this post was submitted on 18 Jun 2025
273 points (91.0% liked)
Anarchism
2223 readers
35 users here now
Discuss anarchist praxis and philosophy. Don't take yourselves too seriously.
Other anarchist comms
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
Join the matrix room for some real-time discussion.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
A single blurry still doesn't pose a convincing argument that he was or wasn't pointing the weapon towards the crowds.
I've not seen enough to conclude either way. So many contradicting things.
If you were wanting to assist with security, when someone obviously doing security addresses you then you'd try and comply, and explain your intent. But did the security actually address him? Or did he just run away from a gun pointed at him? Or did he have his gun pointed in the direction of the crowd while moving towards the crowd and ignoring security? Much of this doesn't make sense.
We don't go around making plausible reasons and then asking the victim to prove them wrong. Maybe the killers are lying to cover their ass?
Facts on the ground is: Arturo didn't shoot anyone, had a right to carry, a bystander was killed by the "good guys" and Arturo was shot himself. Nothing in all of this proves that Arturo was a danger to anyone.
"Innocent until proven guilty" mfs when the accused is a leftist
The victim blaming with assumed narratives no less, is astounding.
What, you expect me to have evidence?
Just because he didn't shoot anyone, doesn't mean his alleged actions wouldn't cause the same reaction or worse from any other reasonable person.
Again, things aren't lining up with the two sides/stories.
Ye which is why I'm inclined to believe the non-killer's story rather than the ones with the most incentive to lie
Both have a very high incentive to lie.
Unless more evidence appears, I'm more inclined to believe the person who didn't shoot anyone, even when they had plenty of opportunity to do so (in self defense no less) and have a history of protecting others.
Yep this really just seems like a tragedy from someone being overzealous. In the end only hurting allies. There's no good outcome from this. But arguably the worst I think is to demonize an ally in an attempt to deflect blame. By shooting "preemptively" they're where there blame lays unfortunately.
I don't necessarily think that there should be imprisonment or jail in this for anyone. It was all completely unintentional. And doesn't serve any public good. But I think unfortunately a lot of people are going to want someone to crucify or demonize.
And I'm not telling you not to. I'm just saying I'm unconvinced, and without more factual information I can't make a decision either way.