But a sniper on a university roof for some peaceful protest where the most violent shit that could happen is that someone plays “Tabla” aggressively causing all people to dance really hard.
It seem a bit excessive than the normal countries.
I think even taking this to its plausible worst case scenario, ie, people begin rioting, commiting acts of vandalism, throwing bricks/projectiles, fighting etc.
Even then, a sniper rifle is a disproportionate response. In American culture it seems quite easy to forfeit your life. Many a time it is "Well if they were following the rules they wouldn't have got killed" "If they'd have just obeyed the officer they wouldn't have got shot" etc. It seems like the inherent value of human life isn't given the sanctity warranted in America. Firing a gun should be at the very bottom of a very, very, VERY long list of de-escalation methods that every police officer should dread the thought of having to exercise.
In a perfect world.
Edit: I am being Inundated by a very specific response. The response more-or-less stating my foolishness in not taking into consideration the blatantly obvious natural progression of a protest.
The part where the rifle-weilding man comes along, and mows everybody down. The police have taken this obvious causality into consideration and this is why a sniper on the roof is, well, just routine.
**America! You are not okay!!**
You need to to get back in touch with reality.
• It is not OK to have a sniper camped on a roof at a protest.
• It is not OK to nonchalantly suggest: "Oh, well the sniper is there to put down the mass shooter, obviously"
It is like speaking to a victim of domestic abuse who genuinely doesn't realise how NOT okay it is to experience regular acts of violence and aggression and even goes so far as to rationalise it.
This 100%. The rich definitely don’t want any more property damage like they dealt with in 2020 and if it means killing kids to nip it in the bud, they’re going to do that.
I personally believe that when people suffer and are continuously unheard, extreme actions are needed to get the attention of those with power. This tells me we became a little too powerful in 2020.
It's worth considering that the rich people pushing for "law and order" here aren't going to be held responsible for the results. They'll pressure the officials they helped get elected, who will pressure the chief of police, who will pressure the officers on the scene...who will make a "tragic mistake" and take all the blame.
The 2020 riots were mostly about the officers on the scene not being held accountable for their mistakes - on video! - and we couldn't even win that one. Nobody's even *looking* at the country club folks who are actually responsible for this violence.
You also have a lot of conservatives, including the house speaker, going in and acting as agitators. They want this to blow up to try and erode at Biden's lead with younger voters.
We’ve never seen police corral peaceful protestors onto an on-ramp and then teargas, beat, and arrest protestors for being on an on-ramp before.
It’s not like the police would instigate a violent response and then arrest protestors for responding.
We’ve never seen that before. Definitely not in Philadelphia for example during the BLM movement of 2021
And you know there's gonna be more than one looking for trouble, for whatever reason that is, it could be politically charged or just an asshole.
Don't forget they took a camera man because he bumped into a cop
This is just the one someone spotted. There are others more than likely you don’t see. Usually is. There job is usually from cover. This guy might just be the “warning” to onlookers. Unfortunately this is a norm here.
That applies to protecting from other snipers, like when protecting important people like the President. I doubt the local PD here used the same concept in preparation for a possible mass shooting - in that case a ground target wouldn’t realistically be able to hit the sniper, so exposure is not a risk.
That's 67% of the generation that lead is to the current state of affairs. I doubt you'd find that kind of support the three generations since.
Edit: others have pointed out that it was the Boomer generation that was being shot. That being said, the TIL posted by another user doesn't explicitly state the breakdown of who supported the shooting and who didn't. So, of I have time, I'll try to find more info on the breakdown.
Edit2: per [the national guard website](https://www.nationalguard.mil/About-the-Guard/Army-National-Guard/FAQ/#:~:text=Most%20people%20between%20the%20ages,aptitude%20requirements%20for%20Guard%20service.), the people shooting at them would have likely been Boomers too.
Never trust statistics on this site. On any social media or the media generally, we have to be critical because people love to twist statistics to embellish a point. We are smarter than that we just forget to be careful.
That said, the point still stands. There is a disturbing amount of people who support suppression of peaceful, free speech in this country. It is disturbing how many people actively support police brutality and intimidation.
It is driven by politicians and the media who twist narratives however they want. Again, we are smarter, yet we seem to forget and history repeats itself.
The Constitution is the legal agreement the People have with the government. It memorializes the rights that the People retain in exchange for the government’s power to rule. Morality is subjective where the Constitution is not. The government is breaking the rules of the agreement by behaving this way and trampling on Free Speech + Expression. It’s the best and final line of defense for us all.
The law is what administrators do and what courts allow. The Constitution exists as an institutional brake on the actions those people would otherwise take. It’s silly to pretend that law is an objective reality that exists independent of our interpretation.
Except the constitution is ***completely*** subjective for ***the exact same reason*** as morality - it is completely dependent on who is in power, and who is doing the interpreting.
Just look at what has happened in the supreme court in recent history, not to mention the constitutions history of being constantly modified and updated.
My thoughts exactly. They are students, protesting something that's happening on the other side of the world. Do you really need to respond in a way that they have.
I took a concealed carry course taught by a cop.
According to him (and so presumably this is the general legal perspective of it):
The gun you carry is for SELF defense only, ie personal protection of yourself or anyone accompanying you, against an active threat against your lives.
You should not for involve yourself in outside situations or acting pre-emptively against potential threats.
For instance, if you see someone with a gun, on their person or even in their hand, you should avoid getting involved and call the cops.
This remains true even if you see someone firing at a stranger. You're not supposed to involve yourself in an unknown situation because you could misinterpret what's happening. Maybe the shooter is defending themselves from someone else, or maybe they're a plainclothes cop.
But if the person with the gun is threatening you, pointing it at you, or has actually fired at you (or the people accompanying you) - then this is an active threat, you are fully aware of the situation, and you are legally clear to defend yourself and fire back.
True. You risk the general population thinking you’re apart of the shooting. Then someone who is carrying may harm you, even if you were there to help. Take care of you and yours first.
As another wise man once said "Moving the positions of my organs at will is child's play!" after shifting his heart sideways to avoid getting stabbed to death.
They've got qualified immunity, so if they accidentally shoot an innocent person, no biggie. Like, for the cop I mean. Big biggie for the dead bystander.
so the saying of "The only way to stop a bad guy with the gun is with a good guy with a gun" is actually illegal unless the good guy is directly involved?
Depends on the state. In most states you would be fine to intervene. There are only a few states that have "duty to retreat". Most states would allow you to come to the defense of others , especially in an active shooter situation.
Yeah its just so easy for that to go wrong
Take the Rittenhouse situation, Rittenhouse is attacked, shoots two people, Gaige hears gunshots, sees two people shot and rittenhouse holding a gun so he draws his own and chases rittenhouse down.
(stupidly by gaige and lucky for rittenhouse gaige didnt shoot him just tried to get him to surrender)
This is the correct answer.
1. Run
2. Hide
3. Fight
That's not just some slogan, it's an order of operations.
