189
190

Oath Keepers Turn Up at Michael Brown Protests in Ferguson, Missouri (nbcnews.com)

LackingAHeart が 投稿

上位 200 件のコメント全て表示する 365
並べ替え:
ベスト
トップ新着論争中古い順Q&A

[–]ramsesniblick3rd 118ポイント119ポイント  (11子コメント)

There is only one oathkeeper, currently in the possession of Brienne of Tarth.

[–]Dirtydeedsinc 22ポイント23ポイント  (9子コメント)

Last seen being used while disregarding that oath.

[–]ramsesniblick3rd 21ポイント22ポイント  (8子コメント)

Only in the show. Her oath also included the caveat that Cat would not "hold her back" when the opportunity arose to reek vengeance on Stannis. In the book she is still holding to that oath.

[–]miaminice1984 11ポイント12ポイント  (3子コメント)

reek vengeance? Wreak, Wreak, you must remember your name.

[–]Dirtydeedsinc 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

I agree with you on all points. My statement was intended as tongue in cheek.

[–]OMGSPACERUSSIA [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

Cat is also permadead in the show. They confirmed no Lady Stoneheart there.

[–]chucicabra [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Who woulda guessed? Reference to popular show as the top comment - again.

[–]Nythious 17ポイント18ポイント  (69子コメント)

Pardon the ignorance - Are they protecting the protestors as an anti-government-establishment group, are they protecting the police as a vigilante 'law enforcement', or are they protecting the stores from theft and looting?

Based on their origin, aren't they the ones protecting the protestors? (and being hated for it at the same time?)

[–]OssiansFolly 53ポイント54ポイント  (24子コメント)

They are there to protect the stores and property. They only care about the community...not police or the BLM rioters.

[–]Nythious 15ポイント16ポイント  (3子コメント)

Thank you, hard to follow who's doing what in Ferg. . .

[–]themadxcow [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

It is especially now that anything posted related to ferguson is quickly purged from reddit. State of emergency, multiple shootings, yet reddit is mysteriously blank.

[–]gbimmer 5ポイント6ポイント  (1子コメント)

The department of justice took over the police force there so now there aren't any riots.

Please ignore the videos, pictures and news articles saying the opposite.

[–]Ndafed1776 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

We also took down the Confederate flag so nobody is angry anymore. All is well !

[–]Artaxerxes_III 15ポイント16ポイント  (12子コメント)

So like the roof Koreans, only not on roofs and not Korean.

[–]OssiansFolly [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

Some might be Korean.

[–]Ebola_The_Kid [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Well they tried to do the roof top route but that scared the people out destroying things and the police had to put a stop to it.

http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/police-shut-down-mysterious-oath-keepers-guarding-rooftops-in-downtown/article_f90b6edd-acf8-52e3-a020-3a78db286194.html

[–]OfMiceAndMenus [スコア非表示]  (8子コメント)

Do we really not have any better description for that family than 'roof Koreans'?

[–]JUST_LOGGED_IN [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Well you immediately know who and what we're talking about. That sounds like a good description to me.

[–]jag986 [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

Vertically Superior Koreans

[–]Ebola_The_Kid [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

They were of Korean descent, and they took up arms on rooftops to protect themselves and their livelihood. It sounds derogatory but it's not being used in that manner.

[–]comawhite12 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

"High Koreans"?

[–]AldoTheeApache [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

Mansard Asian-Americans?

[–]chowderbags [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Which part of LA were they in. They might be "North Koreans".

[–]TSIjoeC 7ポイント8ポイント  (6子コメント)

I'd like to add, and this is only an assumption based on what I've read on the Oath Keepers, but I imagine they're there to ensure the businesses are left alone, as well as individuals property. At the same time, they're keeping an eye on the police to ensure that they're not overstepping their boundaries when it comes to riot control. There's a huge difference between trying to control a chaotic situation and instigating violence, which SOME cops like to do (not all are dirtbags, but some are and like to stir the shit-pot, sorry to say). Oath Keepers are there to ensure shit doesn't get out of hand on both sides. If it's a situation where they don't have to get involved, and can just sit and observe, imo, is a well handled situation.

