Anonymous #1 2w

“Um actually if you don’t have a holster you’re forfeiting your right to life”

23

Anonymous #2 2w

"Uhm if I don't have a seatbelt I'm forfeiting my right to live"

-3

Anonymous #1 2w

False equivalence fallacy

23

Anonymous #2 2w

The whole point of a holster is to prevent negligent discharge, similarly to how the point of a seatbelt is to prevent the worst injuries from a crash. You can easily survive without using either one, but as shown today they can also save your life.

-3

Anonymous #1 2w

I would argue that, seeing how much damage a gun is capable of, preventing negligent discharge is an equivalent safety priority for carrying as wearing a seatbelt would be while driving or in a moving car. What if, instead of 10 cops standing around him, it was a young child?

0

Anonymous #1 2w

“What if” but it wasn’t it doesn’t matter stop justifying a persons murder. It’s wild the hill you are dying on is that because he didn’t have a holster he had it coming. And your comparison to the seat belt is literally just false equivalence.

6

Anonymous #2 2w

I just explained how they are equivalent

0

Anonymous #2 2w

I say "what if" because it could have just as easily been that way, every 6 days a child under the age of 10 is killed by negligent discharge

0

Anonymous #1 2w

They’re not equivalent because not wearing your seatbelt when going on a drive is not equivalent to legally engaging in concealed carry.

6

Anonymous #2 2w

Legally engaging in concealed carry would be doing so in a safe manner

0

Anonymous #2 2w

Concealed carrying without a holster that at the very least covers the entire trigger pocket is not doing so in a safe manner

0

Anonymous #2 2w

Hence its equivalence to driving without a seatbelt

0

Anonymous #1 2w

Your what if doesn’t apply it doesn’t matter it’s entirely different scenarios stop trying to make apples comparable to oranges. And legally engaging in concealed carry is following the rules of what allows someone to conceal carry. A holster is not part of that.

1

Anonymous #2 2w

Well if you're making a choice to carry without a holster and by doing so are intentionally bolstering your chances of a negligent discharge, and plan to resist the police, don't be surprised if you get shot. They're like $5 at walmart, not sure why you're acting as if you can't afford one either (how the fuck are you affording a gun and licensing if that's really the case?)

0

Anonymous #1 2w

Not sure why you’re acting like him not having a holster makes him having his gun any more illegal? He can carry without one, you bitching about how it’s not as safe doesn’t change the fact that he was just beat and then executed for no legal reason. Frankly the lack of even feigned empathy for what’s obviously a senseless loss of life is exactly what I’d expect from a fascist nationalist boot licker

3

Anonymous #6 2w

I saw the video and it shows the first shot is fired out of his weapon as a negligent discharge

0

Anonymous #1 2w

He never handled his weapon though? The Feds had the negligent discharge trying to remove his firearm that he was carrying (assuming) legally

8

Anonymous #6 2w

Still, an officer firing because a negligent discharge occurred with dual fault doesn't make it an execution

-1

Anonymous #1 2w

But it isn’t dual fault… it’s literally the ICE agent pulling the trigger on his gun while taking it off of him, and then a second ICE agent shooting the victim several seconds after he had been disarmed. It was a summary execution (or in other words, a murder in broad daylight).

4

Anonymous #7 2w

Fault of the owner for 1) concealed carrying a P320 2) Not even using a holster for the gun which is currently in court over killing a serviceman with an uncommanded discharge

-1

Anonymous #1 2w

Neither of these are relevant given that it appears the ICE agent accidentally pulled the trigger after having taken the gun. The gun was not on his body in any way when it went off, we have the footage you can’t just repeat this over and over and change what we all saw.

3

Anonymous #7 2w

I doubt you could even charge the guy who disarmed him, considering the totality of the circumstances. Suspect was violently resisting, which would necessitate a harder grip on the firearm (something proven to cause uncommanded discharges in the case of the P320)

1

Anonymous #1 2w

You could certainly charge everyone involved. All the stuff you’re referring to is basically bullshit manufactured by LEOs to get away with murder. They carried out a summary execution in broad daylight, they will get their Nuremberg moment and it’ll probably end with a lengthy prison sentence or execution. Unless they flee the country or something post-war.

3

Anonymous #7 2w

The P320 having uncommanded discharges is completely unrelated to this event and predates it by a while

0

Anonymous #1 2w

Yes I’m aware, I wasn’t really addressing that part because it isn’t what happened. It was an ND, but not uncommanded. The agent just accidentally pulled the trigger because like all ICE agents at this point he has no education and no training and just signed up for the promise of a big bonus and a chance to kill people.

6

Anonymous #7 2w

I'm yet to see anything that'd suggest he pulled the trigger, watched those frames pretty adamantly this morning and all I could see was an uncommanded discharge

1

Anonymous #7 2w

If you have a ss or clip that shows something else I'd love to see

1