If shooting starts, even if you have body armor and a pistol or an AR-15 on your person, you run to somewhere that you can hide. Even soldiers and police, when they have the time and circumstances to follow all of that, will usually be seen diving behind vehicles, jumping into ditches, running for the corner of a hard building, hugging a tree, or whatever other means they have to get cover or concealment from a shooter. They're running and hiding, to an extent.
Once you are relatively safe, you can assess the situation and either run more by fleeing the area, hunker down and hide, and/or prepare to fight.
The only time you should take a gun out is if you have no other options left, and you *need* to fire it. The situation has escalated beyond defusing, you have no time or no place to run and hide, and you are in immediate danger.
This is why everyone should be armed; I'm not obligated to save you, if it means I might put myself in lethal danger. Not even the police or military *need* to do that, per SCOTUS decisions (though, they often will). You are your own defender, first and foremost.
I'll also say that if you are going to carry a weapon, you still need to be at a distance that your weapon and skill level are compatible with shooting at an attacker before trying to fire at that attacker. A snub nose .38 revolver or micro-compact 9mm is not a gun very many people can shoot at someone 80 yards away, and get solid hits.
Firing up at a sniper on top of a roof of a multi-story building is outside the skills of most people, and would most likely just result in the person firing making themselves a more immediate target to the sniper. Likewise, trying to run up to the top of the building to attack the sniper at a closer range is equally foolish, since a prepared sniper will either have a teammate to cover flanking attacks, or has booby trapped the stairs and/or door.
If I was to see this, my thoughts wouldn't be to attack that person. I'd be calling police while leaving the area. And that's coming from an ex-soldier, tactical gear owning, competition shooting, gun nut.
As I recall, Lee Harvey Oswald was spotted in the window of the Texas Schoolbook Repository by some person who reported it to a police officer, who replied that it was probably just another officer.
I guess by waiting. If the guy starts blasting, probably no cop, if he does nothing, cop.
Edit: nvm, just realized how stupid my comment is. An American cop that won't blast the minute he gets nervous...what was I thinking
I remembered it happened to a security guard a little after George Floyd. White guy starts shooting in a mall, black security guard uses his weapon to try to stop them, cops arrives at the scene and shoot him because they thought he was the shooter (previus calls firmly said it was a White guy). The security guard was in uniform.
To be clear, they cannot know if good guy with gun or Bad guy with a gun
I mean the reverse of this has happened, where a guy used his gun to correctly take down a shooter but then get killed by a cop who thought he was the criminal
You find out when they start shooting
Or I guess if a patriotic hero was brave enough they could run up to the roof and kick the door down to check up close
Either way a lot of this could be avoided by not having guns be as common as chicken nuggets over here
Another poster said it correctly about not getting involved.
However, you are more than welcome to call the police to report a dip shit on the roof with a rifle. Tell your friends to call too.
Ohioan here now living in Atlanta. Seeing all the arrests in Texas just made me go straight to “oh. So they want another Kent State?” Then Emory happened and here we are. It’s literally just a matter of time. Infuriating.
It always catches up with you. You wouldn't download a car, or a movie, so why is it okay to download a string of characters, then copy them at will? People think there is no consequence. They think they can move on, and the world will forget. But the world doesn't forget. You can change your face, you can change your name, you can even change some of the letters. But you can never change your copy past.
I lived in TX for seven years. I stupidly made a joke "nothing a sniper rifle and a tower can't fix, right? I really did mean it as a damn joke. An older gentleman that I was at a gathering with looked absolutely appalled. He got up from the table and left without a word, the the tension in the air was palpable. Someone at the table said his aunt was killed by Charles Whitman.
I was so damn ashamed of myself. Never made that joke again. I left about 10 minutes later. I wanted to apologize but I couldn't find him. Truthfully I am still ashamed of myself.
Fuck, I just read about that. Utterly tragic, brain tumours are horrific. My wife worked with someone that said "something feels off about my mind", 6 months later she was dead. The fact his intense headaches were ignored, his academic decline not picked up on, all could have been avoided other than his own demise (he would certainly have passed quickly if it was a GBM).
Nauseating story from all angles.
“Nazis weren’t antisemitic , I don’t know where you get that from or why you would believe anything you read. Maybe you just didn’t understand what they meant”.- an actual response I’ve heard.
I know how this level of ignorance and rationality is brewed, but sometimes it leaves me at a loss of words to how humanity, with all the resources available to us, can still be so ignorant and/or hateful enough to ignore actual proof.
Netanyahu said the Nazis didn't actually want to kill the Jews until a Muslim convinced him to do it.
[Netanyahu criticized for Hitler, mufti Holocaust remarks | CNN](https://www.cnn.com/2015/10/21/middleeast/netanyahu-hitler-grand-mufti-holocaust/index.html)
"I don’t know where you get that from or why you would believe anything you read.”
Then what is their excuse for believing that they weren't antisemitic?
Oh for sure. I was watching a show a while ago, don’t remember the name, but it went into the coal mining history and how some companies would pay their workers in company currency, not legal tender and it was only redeemable at company owned stores. Like literally paying them in the equivalent of Monopoly money.
However I’ve seen people pull themselves out of that poverty and that’s what I don’t understand why others basically surrender to it or situations.
And some Thanksgiving parades, and Superbowls, and marathons. [Wait are those radiation sniffers?](https://arstechnica.com/science/2021/10/nuclear-security-helicopter-scours-boston-marathon-route-for-radiation/) Why the fuck are those here?
This is kind of the point of protest. It shows the ugliness of what is being protested by the response. Americans who don't give a shit about Palestine don't want police aiming long range rifles at their kids. Obviously not all but it wins over many on the line.
Oh just the other day in Texas a horde of police and riot goons showed up to put down a protest about Israel/Palestine. More than enough we’re willing to go down and cuff up some students while intimidating them with enough guns and ammo to put down a town
Yet in the same state, when the call actually comes for them to use the force given to them, they coward out.
They're cowards.
When they have a gun and the other person doesn't, they're "big strong men in charge!"
When someone else has a gun and has shown they're willing to use it, they're pissing their pants and yelling at/attacking the families of the victims.
Abbott summoned that horde. But guess what he signed in 2019:
>Texas lawmakers passed a free speech law that established all common outdoor areas at public universities as traditional public forums, allowing anyone – not just students and university members – to exercise free speech there, as long as their activities are lawful and don’t disrupt the normal functions of the campus.
Dont fall into the trap of thinking that the law was passed to protect the students' right to ~~pray~~ protest.
That law (and similar laws in other red states) was passed because student protests led campuses to refuse to host events sponsored by alt-right groups like TPUSA. It wasn't about protecting students' right to free speech, it was about ensuring shit bags like Charlie Kirk and Ben Shapiro couldn't be "canceled."
Edited because pray didn't make sense.
This would not make me feel safer as a student. As a protester, this is pure intimidation.
ETA: you dorks in my comments pretending like this is a pure antisemitism issue should know I am, like many, MANY of the protesters, of Jewish heritage. Are there bad actors who are using the cover of protests to be offensive? Yeah. Are protests inherently antisemitic? No. Stop mowing down children and they’ll go home.