[–]endlessconciousness [スコア非表示]  (3子コメント)

That article is so bias against the oath keepers.

[–]Nythious [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

That's really where my confusion came from. The article made it seem like they were instigating the race war but the organization seems to support defending people against government oppression.

[–]Cocoon_Of_Dust [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

I couldn't tell what they were there for from the article. Just that they were there.

[–]LoveDaCheese [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

Your statement suggests that only police officers like to "stir the shit-pot." The oath keepers and the protestors are just as likely to do that.

[–]TSIjoeC [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

please re-read my post and get back to me. The oath keepers are not there to stir the pot, but simply to make sure it doesn't boil over, regardless of who's adding shit to the pot, as it were.

[–]Bizoza9 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

I don't even want to admit that I read a story painting it in a different light, but I will just because the information was there. The problem is that when this information is put up, people will absolutely jump to the conclusion that these are bad guys, regardless of anything other than the person they are said to be protecting. I don't know what the deal is with the entire idea of Oath Keepers, but I do like the idea that they espouse, which is to protect the constitution, which is something that police, the justice system itself, and government seems to be against.

Anyway, here is the article. MSN has a liberal bent, so make sure you take that into account when reading the article. I'm not saying that there is not any truth to it, but that it should be read with a grain of salt as to the idea of spin. I am not a conservative or a liberal, so I am not taking a side here either, so please don't shoot the messenger.

[–]StormwindHero -3ポイント-2ポイント  (34子コメント)

There are no protestors only rioters.

コメントをもっと表示する (8 返事)

    [–]IHv2RtrnSumVdeotapes [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

    im fine with it. im sick of these fake protests. just tired of it. i feel bad for the people who live there and have to live in fear of these protesters.

    [–]rindindin [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

    The first time they did this, the original store owner had his place looted and completely messed up.

    It was a disaster.

    [–]MackMizzo 8ポイント9ポイント  (0子コメント)

    When riots began in Baltimore the mayor ordered the police to form a perimeter around the "control zone" and let the rioting idiots run around freely torching and tearing apart a neighborhood full of people and businesses within it.

    I don't think Ferguson business/home owners would really mind the added security where the police have offered none in the past. Or are the same group of people decrying the police for misuse of power and inadequacy going to turn around and proclaim they are the only ones allowed to exercise a right to armed defense? Holy cognitive dissonance, Batman.

    [–]SuperDad_dadadadaaa [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

    There are black open carry groups.

    [–]CornFedMidwesternBoy 8ポイント9ポイント  (0子コメント)

    Good. These "protestors" have said they want war for christssake. The working families and their livelihoods should be protected. If these things keep spreading I hope militias are formed up. I'd join in a heartbeat.

    [–]Rad_Spencer 11ポイント12ポイント  (1子コメント)

    This is basically the protest equivalent of Sharktopus vs Whalewolf.

    [–]gbimmer 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

    Get out the popcorn!

    [–]buncatfarms 11ポイント12ポイント  (5子コメント)

    "If there were black and brown people in this country who showed up in the streets open carrying assault rifles in paramilitary garb would they still be received the same way?" Bynes asked. "It seems to be that especially when it comes to the Second Amendment there seems to be a different way that it is enforced."

    i honestly think they would be received the same way. but are black and brown people going out there in military garb doing this? no, i don't think so. i agree that it was probably unnecessary but as the situation got worse in ferguson, it seems like this group decided to try and help control the crowd. being nice only goes so far when you're up against groups of angry people.

    [–]G-Solutions 20ポイント21ポイント  (0子コメント)

    Yes, the media does this shit deliberately to stir everybody up. Here's my favorite example: MSNBC cropping video of black man and implying that he is a racist white man with a gun who wants to kill Obama.

    [–]Saint_Josephine 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

    Gun control is only a thing today because Ronald Reagan was scared of black panthers doing exactly what these guys are doing.

    So it is true that gun control laws were/are mostly a racial thing.

    [–]bossfoundmylastone -4ポイント-3ポイント  (2子コメント)

    John Crawford III was shot and killed by police for shopping for a bb gun in a Walmart.

