The shooter is a sovereign citizen.

  • @AstridWipenaugh
    link
    1163 months ago

    I bet the officer reached towards his waistband or glovebox. He thought he had something in his hand. The officer was acting suspicious. The officer had a history of crime, a runin with the law when he was 12.The sovcit felt threatened and had to defend himself! Those are the talking points, right?

    • TheTechnician27
      link
      English
      413 months ago

      The SovCits have qualified immunity no contract with the government and thus are not subject to laws.

  • @Maggoty
    link
    893 months ago

    Fucking hell that title. Made me think a police officer shot two other police officers.

      • @Maultasche
        link
        183 months ago

        Probably because it’s hiding under that apostrophe

        • Tier 1 Build-A-Bear 🧸
          link
          English
          33 months ago

          Is it not grammatically correct? Like I almost missed it under the apostrophe too but that’s how you’re supposed to do it

          • @Maultasche
            link
            13 months ago

            I think so, too. But maybe because you expect the closing apostrophe you completely miss the comma.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    663 months ago

    Was the Cop on Drugs? Was he wearing a Hoodie? Did he smoke a Joint once? Was he Sleeping? ALL these things are Things Cops have Killed people over so it’s safe to Assume these are Dangerous Activities that REQUIRE violent intervention!

  • partial_accumen
    link
    323 months ago

    I’m am sure this post will top the “sort by controversial” list.

    From the article: “Cobb-Bey purchased the weapons legally”.

      • @BleatingZombie
        link
        -9
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        I’m sorry. I need to vent

        In the past 3 days I’ve been downvoted for commenting that gay people can adopt babies (in 196 for that matter) and asking why a news article about a bridge seemed to have one photo with a concrete floor and one with a wood floor. I commented asking why I was getting downvoted and someone told me it’s because I said it’s two different bridges (which I most certainly didn’t say) and someone else was sarcastic and rude

        People on Lemmy are proving to get more toxic as time goes on. I’m considering going back to reddit more and more. Sure, the place is horrible, but I don’t feel bad about myself when I feel brave enough to comment

        Edit: Can somebody who’s downvoting me please tell me what I said that was wrong? I really just want to know

        • Omega
          link
          243 months ago

          I just read your two comments. I mean this as constructive and helpful. Sorry if it comes off as rude.

          On the bridge you start interrogating about the incorrect answer to your first question. It’s quite presumptuous. I wouldn’t have downvoted. But it also doesn’t seem like a big deal.

          On your gay adoption comment, I get what you were saying. It came off really pedantic. But also, the implication is hilarious that the way to make men “manly” is to have them raised by gay men.

          • @BleatingZombie
            link
            10
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            That really does help. Thank you

            I didn’t mean to be presumptive or interrogative. I meant to just include a second part if (and only if) it was relevant. I see now how it can easily come across that way

            Would you be able to further explain the implication you mentioned? I don’t understand how you got there. I don’t mean to say you’re wrong or anything. I just don’t get the connection

            • Omega
              link
              103 months ago

              No worries. I don’t mind being told that I’m wrong. And the implication I mentioned is purely just my own observation.

              The post to me sounded like they were calling out their sister who thinks men are being raised to be too feminine. It’s a common accusation that younger people are “raised by women” without enough masculine role models. It’s all Alpha-Beta theory BS.

              The commenter you replied to was saying that applies to every son.

              Your comment seemed to inadvertently offer a solution that the Alpha-Beta types would NOT be happy with, gay parents. No “mothering” required.

              • @BleatingZombie
                link
                83 months ago

                Thank you again. I’m not sure I would have ever made that connection if not for you

                I think lurking is probably best for me

                • Omega
                  link
                  103 months ago

                  To be clear, I don’t think the implication was why you were downvoted. I think you just sounded a bit pedantic. Like you were correcting them without adding to the conversation.

                  I just happened to enjoy the pendantry.

                  By the way, I’ve also been in a position where I was downvoted with zero explanation, even after asking for it. So I get the frustration. Even a bad explanation is preferred to no explanation. So I hope that helps and you continue to contribute however you feel comfortable.