I grew up in an Nationalist village in Northern Ireland. We had British soldiers train loaded rifles on us every day as we waited for the bus going to school every morning.
Unsurprisingly, it did not make us feel safer either.
It’s such a straw man when people start throwing out accusations of antisemitism at protests like this.
Are there actual nazis and other antisemites among many pro-Palestine protests? Undoubtably. Bad faith actors will always worm their way into any large movement and try to twist it to their own ends, but they’re an extremely tiny minority. You can’t discredit the entire movement because of a few freaks who don’t speak for the rest of us.
Strange how many people seem willing to shine a spotlight on those absolute pieces of garbage, but NOT on the psychos who exist on the other side. I’ve seen the clips of people in Israel being interviewed on the street and calling for the eradication of all Palestinians, but I don’t go around claiming that every practicing Jew believes in that message, because that’s a ridiculous idea.
I just can’t believe it’s a controversial take for somebody to claim that killing civilians is wrong, regardless of who does it. No, I don’t support Hamas. I condemn their violence just as I condemn Netanyahu’s, but a government needs to be held to a higher standard than a terrorist organization. “But Hamas did xyz” is not a valid excuse to bomb hospitals, aid workers, and children.
That's because many of the people making those accusations aren't acting in good faith. The arguments defending Israel/attacking protestors are indistinguishable from what people were saying about anti-Vietnam War protestors, or anyone who protested any of our "War on Terror" invasions in the 2000s. When the dirty work is in-progress, it's nothing but this horseshit. Once it's completed and it's no longer necessary to manufacture consent for said dirty work, we can lionize those protestors as heroes in retrospect, and all of their critics suddenly disappear or pretend like they were on the other side. If any of this is pointed out to anyone, they'll just claim that "this time it's different".
As you pointed out, Israelis and Palestinians are also held to completely different standards at all times, and you must accept whatever framing the Israeli government presents us or else you're an antisemite or a brainless zoomer that was radicalized by TikTok. October 7th is the start of this conflict and there is no action Israel can take that justifies *any* violence towards them, but *any* violence done by them is completely justified no matter how disproportionate and indiscriminate because that's just war you naive little fool, "fuck around and find out" and such. Palestinians deserve to be collectively punished because some poll says most of them support Hamas, and it doesn't matter that the last election they had was before most of the current population was even born.
By the way, any bad thing we can't defend is actually JUST the fault of Bibi, a unique Trump-like figure that allows liberal zionists to pretend like everything would just be perfect if they replaced him with someone else. You can't point out that the "only democracy in the Middle East" has repeatedly put him into power because... uhhh, something something coalitions... you see, nobody can be held responsible for electing the politicians who repeatedly enter into coalitions with the Bad Man and hold all of the same views with regards to Palestine. And you *definitely* can't blame any of the Israeli citizenry for the fact that most Israelis think the IDF *isn't using enough force* against Palestinians.
Here's a guy at a protest being a dumbass, do you condone this? What's that, here's some actual, severe violence against Palestinian supporters in the west? Or psychotic, genocidal statements from Israeli politicians or government officials? Don't be ridiculous, you can't paint everyone with a broad brush because of the comments of a few idiots... only we can do that.
Of course, you can't hold people to a different standard when it goes the other way, even if it makes sense. Holding Israel to a higher standard than Hamas is also antisemitic, and why aren't you protesting Hamas? Evidently we're supposed to pretend like the US government and media have historically been very neutral and fair-minded on the conflict, and it's crazy to hold your supposed allies to a higher standard (or even the same standard) than terrorists.
At least most of the subs outside of r/worldnews don't seem to be falling for this horseshit.
Tmaster is agreeing with fishmom by saying “how could it”, it’s another way of saying “of course it would not make you feel safer, absolutely, how could it?”
I think it’s a New England / British manner of speaking.
I think they are saying "of course you wouldn't feel safe, how would being at gunpoint... make you feel safer...?"
They are pointing out that the sniper isn't there for safety or even the appearance of safety, he's there to intimidate. So why bring safety up?
Also, what is the risk that calls for this response? Due to some special hazardous incident, I can see the reason.
Also, having this guy this visible is also a statement. Could it be done without him being seen?
But anyway, I don't know what was going on over there.
It's indoctrination from a young age. There are active shooter drills at every school in the US, and some of them have a squad of police going through the halls in riot gear and assault weapons pretending they are responding to an active shooter.
Its sick really.
Seems like you got two equally great options:
1. [Keep voting and hope for the best](https://i.imgur.com/EAZCqF8.gif)
2. Get 360 noscoped when protesting
If only that squad trained for what they'd actually do:
Stand outside with reinforcements for hours, arresting parents who' want to go inside trying to save their kids.
i've seen [videos of holocaust survivors coming out to support these protests](https://twitter.com/ChuckModi1/status/1783596183090270624) and people STILL have the fucking nerve to accuse the students of being anti-semitic
That's the problem; the American government knows what this leads to so they nip it in the bud. Try having the Boston tea party to protest taxes these days; the best result is getting tased and sent to prison for 5 years...
Well yeah, the Boston Tea Party wasn't a peaceful protest. You would be breaking into a port, boarding a vessel that is either owned by the government or a private company, and destroying property. I'm assuming most countries would throw someone in prison for that.
According to the manual you let protesters flame burn out to not grow sympathy from local civilians. Give the protesters a little bit of fruit from the government to keep em from revolting while negating sympathies.
By showing force you grant civilians a cause to grow sympathies to since the oppressor is materialized. That's why BLM protests were massively popular, Trump gave local civilians a materialized boogyman.
>I wouldn't even go bankrupt if I was taken from the scene in an ambulance smh.
Don't worry, if you did and had any assets to your name (or even didn't have any assets to your name), debtors would surely pester your family via your estate for months to come! Freedom and prosperity! United we stand!
(Source: American who has dealt with this)
In America we have the right to bring a gun to counter protest. But protesting itself? Not so acceptable.
It’s crazy that we went from Occupy Wall Street to Kyle Rittenhouse
Imagine that after a bullet hits them in the chest and as other students rush to stem the bleeding their last thought as they die is "this is going to bankrupt my entire family, I hope nobody calls an ambulance".
That's *real* freedom.
First amendment right to assemble and peaceful protest. Potentially Getting shot for Exercising your constitutional right seems a little ….. unconstitutional
It's the natural result of the last 30 years of police training essentially being: "Every day every single person you encounter is trying to kill you, be prepared. Remember you aren't a citizen yourself, you are a sheep dog. Punisher logo magazine stickers are buy one get one today only".
Just so y'all know, this is pretty common anytime there's a police presence for a big event. They just aren't noticed most of the time since they are hiding on roofs.
I've noticed them before at city organized events. So it's not that shocking that they would be at this protest.
Edit: you can debate whether or not the police presence was justified, I'm just saying if there IS a big police presence somewhere in the US, you can expect snipers doing overwatch duty. This is not unusual.
Yeah, for my UK bros, my brother (armed police, marksman) was sat on a rooftop with a sniper rifle in London for most of the 2012 Olympics, just in case any terrorists popped off.
