I predict the target audience will continue to miss the point, but here goes anyway...

[JoeBags7277 759]

"The law-and-order left got what they wanted on Tuesday of last week, when several CCF members were ambushed on the road by the FBI and Oregon State Police. CCF spokesman LeVoy Finicum was shot and killed, and the rest were arrested (some after also being shot). The killing was met mostly with approval or shrugs from progressives on social media.

One notable exception was Anonymous, which released a video declaring that:

“…Finicum was killed in cold blood, as his hands were in the air. Just as Anonymous called for justice in the killing of Michael Brown we call for justice now.”

Indeed, it was the police killing of Michael Brown that first popularized the protest slogan, “Hands Up, Don’t Shoot,” which has been chanted by many of the same liberals now justifying Finicum being shot with his empty hands in the air.

During the Ferguson unrest however, the law-and-order right would have none of it. To them, Michael Brown was just a “thug,” a known criminal who had recently shaken down a store. If he didn’t want to get shot, he shouldn’t have resisted a cop, thought many of the same conservatives now outraged over the bloody government response to CCF’s armed defiance.

Both sides reduce all questions of justice to identity politics, and effectively treat rights as a sympathy-based concept."

https://medium.com/dan-sanchez/hands-up-don-t-execute-1fa2e582c094#.q0ct9wmq0

[homersapien 11,812]

That photo with the circle around him is intentionally misleading. He was actually shot when reaching for the pistol he was wearing.

[TexasTiger 13,556]

Arms out, not hands up.

[JoeBags7277 759]

Arms out, not hands up.

Red Team, your thoughts?

[cooltigger21 0]

I don't know the details of this. I generally support the police and give them the benefit of the doubt. They are not infallible and if they crossed the line here as it seems then by all means go after them.

[icanthearyou 4,468]

Unarmed individuals versus heavily armed groups of individuals. There is a distinct difference.

[MDM4AU 337]

OMG...

[Strychnine 1,804]

Having watched the video of that shooting, the victim literally did everything wrong. He tried to plow through the snow at speed to avoid a roadblock. He immediately gets out of the vehicle. At one point he has his hands out, then he starts reaching into the left side of his jacket (twice if I recall). He is then shot. The group (and that individual in particular) was known to be armed. If anything, I'm surprised the vehicle wasn't being turned into Swiss cheese as it was plowing into the snow.

I'm all for oversight of law enforcement and holding them accountable. I'm also all for prosecuting officers when they wrongfully kill anyone. This is not one of those cases.

[Auburn4life 24]

"Conservatives" ,as the original author calls them, screaming about he was murdered or he had his hands up, haven't kept up with the story. Video evidence shows he reached for his gun. He also avoided/ran thru a roadblock.

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

Just like Ruby Ridge, these things don't usually end well and the victims aren't always the ones most deserving of getting shot, if anyone has to. I've watched the video over and over and if I had to I couldn't honestly say he was going for his gun. I still think he was possibly shot in the back. an autopsy and ballistics tests would easily resolve that but who thinks we will ever see the results of either?

I'm not putting them down by any means but look at the scenarios:

1. These guys were breaking the law by occupying federal land. Big deal? They weren't threatening anyone's life as far as I know. But the FBI, et. al., made a big deal out of it.

2. We have Hillary Clinton violating national security laws (criminal offense) which may very well have compromised the lives of many others. Yet the FBI, et.al., are dragging their feet in bringing charges. The WH is even involved even though they say they don't get involved in ongoing investigations. Politics?

So two scenarios......equal justice? You decide.

[homersapien 11,812]

Just like Ruby Ridge, these things don't usually end well and the victims aren't always the ones most deserving of getting shot, if anyone has to. I've watched the video over and over and if I had to I couldn't honestly say he was going for his gun. I still think he was possibly shot in the back. an autopsy and ballistics tests would easily resolve that but who thinks we will ever see the results of either?

I'm not putting them down by any means but look at the scenarios:

1. These guys were breaking the law by occupying federal land. Big deal? They weren't threatening anyone's life as far as I know. But the FBI, et. al., made a big deal out of it.

2. We have Hillary Clinton violating national security laws (criminal offense) which may very well have compromised the lives of many others. Yet the FBI, et.al., are dragging their feet in bringing charges. The WH is even involved even though they say they don't get involved in ongoing investigations. Politics?

So two scenarios......equal justice? You decide.

Seriously? What if he had been black and unarmed?

If all these controversial unarmed black men shooting had equivalent video evidence - along with an actual loaded pistol - I don't think there would be a controversy about those shootings.

