters,,,,Hmmm....then someone should have shot the McCloskey’s in St. Louis.Says Mr. Hypocrite.that's really funny cause normally you bitch endlessly at the ones with the guns..Promoting terrorism?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
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.
apply these things to yourself please.
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.
The driver was reported by witnesses as accelerating into the crowd.
Does a guy have the right to point his gun at
a car driving into a crowd?
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,,,
From the zoom press conference the driver honked to get by and they attacked his car. Pointed a gun at him.Peaceful protesters don't shoot.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?
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.