        • partial_accumen
          link
          123 months ago

          In the past 3 days I’ve been downvoted for commenting that gay people can adopt babies (in 196 for that matter)

          I was curious so I went looking in your post history for an innocent and clear comment communicating “that gay people can adopt babies”. I found your comment, and immediately understood why you were downvoted for it. Here it is in context:

          The OP was this:

          and your comment was below one response to the OP:

          I don’t know if English is your second language, or if you’re not used to drawing meaning from poetry rather than fact from prose. The person you replied to was giving a poetic answer. Keep in mind, I’m not saying I agree or disagree with any of the opinions listed above, simply that I can grasp the ideas and concepts the people were communicating in what they wrote:

          When that poster said poetically “Every man is the son of a woman” they were communicating the idea that every man, that grows up to be an “undesirable adult” (as reflected by the OPs post) was once, at least for a fraction of a second, under the care of a woman (as in: thats how biology works). Further, the vast majority of those that would be men were under the care of women for many years, and if they grew to be “undesirable”, then previous generations of women had a hand in raising them that way and are therefore at least partially responsible for them being “undesirable”. Again, I’m not lending my voice in agreement or disagreement, I’m simply translating what they were saying poetically into an easier to understand block of text for you. It is up to you to form your own opinion.

          What you responded with was appearing to contradict the poster as though they wrote prose. You focused exclusively on the idea that a tiny fraction of men are raised by a set of same sex parents ignoring the fact that the vast men aren’t raised in that situation. Further your “yes and no” seemed to suggest it could be as high as 50/50 split, which is of course, far far from reality.

          Your downvotes were earned by you with people essentially saying:

          If you need another example to highly what you did. Imagine the original post was Shakespeare’s like from Romeo and Juliet:

          “What’s in a name? That which we call a rose, by any other word would smell as sweet.”

          And you responded with:

          “Shakespeare was probably referring to Old Garden Roses (Rosaceae Gallicas) and it does have a unique fragrance”

          You might be kind of factually correct, but Shakespeare was writing poetically, not referring to a specific plant, but that the properties of the thing apply to it irrespective of whatever name we attach to it. Nobody cares what the genus and species of rose Shakespeare was referring to because the meaning of the idea he was communicating was separate from that.

        • @apfelwoiSchoppen
          link
          7
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          Malicious downvoting is rampant here. People are a bit more silo’d on reddit which leads to less noise and more positivity when a user sticks to their chosen subs. I get the feeling that people here stick to the All or Local feeds which leads to a lot of negativity.

          • @RunawayFixer
            link
            73 months ago

            This makes a lot of sense. I do indeed stick to all on lemmy and the ignorant downvoting that often happens, reminds me of what would happen in default reddit subs like worldnews. My opt in reddit subs indeed had a way better crowd. The frontpage of Lemmy didn’t used to be this way when I first joined though.

            • @apfelwoiSchoppen
              link
              43 months ago

              Yeah, I’m guilty of it myself. It is a behavorial spiral that I have to jog myself out of. I kinda like the local feed because it feels manageable but I’ve also blocked hundreds of communities at this point.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          -13 months ago

          The majority of lemmy is grade school/high school aged kids. Don’t expect reasonable responses to anything here and you’ll do just fine.

          • @ripcord
            link
            53 months ago

            Is it? Ive only ever heard people claim the age skews much older, 30s at least.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              03 months ago

              I’m not sure anyone can ever know- but I base my evaluation on the immaturity and ignorance that so prevalent here.

          • @apfelwoiSchoppen
            link
            73 months ago

            Folks could gain a lot from blocking communities with which they only participate by downvote.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            -13 months ago

            Yeah. I went back to Reddit myself a bit over a month ago. Rarely come here anymore. It’s become a far left echo chamber for kids that barely know how the real world operates, and are far too stubborn to listen to anyone that tries to explain it to them.

          • @BleatingZombie
            link
            93 months ago

            Thank you. I feel a lot better knowing it’s just morons like you downvoting me. To be honest, I had no idea a stereotype like you actually existed

            I feel so bad for you that I actually feel better about myself!

  • @Jiggle_Physics
    link
    243 months ago

    I can’t remember where I saw it, because it has been years, but a bunch of the Sovcits were passing a video of a man, that state police pulled over, threatening that if they didn’t just leave, he was going to start a gun fight. So they left. They were all sharing it around, claiming victory, sucking each other off. Then, like a year or so later, a news article came out where they decided to watch the guy closely. Instead of just arresting him, they collected a bunch of criminal infractions to charge him with. Then, when he was coming out of some store, or restaurant, or whatever, they ambushed him and took him in.

