24 thoughts on “I Heard It On The NARN

  1. They haven’t charged these guys yet. Seems clear they are considering a self defense scenario.

  2. Timmer’s piece was reasonable.
    I will be pleasantly surprised if he is not ostracized by his comrades for badthink.

  3. They haven’t charged these guys yet. Seems clear they are considering a self defense scenario

    Stop me if I’m wrong, but don’t the cops have 72 hours – and doesn’t the click stop for holidays and weekends?

    They were taken into custody Tuesday must before noon. In 30 hours, the whole place shut down for Thanksgiving. Friday added maybe 24 hours.

    If I read this right (and I may very well not), they have ’til Monday to charge or cut ’em loose.

  4. MBerg: Perhaps 2nd Amendment advocates should consider forming a defense and support fund for these fine young gentleman.

  5. I suppose the long delay before being charges is so the DA can find some dire crime to credibly charge them with, and for which there is a good chance of conviction. It may be that the ‘fine young gentlemen’ were physically assaulted before the shooting. Very tricky business for a prosecutor. Wouldn’t want to be accused of letting ‘white supremacists’ walk, at least not in a city like Saint Paul.
    Where I live almost no one carries a gun. I am always surprised when it is reported that strangers in conceal carry states get into fights. How do they know that they won’t end up shot?

  6. “I am always surprised when it is reported that strangers in conceal carry states get into fights. How do they know that they won’t end up shot?”

    Isn’t that the point of Conceal Carry?

  7. Y’know, the funny thing, Emery, is that some of the gun control propaganda is based on the idea that white people are crazy to have this idea that they need guns to protect them from mobs of Black people.

  8. Emery – No, I don’t.

    If they’re not, it doesn’t necessarily prejudice the self-defense case (although the prosecutors might try to make it seem that way to a jury). It’s possible for someone to be convicted for carrying a gun without a carry permit, which they used in a legitimate self-defense (see Bernard Goetz).

    If the shooter had a permit, AND they win a self-defense claim (against the prosecutor’s inevitable attempt to tie it to “white supremacy”), then the system worked (for a person most of us revile).

    If the shooter had a permit, and gets convicted of aggravated assault and whatever hate crime the US attorney pulls out of their bag? Well, there are 180,000 carry permittees in Minnesota. Any group of 180,000 people in a given year will include 2-3 murderers (Minnesota’s murder rate is 1.8/100,000) and about 200 perps of aggravated assault. One vs 200 over the course of a year – not bad as a population.

  9. “Isn’t that the point of Conceal Carry?”

    You’re trying to be satirical and snarky, right?

  10. Pretty sure I read that the coppers asked for, and received an extension to the 72 hour mandate.

  11. MBerg: I was simply parphrasing what advocates of C&C have stated on this website. Personally, I have no issue with C&C.

  12. I imagine this scenario:
    Bunch of crazy white power people are protesting somewhere. A small group of young Black men show up and start getting in the protesters faces — not assaulting them, but being obnoxious, making a big deal about photographing them and so on.
    A large group of the white power people (and BLM is very much the Black equivalent of White Supremacists) chases down the Black counter-protesters, and corners them. One of the Black protesters pulls a gun and shoots and wounds several of his would-be attackers.
    Where do your sympathies lie?

  13. I don’t believe 2nd Amendment advocates would be well served by adopting these particular men as a ‘poster child’ for self defense.

  14. Just a flesh wound..

    No seriously, it would be a mistake for 2nd amendment advocates to hitch a wagon to these fellas.

  15. It’s always difficult to protect the rights of those with whom you disagree.
    Do people who have ante-diluvian views on public policy enjoy the protections of the Bill of rights?
    Yes. Yes they do.
    This really pisses off the Left, and especially the Current Occupant.

  16. Bento, my sympathies withstanding, if this case were black on white shooting, I would gather the facts and see how they fit within the law.

    We don’t even know they made a big show of recording. A St’rickle article yesterday said the squatters refused to allow the press to listen in on a conversation between themselves and the fire chief. Evidently, video recording violates the black protest community unless it’s in their own best interest.

  17. Emery, the 2nd Amendment hitches it’s wagon to every American citizen….we’re just along for the ride.

    US Constitution; great document; really lends itself to cut and paste discussion. You’d like it.

  18. TriggerWarning, in the MPLS BLM shooting, and in the Colorado Springs shooting, the facts are still in dispute. I meant my 4:54 to be a thought exercise for those who believe the BLM shooter got what was coming to him.
    From the rhetoric I’ve been hearing, the BLM leaders are Black nationalists (whatever they may call themselves). They want extra legal rights for people of their race. Obama’s JD and virtually every Dem politician are happy to oblige them.
    Screw them.

  19. It strikes me that if “Black Lives Matter” really wants a discussion of the issues, threatening journalists and those who disagree with them probably isn’t the way to go. Hence I’ve got to conclude people want to cram things down peoples’ throats.

    Regarding the shooters here, I can’t figure out whether they were brave, idiotic, or what. Probably a mixture of those and other factors.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.