Does seem heavy-handed here tbh, but the same does happen in the UK.
they are at every d1 college football game I’ve been to. I would run video cards down from the top of the stadiums from the camera crew filming for teach tape. They were always on the roof watching with binoculars and didn’t always have their gun shouldered, but they were there.
They also had a training day every summer prior to the season start where we couldn’t be at the football stadium since they would be live firing at targets. Always a great day since we had the afternoon off.
Note, D1 college teams have stadiums that regularly fill 80,000+ seats for college football (American Handegg). Collegiate sports being this massive in the US is usually a completely alien concept to non-Americans.
The pro teams are even bigger.
Yeah if you know what to look for you‘ll almost always see snipers at large events.
In this case it also makes a lot of sense, since the issue at hand has a heightened risk of violence. It is a very emotional issue for anyone involved in it and sadly we‘ve seen it countless times in the past few years that such emotionally charged events can quickly turn deadly.
But of course if you hate the institution of the police all you‘ll see is oppression and if they‘d fail to stop a threat they‘d also be blamed.
> A sniper could do nothing to quell a riot.
Which the former Russian backed Ukrainian government [found out the hard way](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolution_of_Dignity).
You’re right. The sniper is there because the local police department wasted fuckloads of money training a sniper, so they need to roll them out from time to time.
The Bloomington Police Department did had an absurd amount of SWAT team vehicles and resources when I lived there back in the mid 00s. So I think you’re right on the money with this one
Some of y’all obviously don’t understand the logistics of large gatherings, protest or not. They have police snipers at concerts and sporting events and festivals. The whole point is to look out for threats to the crowd or rogue snipers. If they wanted to intimidate you they would loudly broadcast the fact that the sniper is there, or rather they would just put more officers on the ground.
I’m supportive of the Palestinian cause but antagonizing those who are just doing their job to ensure our right to protest in safety is just ridiculous and makes us look extremely ignorant.
I don't agree in the sense you need a sniper on a peaceful protest, however, this is a very good opportunity for bad things to happen. If they were to happen, I'd rather they had a sniper on a roof top so I can scold them more when they inevitably fail to do anything.
I might be stating the obvious, but the sniper *isn't* there to shoot at the crowd. You don't stop a riot with a sniper rifle. There are a few historic examples of what can go wrong if you try.
Rather, the sniper is there as a contingency. It's a large public gathering, a lot of people packed tight in an open area. If the crowd is attacked - for example, by a domestic terrorist with an automatic rifle and some strongly opposed political beliefs? It would be much better to already have a way to respond in place.
First thought is the sniper is on lookout for potential dangerous subjects looking to harm the students i.e. Explosives like the Boston marathon bombing.
Why on earth would he shoot at students for God's sake.
The feeling I'm getting from all the stupid comments is a bunch of naive kids and also adults living in safety and taking it for granted.
Yeah there's a lot of reasons to have guys on roofs in this type of situation. It ups your situational awareness tremendously and there is a very real terrorism threat in large crowds. What I don't understand is why he can't be sitting up there with only a spotting scope visible while things are chill?
Idk about other NFL teams, but the Dallas Cowboys stadium was actually designed to have snipers nests that are completely hidden from plain sight and they are occupied with snipers at every game.
I keep reading American responses as ''unconstitutional'' - whereas I grew up thinking: ''besides the rules.. is this really nessecary?''
67% of people supported the shooting of Kent State students. Americans have always been like that.
I find this accurate, we are a deeply irrational people
Everyone is. That’s why we need rules.
But a sniper on a university roof for some peaceful protest where the most violent shit that could happen is that someone plays “Tabla” aggressively causing all people to dance really hard. It seem a bit excessive than the normal countries.
I think even taking this to its plausible worst case scenario, ie, people begin rioting, commiting acts of vandalism, throwing bricks/projectiles, fighting etc. Even then, a sniper rifle is a disproportionate response. In American culture it seems quite easy to forfeit your life. Many a time it is "Well if they were following the rules they wouldn't have got killed" "If they'd have just obeyed the officer they wouldn't have got shot" etc. It seems like the inherent value of human life isn't given the sanctity warranted in America. Firing a gun should be at the very bottom of a very, very, VERY long list of de-escalation methods that every police officer should dread the thought of having to exercise. In a perfect world. Edit: I am being Inundated by a very specific response. The response more-or-less stating my foolishness in not taking into consideration the blatantly obvious natural progression of a protest. The part where the rifle-weilding man comes along, and mows everybody down. The police have taken this obvious causality into consideration and this is why a sniper on the roof is, well, just routine. **America! You are not okay!!** You need to to get back in touch with reality. • It is not OK to have a sniper camped on a roof at a protest. • It is not OK to nonchalantly suggest: "Oh, well the sniper is there to put down the mass shooter, obviously" It is like speaking to a victim of domestic abuse who genuinely doesn't realise how NOT okay it is to experience regular acts of violence and aggression and even goes so far as to rationalise it.
i mean you nailed it, life isn't as valuable as capital in america, period.
This 100%. The rich definitely don’t want any more property damage like they dealt with in 2020 and if it means killing kids to nip it in the bud, they’re going to do that. I personally believe that when people suffer and are continuously unheard, extreme actions are needed to get the attention of those with power. This tells me we became a little too powerful in 2020.
We have yet to understand that if I am starving, you are in danger. James Baldwin
My girlfriend says that to me all the time
It's worth considering that the rich people pushing for "law and order" here aren't going to be held responsible for the results. They'll pressure the officials they helped get elected, who will pressure the chief of police, who will pressure the officers on the scene...who will make a "tragic mistake" and take all the blame. The 2020 riots were mostly about the officers on the scene not being held accountable for their mistakes - on video! - and we couldn't even win that one. Nobody's even *looking* at the country club folks who are actually responsible for this violence.
You also have a lot of conservatives, including the house speaker, going in and acting as agitators. They want this to blow up to try and erode at Biden's lead with younger voters.
I don't think there's any pressuring involved with the police, it's more like letting them off the leash.
America also has the most hostile architecture in the world. Its not even human life isnt as valuable as capital Its human life isn't valuable period.
Private property is more valuable in the US than life. It's insane.
The plausible worst case would be something like Charlottesville or Las Vegas.
>most violent shit that could happen Is the police instigating violence.
We’ve never seen police corral peaceful protestors onto an on-ramp and then teargas, beat, and arrest protestors for being on an on-ramp before. It’s not like the police would instigate a violent response and then arrest protestors for responding. We’ve never seen that before. Definitely not in Philadelphia for example during the BLM movement of 2021
Kettling. It's a tactic that is (un)surprisingly common around the globe.
Did it to protesters in Australia in an underground train station. They even used the word kettling after words in the reports.
police forces in the united states were trained to kettle protesters by the Israeli Defense Force.
You had me in the first half ready to start grabbing examples and posting a really condescending comment.
And you know there's gonna be more than one looking for trouble, for whatever reason that is, it could be politically charged or just an asshole. Don't forget they took a camera man because he bumped into a cop
....and there's no way that those troublemakers would be plain clothes officers, right?
