More conflict in Albuquerque shooting involved

[mindfold]

https://www.npr.org/sections/live-up...oval-of-statue

We all knew something like this was going to happen sooner or later.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[FoxtArt]

There's a lot of different groups and influences that are heavily pushing us to kill each other while the opportunity is ripe leading into November. Many different motivations, but I think we're in for a rough four and a half months.

[Gman]

There's a lot of different groups and influences that are heavily pushing us to kill each other while the opportunity is ripe leading into November. Many different motivations, but I think we're in for a rough four and a half months.

Do you promise it will only be that long?

Supposedly the shooter is the son of a sheriff. With a crowd screaming things like "I'll fucking kill you!!!", not sure what his options were. Death, or try and stay alive and deal with this in court?

As to instigating, it could be argued that everybody there was looking for a fight.

[FoxtArt]

Do you promise it will only be that long?

It depends on the incubation period of an unintentional pregnancy resulting from the negligent application of sodomy geese.

-- Monty Python and the Twenty-Twenty.

[FoxtArt]

Video shows multiple "protestors" attacking the guy in the blue shirt prior to him pulling a gun FWIW. I don't have a comment on his reaction, only that the majority of the media is neglecting to accurately represent it.

ETA: There's also video of him pulling a protester to the ground prior to the attack. As in most every case, it appears to be one that everybody has shit on their face. I wonder what the DA will do with it. Because his earlier action constitutes a potential chargeable assault, it could potentially revoke his self-defense affirmative defense to the latter act, but NM law is in question so who knows. He (shooter) definitely escalated in the first instance. It also doesn't take a genius to know that pulling a gun amid protesters is very unwise for a ton of reasons, even if they are trying to whack you.

[tmckay2]

Video shows multiple "protestors" attacking the guy in the blue shirt prior to him pulling a gun FWIW. I don't have a comment on his reaction, only that the majority of the media is neglecting to accurately represent it.

ETA: There's also video of him pulling a protester to the ground prior to the attack. As in most every case, it appears to be one that everybody has shit on their face. I wonder what the DA will do with it. Because his earlier action constitutes a potential chargeable assault, it could potentially revoke his self-defense affirmative defense to the latter act, but NM law is in question so who knows. He (shooter) definitely escalated in the first instance. It also doesn't take a genius to know that pulling a gun amid protesters is very unwise for a ton of reasons, even if they are trying to whack you.

Not condemning anyone but if you are carrying you should never, under any circumstances, escalate a situation or make it physical. I think it certainly does dampen your defense argument. You want to always be able to show you avoided confrontation at all costs until your life was on the line or the likelihood the court wont side with you goes way up

That being said I dont know all the facts so perhaps the facts are it was escalated outside of his control.

[CS1983]

Not condemning anyone but if you are carrying you should never, under any circumstances, escalate a situation or make it physical. I think it certainly does dampen your defense argument. You want to always be able to show you avoided confrontation at all costs until your life was on the line or the likelihood the court wont side with you goes way up

That being said I dont know all the facts so perhaps the facts are it was escalated outside of his control.

I dunno about anyone else, but I find myself much more on my P's and Q's when carrying. At least, I'm more aware of it.

[O2HeN2]

I dunno about anyone else, but I find myself much more on my P's and Q's when carrying. At least, I'm more aware of it.

Me too. Which is why I have a hate the fact that people typically only quote the first sentence from Heinlein: "An armed society is a polite society."

That makes it sound as if everyone is on good behaviour only because they fear being shot.

The full quote: "An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life."

Makes it quite clear that it's the ARMED person that's on their best behavior to avoid having to use deadly force.

In other words most people completely misunderstand what the quote is saying.

O2

[Bailey Guns]

I read about this earlier. The reporting is so one-sided and biased...even more so than usual...that it boggles the mind. Protesters attempting to destroy property = good. Armed citizens = satan. Even the leftist governor all but praised the protesters and said the non-anarchist types, the armed protesters, were only there to cause trouble with the anarchists.

Fucking ridiculous.

[hollohas]

He may have done something earlier, but in the video I saw leading up to the shooting, he was hit, retreated a good distance and was then attacked. Not sure about NM law, but in many states, even if someone is an initial attacker, once they retreat, there is no justified defense against them. So the mob attacking him is pure assault by them regardless of any possibility he may have been the initial aggressor.

So, does that mean the shooter is untitled to self-defense since he was very clearly retreating?