Everything I've said is factually accurate. Hilarious how some commenters are saying I am "lying" or assume I disagree with the verdict when it could not be further from the truth. I'm only pointing out that armed fire upon police might be legal in Minnesota, and there is recent case example of that.
--------------------
>This is a silly way to have a conversation, but as for your response: every single word you picked was as misleading as possible. "AK" implies an assault rifle but it was a pistol. "Lit up on cops" implies that he started the conflict by attacking cops, rather than it being one of self-defense against people indistinguishable from thugs. You invoke "BLM riots", but there is no evidence he was involved in that at all. Your words are clearly chosen in such a way as to prime people towards a certain belief about the event. With the most charitable interpretation of your words possible, they might factually describe the events, but I think it crosses the line to the point where you would have to be so charitable as to actively misinterpret what words mean in order for them to remain factually accurate. At any rate, that level of charity is absolutely unwarranted given how intentionally uncharitable the selection of those words was in the first place.
AK implies an AK family firearm. IIRC it was a draco or draco like "pistol." Anyone with familiarity with firearms will consider that "pistol" to be in the AK family; it does have as shortened barrel and no stock but otherwise looks like and has nearly same components as the most common form of AK (In US, AK doesn't imply it is select fire assault rifle, if you go to a gun show and someone is selling an AK it is assumed it is semi-auto unless they advertise it as an NFA AK).
"Lit up" means he opened fire. I linked the case so you could read the facts, I agree it was in self defense, not sure why you assumed otherwise. I would have linked to some other news source if I wanted bias against him.
I said "during" the BLM riots, not that he was a rioter.
I can assure you I probably have a nearly similar opinion on this as you do, it appears you just jumped to conclusions and drawn ones that didn't exist so you could go on your rage against me.
My point here is the people he shot at acted a lot like ICE did in Minneapolis -- rolling up in unmarked cars, masked, shooting people (like goode). It's not clear to me citizens of Minnesota would actually be found guilty if they were to find themselves in a case of self defense.
alt Hacker News
Different state; in the state Pretti was shot the state charges were acquitted when a guy with an AK lit up on cops during the BLM riots. []
[] https://minnesotareformer.com/2021/09/01/jaleel-stallings-sh...
--------- re: below due to throttling -------
Everything I've said is factually accurate. Hilarious how some commenters are saying I am "lying" or assume I disagree with the verdict when it could not be further from the truth. I'm only pointing out that armed fire upon police might be legal in Minnesota, and there is recent case example of that.
--------------------
>This is a silly way to have a conversation, but as for your response: every single word you picked was as misleading as possible. "AK" implies an assault rifle but it was a pistol. "Lit up on cops" implies that he started the conflict by attacking cops, rather than it being one of self-defense against people indistinguishable from thugs. You invoke "BLM riots", but there is no evidence he was involved in that at all. Your words are clearly chosen in such a way as to prime people towards a certain belief about the event. With the most charitable interpretation of your words possible, they might factually describe the events, but I think it crosses the line to the point where you would have to be so charitable as to actively misinterpret what words mean in order for them to remain factually accurate. At any rate, that level of charity is absolutely unwarranted given how intentionally uncharitable the selection of those words was in the first place.
AK implies an AK family firearm. IIRC it was a draco or draco like "pistol." Anyone with familiarity with firearms will consider that "pistol" to be in the AK family; it does have as shortened barrel and no stock but otherwise looks like and has nearly same components as the most common form of AK (In US, AK doesn't imply it is select fire assault rifle, if you go to a gun show and someone is selling an AK it is assumed it is semi-auto unless they advertise it as an NFA AK).
"Lit up" means he opened fire. I linked the case so you could read the facts, I agree it was in self defense, not sure why you assumed otherwise. I would have linked to some other news source if I wanted bias against him.
I said "during" the BLM riots, not that he was a rioter.
I can assure you I probably have a nearly similar opinion on this as you do, it appears you just jumped to conclusions and drawn ones that didn't exist so you could go on your rage against me.
My point here is the people he shot at acted a lot like ICE did in Minneapolis -- rolling up in unmarked cars, masked, shooting people (like goode). It's not clear to me citizens of Minnesota would actually be found guilty if they were to find themselves in a case of self defense.