    Tamir Rice was shot and killed by police for playing with a toy gun in a park.

    [–]LegendLength [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

    And Michael Brown was a saint we got it ...

    [–]themadxcow [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

    They were line gunmen, not a militia. What's your point?

    [–]anothercarguy 8ポイント9ポイント  (9子コメント)

    I like how the opinion of the Southern Poverty Law Center was treated as unbiased fact. Here's an SJW socialist group who says xxx is yyyy. Must be fact

    [–]wheresmygirlmolly [スコア非表示]  (4子コメント)

    Lol Southern Poverty Law Center as an "SJW" group. Get a grip.

    [–]dacian420 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

    To the reactionaries who have been brigading /r/news these days (due to their hate subs being banned), anyone who doesn't want to round up blacks and intern them in concentration camps counts as an "SJW".

    コメントをもっと表示する (3 返事)

      コメントをもっと表示する (4 返事)

        [–]YearOfTheChipmunk 19ポイント20ポイント  (77子コメント)

        I feel like a bunch of heavily armed guys walking down the street isn't going to de-escalate the situation any. This would be unsettling to see.

        I mean, the article touched on it but didn't really explain it, who are these guys? Why are they just allowed to gear up and act like a personal army?

        [–]LackingAHeart[S] 36ポイント37ポイント  (11子コメント)

        This is just the wiki page but it's something other than their own site.

        They were apparently there in 2014 to protect residents and businesses so I'm assuming it's the same reason.

        [–]YearOfTheChipmunk 10ポイント11ポイント  (9子コメント)

        Reading that wiki page they actually seem quite reasonable. So maybe they could do some good for the situation. I just don't know if a show of pure force is the way to do it.

        Of course, I wasn't there, so maybe they know something I don't. Seeing people walk around with assault rifles out just makes me uncomfortable.

        [–]DeathHaze420 19ポイント20ポイント  (6子コメント)

        Its just a rifle. It hasn't assaulted anyone.

        [–]klaw7 [スコア非表示]  (4子コメント)

        It's an assault rifle. Get over it.

        [–]loudnoises461 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

        By definition it's not a assault rifle has the ability to have selective fire which means the ability to fire semi, burst and full auto. A ar15 only has the ability to fire semiautomatic meaning one trigger pull one bullet. This means it does not meet the definition of assault rifle.

        [–]Ebola_The_Kid [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

        Get over what?

        If you can't even define what terrifies you then we can't really expect your arguments on this to be based on logic and not emotion.

        コメントをもっと表示する (2 返事)

          [–]leftnotracks [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

          Then try this one. These guys have checked the fuck out from reality.

          [–]EA_Forum_Moderator [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

          Different news article said they were there to protect Infowars journalist. Article also said they were carrying automatic rifles and handguns (before editing to military style) so that's that for the author's credibility.

          [–]beer_4_breakfast 32ポイント33ポイント  (16子コメント)

          Open carry laws that apply to the area allow for this.

          [–]J_lovin 17ポイント18ポイント  (12子コメント)

          Time to get downvoted by those who read this:

          But in this situation, I definitely advocate the idea behind protecting the stores, civilians, and community as a whole for this situation. Take a quick look at this article. We were given the amendment to bear arms just for this, (or to be able to protect our selves from the government, which in this case is not the case).

          I admit them walking around in full military gear as if they were in the middle east does come off as intimidating and is a bit much...

          [–]CaptainGlobal [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

          If I was a business owner in Ferguson, I know I'd want these guys camped out in front of my store to stop the looters. We've learned from both Ferguson and Baltimore that the police won't protect stores and property from protesters, rioters, and looters.

          [–]DeathHaze420 6ポイント7ポイント  (0子コメント)

          Its what it takes, though. These guys mean business and their business is protecting the community and their businesses.

          [–]Dreadlifts_Bruh [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

          We do have a right to a militia...

          [–]pumpyourstillskin [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

          And our militias were first formed to protect against roving bands of mauraders

          [–]comawhite12 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

          Always be prepared.