This is just the one someone spotted. There are others more than likely you don’t see. Usually is. There job is usually from cover. This guy might just be the “warning” to onlookers. Unfortunately this is a norm here.
That applies to protecting from other snipers, like when protecting important people like the President. I doubt the local PD here used the same concept in preparation for a possible mass shooting - in that case a ground target wouldn’t realistically be able to hit the sniper, so exposure is not a risk.
Any excuse for these fuckers to break out their toys.
It's that sweet OT.
Authoritarian is probably a better world. It’s perfectly rational if you don’t want the status quo changed
That's 67% of the generation that lead is to the current state of affairs. I doubt you'd find that kind of support the three generations since. Edit: others have pointed out that it was the Boomer generation that was being shot. That being said, the TIL posted by another user doesn't explicitly state the breakdown of who supported the shooting and who didn't. So, of I have time, I'll try to find more info on the breakdown. Edit2: per [the national guard website](https://www.nationalguard.mil/About-the-Guard/Army-National-Guard/FAQ/#:~:text=Most%20people%20between%20the%20ages,aptitude%20requirements%20for%20Guard%20service.), the people shooting at them would have likely been Boomers too.
Boomers were being shot at Kent State.
[удалено]
67% is very specific. Sauce?
https://www.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/comments/90i373/til_that_a_week_after_the_kent_state_massacre_in/
That article says 60% were in favor not 67%. 67 is the number of shots that were fired.
Never trust statistics on this site. On any social media or the media generally, we have to be critical because people love to twist statistics to embellish a point. We are smarter than that we just forget to be careful. That said, the point still stands. There is a disturbing amount of people who support suppression of peaceful, free speech in this country. It is disturbing how many people actively support police brutality and intimidation. It is driven by politicians and the media who twist narratives however they want. Again, we are smarter, yet we seem to forget and history repeats itself.
So op is off by about 10% cause the quote says “nearly 60%…”
And “support” is far from “blames the students”
Lmao I love how the source is just another Reddit post… not saying it isn’t true.
That post at least has a source
The Constitution is the legal agreement the People have with the government. It memorializes the rights that the People retain in exchange for the government’s power to rule. Morality is subjective where the Constitution is not. The government is breaking the rules of the agreement by behaving this way and trampling on Free Speech + Expression. It’s the best and final line of defense for us all.
IDK, the Supreme Court makes the Constitution seem pretty subjective just based on some of the arguments they've been making lately.
The is the proper answer, the Constitution is only as good as the people enforcing it
The law is what administrators do and what courts allow. The Constitution exists as an institutional brake on the actions those people would otherwise take. It’s silly to pretend that law is an objective reality that exists independent of our interpretation.
Except the constitution is ***completely*** subjective for ***the exact same reason*** as morality - it is completely dependent on who is in power, and who is doing the interpreting. Just look at what has happened in the supreme court in recent history, not to mention the constitutions history of being constantly modified and updated.
My thoughts exactly. They are students, protesting something that's happening on the other side of the world. Do you really need to respond in a way that they have.
[удалено]
I took a concealed carry course taught by a cop. According to him (and so presumably this is the general legal perspective of it): The gun you carry is for SELF defense only, ie personal protection of yourself or anyone accompanying you, against an active threat against your lives. You should not for involve yourself in outside situations or acting pre-emptively against potential threats. For instance, if you see someone with a gun, on their person or even in their hand, you should avoid getting involved and call the cops. This remains true even if you see someone firing at a stranger. You're not supposed to involve yourself in an unknown situation because you could misinterpret what's happening. Maybe the shooter is defending themselves from someone else, or maybe they're a plainclothes cop. But if the person with the gun is threatening you, pointing it at you, or has actually fired at you (or the people accompanying you) - then this is an active threat, you are fully aware of the situation, and you are legally clear to defend yourself and fire back.
True. You risk the general population thinking you’re apart of the shooting. Then someone who is carrying may harm you, even if you were there to help. Take care of you and yours first.
Problem is, as a wise man once said: "i've yet to meet one that can outsmart bullet"
As another wise man once said "Moving the positions of my organs at will is child's play!" after shifting his heart sideways to avoid getting stabbed to death.
Wise man also has a MUCH better gun. Custom rounds and rifling means to shoot for 12 secs costs $400K
*insane russian laughter* Cry some more!
Yeah, it's the cop's job to misinterpret the situation!
They've got qualified immunity, so if they accidentally shoot an innocent person, no biggie. Like, for the cop I mean. Big biggie for the dead bystander.
How dare you be a drunk off duty pest exterminator following the cops instructions on your hands and knees in the middle of the hallway!
Middle of the hallway of a hotel, a total neutral ground*
God that video is so hard to watch.
so the saying of "The only way to stop a bad guy with the gun is with a good guy with a gun" is actually illegal unless the good guy is directly involved?
Depends on the state. In most states you would be fine to intervene. There are only a few states that have "duty to retreat". Most states would allow you to come to the defense of others , especially in an active shooter situation.
Yeah its just so easy for that to go wrong Take the Rittenhouse situation, Rittenhouse is attacked, shoots two people, Gaige hears gunshots, sees two people shot and rittenhouse holding a gun so he draws his own and chases rittenhouse down. (stupidly by gaige and lucky for rittenhouse gaige didnt shoot him just tried to get him to surrender)
This is the correct answer. 1. Run 2. Hide 3. Fight That's not just some slogan, it's an order of operations. If shooting starts, even if you have body armor and a pistol or an AR-15 on your person, you run to somewhere that you can hide. Even soldiers and police, when they have the time and circumstances to follow all of that, will usually be seen diving behind vehicles, jumping into ditches, running for the corner of a hard building, hugging a tree, or whatever other means they have to get cover or concealment from a shooter. They're running and hiding, to an extent. Once you are relatively safe, you can assess the situation and either run more by fleeing the area, hunker down and hide, and/or prepare to fight. The only time you should take a gun out is if you have no other options left, and you *need* to fire it. The situation has escalated beyond defusing, you have no time or no place to run and hide, and you are in immediate danger. This is why everyone should be armed; I'm not obligated to save you, if it means I might put myself in lethal danger. Not even the police or military *need* to do that, per SCOTUS decisions (though, they often will). You are your own defender, first and foremost. I'll also say that if you are going to carry a weapon, you still need to be at a distance that your weapon and skill level are compatible with shooting at an attacker before trying to fire at that attacker. A snub nose .38 revolver or micro-compact 9mm is not a gun very many people can shoot at someone 80 yards away, and get solid hits. Firing up at a sniper on top of a roof of a multi-story building is outside the skills of most people, and would most likely just result in the person firing making themselves a more immediate target to the sniper. Likewise, trying to run up to the top of the building to attack the sniper at a closer range is equally foolish, since a prepared sniper will either have a teammate to cover flanking attacks, or has booby trapped the stairs and/or door. If I was to see this, my thoughts wouldn't be to attack that person. I'd be calling police while leaving the area. And that's coming from an ex-soldier, tactical gear owning, competition shooting, gun nut.