    Long story short, he had CP. Possibly was paying an underage girl for sex. ALL the sovcit hang-outs were immediately perma-banning anyone who posted it.

    Like, I passionately despise the legal industry here. From the cops to the legislators. However, all they have done is make it so cops assume anyone, who doesn’t immediately start sucking them off, is a sovcit. This makes them even more likely to be violent, and they do everything they can to make sure anyone that doesn’t listen to their unlawful BS, is associated with that movement.

  • @hate2bme
    link
    153 months ago

    Sovereign citizen kills sovereign citizen.

    • @vxx
      link
      33 months ago

      Very unlikey. Apparently it was a “sovereign citizen”

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      33 months ago

      Look, it’s bad enough as it is, but you don’t have to lie on the quote. It never said that in the article.

      • @jpreston2005
        link
        13 months ago

        U.S. District Judge Charles Simpson’s ruling declared that the actions of Taylor’s boyfriend, who fired a shot at police the night of the raid, were the legal cause of her death, not a bad warrant.

        That’s the quote. I didn’t lie, I shortened it.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          13 months ago

          You used quotes. That’s for repeating what someone said verbatim. And “the legal cause ofnher death” is very different than she was killed by the boyfriend.

    • EleventhHour
      link
      18
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Dirty cops belong in jail, not to be executed in the streets.

      Vengeance is not justice.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        23 months ago

        All cops are dirty.

        And I’d agree that execution isn’t the preferred method of dealing with the problem. But it’s happened now, so oh well.

        • EleventhHour
          link
          5
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          Complacency and indifference in the face of injustice begets further injustice. It’s hypocritical to then claim to seek justice.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            5
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            I don’t want “justice”, I don’t want cops.

            I want to protect lives and make the world a better place.

            Oh and during war, armed resistance is morally fine.

            • EleventhHour
              link
              -13 months ago

              yet, you seem tolerant of murder and vengeance. so, you would appear to only want to protect certain lives and make the world a better place for some. and who would be the one to decide who benefits from this “better world”? you?

                • EleventhHour
                  link
                  73 months ago

                  not really sure where dying during war comes into play when discussing this murder of police officers…

                  i think you replied to the wrong comment

                • Lightor
                  link
                  13 months ago

                  And who gets to decide when we’re at war about what

                  You want good people protected, how do you propose we do that without any group that is very cop like in their responsibilities?

        • @Maggoty
          link
          -83 months ago

          Okay put it this way then. The actively dirty ones go to prison, the passively dirty ones get fired.

          Look no more cops and we avoided the reign of terror.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            143 months ago

            There’s an article on the front page right now about how a cop who raped his daughters was given custody and the mother imprisoned for refusing court mandated Christian reunification therapy.

            Cops don’t have consequences

            • @Maggoty
              link
              -4
              edit-2
              3 months ago

              No. That’s the proposal. I know they aren’t facing consequences right now.

          • TheTechnician27
            link
            English
            12
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            The actively dirty ones go to prison

            No they don’t, and they never will if we keep perpetuating this ridiculous pearl-clutching, cop-venerating bullshit where calling them out for what they are – a state-sanctioned gang – is stigmatized.

            • @Maggoty
              link
              -23 months ago

              That’s the point. I want the dirty ones in prison.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            8
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            I’d gladly take a non-lethal outcome, but I didn’t decide this act and I had zero influence on it.

            I’m not going to lose sleep over it either tho mind you.

            • @Maggoty
              link
              -53 months ago

              That’s really all I’m trying to avoid. This country is going to blow it’s top off if we keep treating the people as an exploitable resource. I just don’t want to deal with a reign of terror.

        • EleventhHour
          link
          2
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          And what rights do you not have now that you believe you will win by murdering police?

            • EleventhHour
              link
              5
              edit-2
              3 months ago

              why? because you don’t have a snappy answer? no anarchist slogan in your pocket you can throw back?

        • Lightor
          link
          03 months ago

          Historically inaccurate

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    83 months ago

    This post has brought out the worst of Lemmy. At least I can find respite in the fact that those glorifying this are merely edgelord keyboard warriors and have absolutely no measurable impact on the real world.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    -5
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    Imagine celebrating the death of a human being, knowing that their family’s lives are forever changed-

    And feeling good about yourself.

    Stay classy lemmy.

    EDIT: look at all the cowards downvoting without having the balls to respond. There are the type of people that will celebrate the death of innocent people.