          Seems a few of the peaceful protesters were chanting they were ready for war. Guess who is more ready?

          [–]YearOfTheChipmunk 3ポイント4ポイント  (5子コメント)

          This article was a little misleading. It didn't mention once that they only went there to protect stores and the community.

          From the pictures and some of the wording, I was assuming they were roving around in bands just trying to intimidate protesters into silence. But it seems like they were going about it in an okay way.

          Still not sure I'm a fan of a group of civilians brandishing assault rifles though. But that's probably just my British sensibilities.

          [–]Artaxerxes_III [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

          A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

          It seems like they are taking the second amendment quite seriously.

          Edit: Or rather, using the second amendment as intended, using arms in an organized militia.

          [–]OfMiceAndMenus [スコア非表示]  (7子コメント)

          This would be unsettling to see.

          Really? People dressed almost exactly like that were in every airport I went through from 2001-2005 or so. He's standing there calmly and talking into a radio. Technically he shouldn't have his hand on his weapon, as that could be seen as brandishing or intimidation, but I can't really tell how he's got it slung.

          Why are they just allowed to gear up and act like a personal army?

          The second amendment of the US Constitution. They're not there to shoot peaceful protesters or even rowdy ones. They're there to stop the police or protesters from overstepping into violence, and to protest an unlawful lockdown/police state just like the other protesters are against police brutality.

          [–]Callous1970 19ポイント20ポイント  (0子コメント)

          Were there riots and shootouts last night? Nope. Looks like it deescalated.

          [–]Chad3000 6ポイント7ポイント  (3子コメント)

          There were protesters yesterday getting arrested for filming police too, it does raise questions about double standards.

          [–]Callous1970 2ポイント3ポイント  (2子コメント)

          I have a serious problem with the police thinking they can arrest a person for filming them performing their duties. Maybe the protesters with the cameras should ask the Oathkeepers for protection?

          [–]Ebola_The_Kid 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

          I think the protesters have as much of a right to be armed as the oathkeepers. Maybe they can make the choice to responsibly own firearms and defend themselves as the oathkeepers have.

          Or they can rely on the police whom they view as racist and abusive.

          [–]backporch4lyfe [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

          That's is an interesting point, maybe a non profit can be set up to arm and train the disadvantaged segments of society? We can all see that 2nd amendment education has helped other folk in our country, maybe these people could also benefit from just your basic rifle safety and constitutional values instruction? What do you think would be a food weapon to get them started on SKS? AK?

          [–]AnhydrousEtOH [スコア非表示]  (3子コメント)

          I'd rather see those guys patrolling the streets than heavily armed police who know they are legally not responsible for anything including murder. These guys at least know when they pull the trigger, they will have to answer for those actions.

          Cops can pull the trigger, take a nice vacation and in all likelihood return to their job without even a slap on the wrist.

          [–]YearOfTheChipmunk [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

          You make a good point I hadn't considered. Ultimately, they'll be more responsible.

          コメントをもっと表示する (2 返事)

            [–]neverlaid [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

            You don't remember the roof Koreans do you?

            [–]themadxcow [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

            Did you not hear about the riots the other day? I mean, I know reddit censored the shit out of it, but ferguson went into a state of emergency.

            [–]YearOfTheChipmunk [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

            I did not. I basically only get my American news from Reddit.

            コメントをもっと表示する (3 返事)

              [–]beer_4_breakfast 17ポイント18ポイント  (37子コメント)

              I get they are allowed to do this, but this just reeks of instigation.

              [–]AnhydrousEtOH [スコア非表示]  (3子コメント)

              I'd rather have these guys patrolling my neighborhood than any police. These guys pull the trigger and there is no blue wall of silence and no institutional dogma that prevents them from ever being held accountable for their actions. They shoot and kill someone, they will answer for their actions.

              [–]beer_4_breakfast [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

              I'd rather not have anonymous dudes sporting military garments and AR-15s doing the policing. So I guess we have a difference of opinion...

              [–]bigwillyb123 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

              Those anonymous dudes will have to actually face criminal charges if they use their guns.