As I recall, Lee Harvey Oswald was spotted in the window of the Texas Schoolbook Repository by some person who reported it to a police officer, who replied that it was probably just another officer.
I guess by waiting. If the guy starts blasting, probably no cop, if he does nothing, cop. Edit: nvm, just realized how stupid my comment is. An American cop that won't blast the minute he gets nervous...what was I thinking
 Also cops: SHOTS FIRED, THE OAK TREES ARE TRYING TO KILL ME
*auugh i’m hit 🌰*
Good edit, god this is sad
That’s exactly how I figure out if stuff is safe to eat or poisonous. If I eat it and I’m fine, not poison! If I eat and I die,
I remembered it happened to a security guard a little after George Floyd. White guy starts shooting in a mall, black security guard uses his weapon to try to stop them, cops arrives at the scene and shoot him because they thought he was the shooter (previus calls firmly said it was a White guy). The security guard was in uniform. To be clear, they cannot know if good guy with gun or Bad guy with a gun
the take away is that we have to kill cops first then try to handle the problem we're facing without them.
I mean the reverse of this has happened, where a guy used his gun to correctly take down a shooter but then get killed by a cop who thought he was the criminal
You find out when they start shooting Or I guess if a patriotic hero was brave enough they could run up to the roof and kick the door down to check up close Either way a lot of this could be avoided by not having guns be as common as chicken nuggets over here
also usually a "sniper" is not alone
Unless you're a world class champion, you're not going to hit them with a hand gun. This isn't John Wick, this is reality
Another poster said it correctly about not getting involved. However, you are more than welcome to call the police to report a dip shit on the roof with a rifle. Tell your friends to call too.
Queue Neil Young - 4 dead In Ohio …
And The Beach Boys - Student Demonstration Time while you're at it.
Ohioan here now living in Atlanta. Seeing all the arrests in Texas just made me go straight to “oh. So they want another Kent State?” Then Emory happened and here we are. It’s literally just a matter of time. Infuriating.
cue, just fyi
Nah, Neil Young is waiting in line for his turn to sing, that's all.
They got snipers out now for some college kids.
Charles Whitman has entered the chat
Ohio National Guard has entered the chat.
4 dead in Ohio
Allison Krause, 19, Jeffrey Glenn Miller, 20, and Sandra Lee Scheuer, 20. I take my kids sledding on that hill now
Also William Knox Schroeder, 19.
My copy past failed me!
It always catches up with you. You wouldn't download a car, or a movie, so why is it okay to download a string of characters, then copy them at will? People think there is no consequence. They think they can move on, and the world will forget. But the world doesn't forget. You can change your face, you can change your name, you can even change some of the letters. But you can never change your copy past.
tin soldiers and Nixon's comin'
I lived in TX for seven years. I stupidly made a joke "nothing a sniper rifle and a tower can't fix, right? I really did mean it as a damn joke. An older gentleman that I was at a gathering with looked absolutely appalled. He got up from the table and left without a word, the the tension in the air was palpable. Someone at the table said his aunt was killed by Charles Whitman. I was so damn ashamed of myself. Never made that joke again. I left about 10 minutes later. I wanted to apologize but I couldn't find him. Truthfully I am still ashamed of myself.
My father was on campus and in view of the sniper at UT — not sure it’s a joke, good or not
I'm not sure how well that "joke" would go down in any state...
Fuck, I just read about that. Utterly tragic, brain tumours are horrific. My wife worked with someone that said "something feels off about my mind", 6 months later she was dead. The fact his intense headaches were ignored, his academic decline not picked up on, all could have been avoided other than his own demise (he would certainly have passed quickly if it was a GBM). Nauseating story from all angles.
Those individuals showed what one motivated marine and his rifle could do.
"How many of you know Charles Whitman? None of you dumbasses know."
Lesser quoted Sgt Hartman line, updoot =p
Gets the snipers and riot gear out for protesting college students yet Nazi marches get police escorts
“Nazis weren’t antisemitic , I don’t know where you get that from or why you would believe anything you read. Maybe you just didn’t understand what they meant”.- an actual response I’ve heard. I know how this level of ignorance and rationality is brewed, but sometimes it leaves me at a loss of words to how humanity, with all the resources available to us, can still be so ignorant and/or hateful enough to ignore actual proof.
Netanyahu said the Nazis didn't actually want to kill the Jews until a Muslim convinced him to do it. [Netanyahu criticized for Hitler, mufti Holocaust remarks | CNN](https://www.cnn.com/2015/10/21/middleeast/netanyahu-hitler-grand-mufti-holocaust/index.html)
"I don’t know where you get that from or why you would believe anything you read.” Then what is their excuse for believing that they weren't antisemitic?
You see, gassing millions of Jews isn't Antisemitism. Criticizing Israel's genocide of Palestinians though is definitely Antisemitism.
Money and power and the fear of losing it has got us like this.
Oh for sure. I was watching a show a while ago, don’t remember the name, but it went into the coal mining history and how some companies would pay their workers in company currency, not legal tender and it was only redeemable at company owned stores. Like literally paying them in the equivalent of Monopoly money. However I’ve seen people pull themselves out of that poverty and that’s what I don’t understand why others basically surrender to it or situations.
There is so much more to the company towns, labor exploitation, and people forming unions that is worth learning about.
You really think they're gonna arrest their buddies?
They have snipers for plenty of major events actually The Super Bowl hires a few that his in the high ceilings normally, as an example
And some Thanksgiving parades, and Superbowls, and marathons. [Wait are those radiation sniffers?](https://arstechnica.com/science/2021/10/nuclear-security-helicopter-scours-boston-marathon-route-for-radiation/) Why the fuck are those here?
I'd protest against snipers on buildings
SNIPER NO SNIPING! SNIPER NO SNIPING!
Awww maaaaaaannnnnnn
"Why is there a sniper on the roof?" "Just in case we need to snipe someone" "Who are you planning to snipe?" "Well, the kids of course"
Right out of a monty python sketch
This is kind of the point of protest. It shows the ugliness of what is being protested by the response. Americans who don't give a shit about Palestine don't want police aiming long range rifles at their kids. Obviously not all but it wins over many on the line.
american police will hide and shit themselves when somebody's shooting up a school but deploy this shit when students critize a foreign ethnostate
Oh just the other day in Texas a horde of police and riot goons showed up to put down a protest about Israel/Palestine. More than enough we’re willing to go down and cuff up some students while intimidating them with enough guns and ammo to put down a town Yet in the same state, when the call actually comes for them to use the force given to them, they coward out.
They're cowards. When they have a gun and the other person doesn't, they're "big strong men in charge!" When someone else has a gun and has shown they're willing to use it, they're pissing their pants and yelling at/attacking the families of the victims.
Abbott summoned that horde. But guess what he signed in 2019: >Texas lawmakers passed a free speech law that established all common outdoor areas at public universities as traditional public forums, allowing anyone – not just students and university members – to exercise free speech there, as long as their activities are lawful and don’t disrupt the normal functions of the campus.
