Wow so initial reports are a shooter was about to open fire at the crowd, civilians fired upon the shooter and accidentally hit this guy? Damn.
Sounds like it. If the guy hadn’t shot the shooter, how many more might have died? Impossible to know but given that limited information I hope the guy is doing OK.
Detectives don’t yet know why Gamboa pulled out a rifle
Because. He’s. A. Fucking. Magat. Nazi. Terrorist.
Jesus H Christ you fuckwadded enablers.
Does peacekeeper mean armed protester or police officer?
“Our victim was not the intended target,” Brian Redd, the Salt Lake City police chief, said, “but rather an innocent bystander participating in the demonstration.”
Sounds like police to me.
The Utah chapter did not immediately respond to AP questions about the peacekeeping team. It was unclear who hired them, whether they were volunteers or what their training was prior to the event. Redd said that the peacekeepers’ actions are also part of the investigation.
Further down. Not a cop.
Gotta love the passive language on these sort of articles…
So glad that the good guys with guns took out the bad guy with guns. Oh wait.
It does kind of seem like what happened here as far as we know though…
No, there was a bad guy with a gun, but the good guys killed an innocent bystander instead of the actual criminal.
You can’t even trust someone with perfect intentions with a gun.
deleted by creator
They should NOT have shot at him. Gun safety 101 is “don’t fire unless you’re willing to kill something past the target”, which in this case was a BIG FUCKING CROWD. The criminal needed to be stopped, but this was not the way. Perhaps if he had been actively shooting I would feel differently.
I’m actually not criticizing the guy who pulled the trigger. The situation was a mess and I don’t think a human has the reaction time to think this one out. But it’s another case where we can see that even “good guys guns” can cause more damage than bad guy guns, unlike what the right wing might lead you to believe.
According the article he was about to actively shoot. So no I don’t think this is a case where good guy with gun cause more damage. A rifle being fired into a large crowd would absolutely have caused more damage. Again I don’t understand your point.
The point is probably that only bringing lethal ordinance to a large and crowded environment as a “peacekeeping force”, you’re liable to end of with unnecessary casualties.
The problem isn’t that they reacted with all they had in the situation, the problem is that’s all they went into the situation with.
I guess I just don’t understand how many of us are supposed to die so you feel comfortable. What’s the number? What’s the exact number of us that are allowed to be murdered by right wing nut jobs for you to feel comfortable? They’ve been making threats for weeks. We knew this was a possibility. Some people came prepared and were able to stop a big greater tragedy from happening, yet you’re mad that more of us weren’t mowed down. It’s ridiculous.
deleted by creator
That supposes that there are only two options: shoot a deadly weapon or don’t shoot a deadly weapon.
There are a ton of less lethal options available that can be used. Why weren’t those considered instead? There may have been less innocent casualties that way.
deleted by creator
Yeah but they were aiming at the bad guy with a gun and they did hit him apparently thus stopping him from shooting a bunch of other people. Like it’s horrible this other guy got shot but the alternative seems to have been a lot of people being shot. I guess I’m just not seeing your point here because it seems like you’re saying it would have been better for the guy to commit a mass shooting and kill a bunch of those protesters.
This assumes they couldn’t have prepared something less liable to cause collateral damage. It’s not like it’s just some random person who happened to have a gun on them, this was apparently a person or persons who specifically came to this event to prevent this sort of thing. And all they seemed to bring was something with a high likelihood of collateral damage.