              [–]InnerSpikeWork [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

              Good thing these guys aren't anonymous

              [–]Gingor 23ポイント24ポイント  (52子コメント)

              Good.
              They rioted again, they shot at police... someone needs to keep the peace in Ferguson.

              コメントをもっと表示する (16 返事)

                [–]ImRealGrass 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

                I gotta admit...They have a pretty badass name.

                [–]kuthoofd 6ポイント7ポイント  (6子コメント)

                Why are these people still called protesters, from what I've seen they are just criminals.

                [–]Lad22 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

                If say anything else reddit mods delete it. You'll notice the lack of stories since they're deleting them as they're posted if it shines a bad light on the actions in Ferguson.

                [–]FalconHunter [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

                Because there are multiple facets and several disorganized groups in play. In some cases, there's crossover between groups.

                Some are just demonstrating. Some are demonstrating and performing acts of CIVIL disobedience. Some are actively trying to instigate a conflict. And some are complete anarchists who want to capitalize on the situation for personal gain.

                It's like Reddit. Not all Redditors are SJWs, or racists, or misogynists, or etc.

                [–]emptyfree [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

                Great quote on this in an WSJ article today:

                “It was a similar dynamic to what we saw on some of the worst nights last year,” he said. “There is an active protest group, and there are some people who are just waiting for stuff to happen, just sitting back and waiting for an opportunity to steal stuff and cause trouble.”

                [–]emptyfree [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

                So, in a nutshell, there are people who are peaceful protestors and some who are not.

                [–]LackingAHeart[S] [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

                Political correctness. God forbid we offend someone or hurt their feelings.

                [–]bradishungry [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

                If you have actually seen any ground footage you would see the vast majority of what is happening in Ferguson is peaceful protest.

                [–]CPTN_dick_fingers [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

                You know what some people are there to peacefully gather and bring light to an issue. Others (mainly the ones that fired at cops are the ones starting the shit) The oath keepers are probably there to help protect the individuals gathering peacefully.

                [–]hastdubutthurt [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

                As a property owner in the st Louis area, I welcome the presence of people actually willing to defend it from these rioters.

                [–]Banevader69 [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

                Its interesting how people in ferguson compare the police response to people firing at them to the police response to the legal and seemingly responsible use of firearms these individuals took part in. they really think its a race issue, and not the actions of the people thats causing that level of response. Wow.

                [–]LackingAHeart[S] [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

                they really think its a race issue

                Which only shows me that they're the ones with the racist mentality.

                [–]Peter_Olinto 2ポイント3ポイント  (4子コメント)

                Really don't know how I feel about this. Full disclosure: 100% for their rights as gun owners and the Second Amendment, but am generally against open carry dickheads which paint a bad picture for gun owners in general. I know they were there last year protecting stores, but these pictures it looks like they're on combat patrol. If they were there to protect stores, I'd really like to see them in front of stores, not on the street with their rifles slung in front of them. Just my opinion.

                [–]Szalkow 4ポイント5ポイント  (2子コメント)

                Different news sources will report different things to support their own agenda. This article paints the Oath Keepers as trigger-happy vigilantes patrolling the streets. The Oath Keepers themselves claim that they went to Ferguson to protect local businesses and residences. Members of the group have been helping local businesses board up their windows and standing watch on rooftops of stores and apartment complexes.

                St. Louis Today - Police shut down mysterious 'Oath Keepers' guarding rooftops in downtown Ferguson

                However, earlier this week the police asked that Oath Keepers vacate the rooftops under threat of arrest for operating [in security role] without a license. Several of them have remained in Ferguson to protest.

                [–]FalconHunter [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

                these pictures it looks like they're on combat patrol.

                NBC has a history of sculpting the narrative to fit their purposes

                I'd be willing to wager that there are plenty of examples of them doing exactly what you're suggesting (guarding stores, etc) but that such shots don't fit the narrative that NBC is trying to present, so they're not used.

                [–]Lo808 [スコア非表示]  (3子コメント)

                "If there were black and brown people in this country who showed up in the streets open carrying assault rifles in paramilitary garb would they still be received the same way?" Bynes asked. "It seems to be that especially when it comes to the Second Amendment there seems to be a different way that it is enforced."