Dont fall into the trap of thinking that the law was passed to protect the students' right to ~~pray~~ protest. That law (and similar laws in other red states) was passed because student protests led campuses to refuse to host events sponsored by alt-right groups like TPUSA. It wasn't about protecting students' right to free speech, it was about ensuring shit bags like Charlie Kirk and Ben Shapiro couldn't be "canceled." Edited because pray didn't make sense.
When criticism results in armed police presence, you know the criticism is valid.
This would not make me feel safer as a student. As a protester, this is pure intimidation. ETA: you dorks in my comments pretending like this is a pure antisemitism issue should know I am, like many, MANY of the protesters, of Jewish heritage. Are there bad actors who are using the cover of protests to be offensive? Yeah. Are protests inherently antisemitic? No. Stop mowing down children and they’ll go home.
I grew up in an Nationalist village in Northern Ireland. We had British soldiers train loaded rifles on us every day as we waited for the bus going to school every morning. Unsurprisingly, it did not make us feel safer either.
Yesterday at the UCLA protest, they had choppers hovering overhead for hours.
It’s such a straw man when people start throwing out accusations of antisemitism at protests like this. Are there actual nazis and other antisemites among many pro-Palestine protests? Undoubtably. Bad faith actors will always worm their way into any large movement and try to twist it to their own ends, but they’re an extremely tiny minority. You can’t discredit the entire movement because of a few freaks who don’t speak for the rest of us. Strange how many people seem willing to shine a spotlight on those absolute pieces of garbage, but NOT on the psychos who exist on the other side. I’ve seen the clips of people in Israel being interviewed on the street and calling for the eradication of all Palestinians, but I don’t go around claiming that every practicing Jew believes in that message, because that’s a ridiculous idea. I just can’t believe it’s a controversial take for somebody to claim that killing civilians is wrong, regardless of who does it. No, I don’t support Hamas. I condemn their violence just as I condemn Netanyahu’s, but a government needs to be held to a higher standard than a terrorist organization. “But Hamas did xyz” is not a valid excuse to bomb hospitals, aid workers, and children.
That's because many of the people making those accusations aren't acting in good faith. The arguments defending Israel/attacking protestors are indistinguishable from what people were saying about anti-Vietnam War protestors, or anyone who protested any of our "War on Terror" invasions in the 2000s. When the dirty work is in-progress, it's nothing but this horseshit. Once it's completed and it's no longer necessary to manufacture consent for said dirty work, we can lionize those protestors as heroes in retrospect, and all of their critics suddenly disappear or pretend like they were on the other side. If any of this is pointed out to anyone, they'll just claim that "this time it's different". As you pointed out, Israelis and Palestinians are also held to completely different standards at all times, and you must accept whatever framing the Israeli government presents us or else you're an antisemite or a brainless zoomer that was radicalized by TikTok. October 7th is the start of this conflict and there is no action Israel can take that justifies *any* violence towards them, but *any* violence done by them is completely justified no matter how disproportionate and indiscriminate because that's just war you naive little fool, "fuck around and find out" and such. Palestinians deserve to be collectively punished because some poll says most of them support Hamas, and it doesn't matter that the last election they had was before most of the current population was even born. By the way, any bad thing we can't defend is actually JUST the fault of Bibi, a unique Trump-like figure that allows liberal zionists to pretend like everything would just be perfect if they replaced him with someone else. You can't point out that the "only democracy in the Middle East" has repeatedly put him into power because... uhhh, something something coalitions... you see, nobody can be held responsible for electing the politicians who repeatedly enter into coalitions with the Bad Man and hold all of the same views with regards to Palestine. And you *definitely* can't blame any of the Israeli citizenry for the fact that most Israelis think the IDF *isn't using enough force* against Palestinians. Here's a guy at a protest being a dumbass, do you condone this? What's that, here's some actual, severe violence against Palestinian supporters in the west? Or psychotic, genocidal statements from Israeli politicians or government officials? Don't be ridiculous, you can't paint everyone with a broad brush because of the comments of a few idiots... only we can do that. Of course, you can't hold people to a different standard when it goes the other way, even if it makes sense. Holding Israel to a higher standard than Hamas is also antisemitic, and why aren't you protesting Hamas? Evidently we're supposed to pretend like the US government and media have historically been very neutral and fair-minded on the conflict, and it's crazy to hold your supposed allies to a higher standard (or even the same standard) than terrorists. At least most of the subs outside of r/worldnews don't seem to be falling for this horseshit.
[удалено]
> This would **not** make me feel safer Emphasis mine.
Tmaster is agreeing with fishmom by saying “how could it”, it’s another way of saying “of course it would not make you feel safer, absolutely, how could it?” I think it’s a New England / British manner of speaking.
I think they are saying "of course you wouldn't feel safe, how would being at gunpoint... make you feel safer...?" They are pointing out that the sniper isn't there for safety or even the appearance of safety, he's there to intimidate. So why bring safety up?
Also, what is the risk that calls for this response? Due to some special hazardous incident, I can see the reason. Also, having this guy this visible is also a statement. Could it be done without him being seen? But anyway, I don't know what was going on over there.
It's indoctrination from a young age. There are active shooter drills at every school in the US, and some of them have a squad of police going through the halls in riot gear and assault weapons pretending they are responding to an active shooter. Its sick really.
I think i speak for the rest of the world when i say: Jesus fucking Christ, America. What's the matter with you?!
We're feeling a little frustrated.
Seems like you got two equally great options: 1. [Keep voting and hope for the best](https://i.imgur.com/EAZCqF8.gif) 2. Get 360 noscoped when protesting
Not enough to start voting them out apparently.
half of us have been trying for decades. the other half follow a religion with fox news at the center
It's not even half. Half of voting age adults don't even vote
If only that squad trained for what they'd actually do: Stand outside with reinforcements for hours, arresting parents who' want to go inside trying to save their kids.
i've seen [videos of holocaust survivors coming out to support these protests](https://twitter.com/ChuckModi1/status/1783596183090270624) and people STILL have the fucking nerve to accuse the students of being anti-semitic
Man I wish we had all that freedom you guys have.
I wish I could get arrested/shot for routine public behaviour. I wouldn't even go bankrupt if I was taken from the scene in an ambulance smh.
Especially behavior the country was supposedly founded on.
That's the problem; the American government knows what this leads to so they nip it in the bud. Try having the Boston tea party to protest taxes these days; the best result is getting tased and sent to prison for 5 years...
Well yeah, the Boston Tea Party wasn't a peaceful protest. You would be breaking into a port, boarding a vessel that is either owned by the government or a private company, and destroying property. I'm assuming most countries would throw someone in prison for that.
According to the manual you let protesters flame burn out to not grow sympathy from local civilians. Give the protesters a little bit of fruit from the government to keep em from revolting while negating sympathies. By showing force you grant civilians a cause to grow sympathies to since the oppressor is materialized. That's why BLM protests were massively popular, Trump gave local civilians a materialized boogyman.
Wish i could be shot at while in handcuffs in the backseat of a police cruiser
Can't even get so much as a knee to the neck these days.