[Strychnine 1,804]

Just like Ruby Ridge, these things don't usually end well and the victims aren't always the ones most deserving of getting shot, if anyone has to. I've watched the video over and over and if I had to I couldn't honestly say he was going for his gun. I still think he was possibly shot in the back. an autopsy and ballistics tests would easily resolve that but who thinks we will ever see the results of either?

I'm not putting them down by any means but look at the scenarios:

1. These guys were breaking the law by occupying federal land. Big deal? They weren't threatening anyone's life as far as I know. But the FBI, et. al., made a big deal out of it.

2. We have Hillary Clinton violating national security laws (criminal offense) which may very well have compromised the lives of many others. Yet the FBI, et.al., are dragging their feet in bringing charges. The WH is even involved even though they say they don't get involved in ongoing investigations. Politics?

So two scenarios......equal justice? You decide.

Seriously? What if he had been black and unarmed?

If all these controversial unarmed black men shooting had equivalent video evidence - along with an actual loaded pistol - I don't think there would be a controversy about those shootings.

I'm a 36-year-old white guy, and I have little doubt that I would be immediately shot if I was reaching inside my jacket after having just tried to run through a roadblock. That becomes even more certain when you consider that the officers on the scene knew all of those guys were armed.

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

Just like Ruby Ridge, these things don't usually end well and the victims aren't always the ones most deserving of getting shot, if anyone has to. I've watched the video over and over and if I had to I couldn't honestly say he was going for his gun. I still think he was possibly shot in the back. an autopsy and ballistics tests would easily resolve that but who thinks we will ever see the results of either?

I'm not putting them down by any means but look at the scenarios:

1. These guys were breaking the law by occupying federal land. Big deal? They weren't threatening anyone's life as far as I know. But the FBI, et. al., made a big deal out of it.

2. We have Hillary Clinton violating national security laws (criminal offense) which may very well have compromised the lives of many others. Yet the FBI, et.al., are dragging their feet in bringing charges. The WH is even involved even though they say they don't get involved in ongoing investigations. Politics?

So two scenarios......equal justice? You decide.

Seriously? What if he had been black and unarmed?

If all these controversial unarmed black men shooting had equivalent video evidence - along with an actual loaded pistol - I don't think there would be a controversy about those shootings.

I'm a 36-year-old white guy, and I have little doubt that I would be immediately shot if I was reaching inside my jacket after having just tried to run through a roadblock. That becomes even more certain when you consider that the officers on the scene knew all of those guys were armed.

But you do indicate you a little doubt. But as Hillary says "what difference does it make?" The guy is dead.

[Strychnine 1,804]

Just like Ruby Ridge, these things don't usually end well and the victims aren't always the ones most deserving of getting shot, if anyone has to. I've watched the video over and over and if I had to I couldn't honestly say he was going for his gun. I still think he was possibly shot in the back. an autopsy and ballistics tests would easily resolve that but who thinks we will ever see the results of either?

I'm not putting them down by any means but look at the scenarios:

1. These guys were breaking the law by occupying federal land. Big deal? They weren't threatening anyone's life as far as I know. But the FBI, et. al., made a big deal out of it.

2. We have Hillary Clinton violating national security laws (criminal offense) which may very well have compromised the lives of many others. Yet the FBI, et.al., are dragging their feet in bringing charges. The WH is even involved even though they say they don't get involved in ongoing investigations. Politics?

So two scenarios......equal justice? You decide.

Seriously? What if he had been black and unarmed?

If all these controversial unarmed black men shooting had equivalent video evidence - along with an actual loaded pistol - I don't think there would be a controversy about those shootings.

I'm a 36-year-old white guy, and I have little doubt that I would be immediately shot if I was reaching inside my jacket after having just tried to run through a roadblock. That becomes even more certain when you consider that the officers on the scene knew all of those guys were armed.

But you do indicate you a little doubt. But as Hillary says "what difference does it make?" The guy is dead.

My doubt consists of knowing that there are some officers that are very reluctant to fire their weapons and take a life. What I can say with certainty is: if I were a law enforcement officer, I would have shot that guy once he started reaching toward the inside of his jacket. That wasn't some random roadblock to snag unlicensed or drunk drivers. It was a roadblock set up specifically to get those guys, which were people they knew to be armed. This particular guy had already said he'd rather die than go to jail. Like I said in my first post, I'm surprised the officers weren't already firing after he tried to plow through the roadblock and nearly hit one of them.