                The commiteewoman said that police did not confront the Oath Keepers — which hit to the core of the issues.

                "There were two blocks of police. They saw them," she said. "It's more about the hypocrisy. Of wow, if anybody out here tried that they'd be met with a different greeting from police."

                [–]Ebola_The_Kid [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

                The Oathkeepers aren't known to act as a screen for looting or arson, the police were probably right to ignore them. They weren't targeting police and civilian businesses as the BLM rioters were.

                Not everyone carrying a gun is a criminal. Usually we judge that based off of the way people act. Oathkeepers aren't destroying things or hurting innocent people? Probably a safe call to ignore them and focus on all the actual crime going on.

                [–]ray_pape [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

                No the oathkeepers are white and therefore racist, and being a racist is worse than being pretty much anything up to and including a cop killer.

                コメントをもっと表示する (1 返事)

                  [–]BreakfastTamales [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

                  Now all we need is the "All Damn Day" guy to show up.

                  [–]TheIslander829 [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

                  After what happened last year, shit... I'd take a gatling gun and just maul whoever tries to "protest".

                  [–]themadxcow [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

                  It happened again two days ago. Reddit has just decided that it's going to pretend it didn't happen and is deleting all references to it. This thread will be gone in another hour or two.

                  [–]ray_pape [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

                  Cue the calls of "hurr durr stupid white racist rednecks hurr durr"

                  [–]BigDickRichie 1ポイント2ポイント  (5子コメント)

                  The police don't want them there. The protestors don't want them there. Whose "side" are they on and whose side they should be on based on their own "orders" is quite interesting.

                  The Oath Keepers' website outlines a list of 10 "Orders" members will not obey — including orders to disarm the American people, conduct warrantless searches or "blockade American cities, thus turning them into giant concentration camps."

                  Included on the list are two which might have particular resonance in Ferguson. The fourth? "We will NOT obey order to impose martial law or a 'state of emergency' on a state."

                  And the final item: "We will NOT obey any orders which infringe on the right of the people to free speech, to peaceably assemble, and to petition their government for a redress of grievances."

                  [–]treretr 8ポイント9ポイント  (2子コメント)

                  The protesters don't want the police there and the police don't want the protesters there, I fail to see how every group wanting all the other groops to be there is relivent.

                  [–]BigDickRichie [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

                  My point is that the protestors should want the Oath Keeps there if the Oath Keepers are following their own "orders".

                  The Oath Keepers should be standing with the protestors and not police if they are following their own "orders".

                  It's unclear to me who the Oath Keepers are actually siding with in this instance.

                  [–]lmg6841 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

                  They're standing with property owners, not the police.

                  [–]ani625 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

                  Definitely an additional burden on the police, as if they're having it easy.

                  [–]TrueBlueMichiganMan [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

                  "St. Louis County Police Chief Jon Belmar described their presence as 'both unnecessary and inflammatory."'

                  Then do you damn job, you sniveling appeaser. I'm sure the business owners are happy to have individuals who respect their property and want to defend them. If your police force was doing its job, this wouldn't be necessary.

                  "Ready for what?" "Ready for war!"

                  These looters and criminals issued the challenge and it has been taken up. And I sincerely doubt their goons firing handguns sideways above their heads will stand up for a second against trained, responsible gun owners.

                  [–]atomiccheesegod [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

                  The "Oath Keepers" are basically nothing more than old, ultra conservative white men with Hero complexes and airsoft gear.

                  They rallied to "guard" recruiting stations after the Tennessee attack but there point seemed moot after these clowns had a string of negligent weapon discharges. Ironically despite their seemingly pro-military stance and background the majority of the Oathkeepers support the "Jade Helm" crack pot conspiracy and they think the Army (who already has massive bases in Texas) is trying to invade Texas to take complete control.

                  [–]LupusLycas [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

                  The Oath Keepers organization says its members — all former military, police and first responders — pledge to "defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic."

                  So they're protesting police brutality?

                  コメントをもっと表示する (31 返事)