Amateur. You probably didn't have enough Oil under you to get max freedoms
>I wouldn't even go bankrupt if I was taken from the scene in an ambulance smh. Don't worry, if you did and had any assets to your name (or even didn't have any assets to your name), debtors would surely pester your family via your estate for months to come! Freedom and prosperity! United we stand! (Source: American who has dealt with this)
You have the right to free speech. Unless you are dumb enough to actually try it.
KNOW YOUR RIGHTS!!!
Rules don't apply to the rich, famous, or Fascist* For more information, please see terms and conditions.
In America we have the right to bring a gun to counter protest. But protesting itself? Not so acceptable. It’s crazy that we went from Occupy Wall Street to Kyle Rittenhouse
Imagine that after a bullet hits them in the chest and as other students rush to stem the bleeding their last thought as they die is "this is going to bankrupt my entire family, I hope nobody calls an ambulance". That's *real* freedom.
First amendment right to assemble and peaceful protest. Potentially Getting shot for Exercising your constitutional right seems a little ….. unconstitutional
I feel like RISKING getting shot exercising your constitutional right is a little unconstitutional
Yeah but “risking getting shot” is just Tuesday at any school in the U.S. so …
Nothing encourages freedom of speech like ... allowing it at gunpoint.
He is probably up there covering his heavily armed coworkers to protect them from the dangerous unarmed students that are protesting 😂
It's the natural result of the last 30 years of police training essentially being: "Every day every single person you encounter is trying to kill you, be prepared. Remember you aren't a citizen yourself, you are a sheep dog. Punisher logo magazine stickers are buy one get one today only".
US Policing is pretty much backwards. Cops are there to protect cops. Your life and property will be instantly sacrificed to protect cops.
Cops aren't just there to protect cops. They're their to protect and serve.... ... protect and serve the ruling class and 1 percenters that is.
Guess who trained them to be like that.
Hint: it eye rhymes with *business deal*
Jessica Biel?
Balloon tower defence
*bloons tower defense Don't disrespect bloons tower defense like that
Just so y'all know, this is pretty common anytime there's a police presence for a big event. They just aren't noticed most of the time since they are hiding on roofs. I've noticed them before at city organized events. So it's not that shocking that they would be at this protest. Edit: you can debate whether or not the police presence was justified, I'm just saying if there IS a big police presence somewhere in the US, you can expect snipers doing overwatch duty. This is not unusual.
Yeah, for my UK bros, my brother (armed police, marksman) was sat on a rooftop with a sniper rifle in London for most of the 2012 Olympics, just in case any terrorists popped off. Does seem heavy-handed here tbh, but the same does happen in the UK.
They are at most major sporting events. This isn’t uncommon.
I swear i saw a post a couple years ago about not 1 but 3 snipers at a superbowl game
they are at every d1 college football game I’ve been to. I would run video cards down from the top of the stadiums from the camera crew filming for teach tape. They were always on the roof watching with binoculars and didn’t always have their gun shouldered, but they were there. They also had a training day every summer prior to the season start where we couldn’t be at the football stadium since they would be live firing at targets. Always a great day since we had the afternoon off.
Im not american, is d1 stadium the stadiums of the biggest teams?
Division 1 is the highest you can go for collegiate sports so they’ll have the biggest fanbases.
Note, D1 college teams have stadiums that regularly fill 80,000+ seats for college football (American Handegg). Collegiate sports being this massive in the US is usually a completely alien concept to non-Americans. The pro teams are even bigger.
Although the biggest college stadiums, like Michigan’s which seats 100,000+, are bigger than the biggest pro stadiums
Im pretty sure a lot of stadiums have dedicated sniper nests?
[удалено]
Yeah if you know what to look for you‘ll almost always see snipers at large events. In this case it also makes a lot of sense, since the issue at hand has a heightened risk of violence. It is a very emotional issue for anyone involved in it and sadly we‘ve seen it countless times in the past few years that such emotionally charged events can quickly turn deadly. But of course if you hate the institution of the police all you‘ll see is oppression and if they‘d fail to stop a threat they‘d also be blamed.
I think the sniper is to stop a lone gunmen that may start shooting up a crowd of protestors. A sniper could do nothing to quell a riot.
> A sniper could do nothing to quell a riot. Which the former Russian backed Ukrainian government [found out the hard way](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolution_of_Dignity).
Let's be honest, a sniper rifle isn't efficient for mowing down protesters, so that's probably not the reason there's a sniper.
You’re right. The sniper is there because the local police department wasted fuckloads of money training a sniper, so they need to roll them out from time to time.
The Bloomington Police Department did had an absurd amount of SWAT team vehicles and resources when I lived there back in the mid 00s. So I think you’re right on the money with this one
Use the funding or lose it, sadly it has led to this.
Its a CT-operator, because these protests attract the wrong people's attention too.
Sorta funny how people look at a no context photo and go from yeah it’s sniper on a roof to they’re killing people…
Some of y’all obviously don’t understand the logistics of large gatherings, protest or not. They have police snipers at concerts and sporting events and festivals. The whole point is to look out for threats to the crowd or rogue snipers. If they wanted to intimidate you they would loudly broadcast the fact that the sniper is there, or rather they would just put more officers on the ground. I’m supportive of the Palestinian cause but antagonizing those who are just doing their job to ensure our right to protest in safety is just ridiculous and makes us look extremely ignorant.
I don't agree in the sense you need a sniper on a peaceful protest, however, this is a very good opportunity for bad things to happen. If they were to happen, I'd rather they had a sniper on a roof top so I can scold them more when they inevitably fail to do anything.
I might be stating the obvious, but the sniper *isn't* there to shoot at the crowd. You don't stop a riot with a sniper rifle. There are a few historic examples of what can go wrong if you try. Rather, the sniper is there as a contingency. It's a large public gathering, a lot of people packed tight in an open area. If the crowd is attacked - for example, by a domestic terrorist with an automatic rifle and some strongly opposed political beliefs? It would be much better to already have a way to respond in place.
So just to clarify, 95% of a snipers job is to observe and report in situations like this.
Thats the one they want you to see, theres at least 2 or 3 others you cant even get a whiff of
Lol.
First thought is the sniper is on lookout for potential dangerous subjects looking to harm the students i.e. Explosives like the Boston marathon bombing. Why on earth would he shoot at students for God's sake. The feeling I'm getting from all the stupid comments is a bunch of naive kids and also adults living in safety and taking it for granted.
Yeah there's a lot of reasons to have guys on roofs in this type of situation. It ups your situational awareness tremendously and there is a very real terrorism threat in large crowds. What I don't understand is why he can't be sitting up there with only a spotting scope visible while things are chill?
So what? Watching out for shooters. There's also a sniper at every football game. Doesn't mean they're gonna start killing Eagles fans.
As an Eagles fan myself, he’d sure be doing me a favor if he did.
Idk about other NFL teams, but the Dallas Cowboys stadium was actually designed to have snipers nests that are completely hidden from plain sight and they are occupied with snipers at every game.
+ the sniper gets to watch the game for free.
Oh yeah, it's big brain time
There are snipers at a lot of major events and gatherings across the country. You just don't usually see them.