The BLM "protestor" who was fatally Shot in Austin was filmed hours earlier saying that the 'People Who Hate Us' Are 'Too Big of Pussies to Actually Do Anything About It'

submitted by america_first_1776 from thegatewaypundit.com

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]FediNetizen 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Where is the evidence that he pointed his rifle at the guy? So far the only thing I've seen is a photo that doesn't show anything, the only testimony I've seen claiming that he pointed the gun was from the guy who killed him when he was being questioned by police. Where is the actual evidence that the man who was killed pointed a gun at the man who killed him?

Also the timeline doesn't make sense. If he was already pointing his gun then how did that guy have time to draw it, aim, and fire it without the guy who already had a gun pointed having time to fire back? We know from testimony that Garrett never fired, it was first 5 shots from the guy in the car, then 3 shots later from a different person shooting at the car right after the fact.

[–]BRAPking 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Those are all good questions. But if the driver who was defending himself shot Garett for no reason, why was he released? Sure they're still investigating, but they would hold him if this shooting was suspicious. Could it be that there's additional evidence that only law enforcement has at this time? I would bet there is.

If he was already pointing his gun then how did that guy have time to draw it, aim, and fire it without the guy who already had a gun pointed having time to fire back?

I think it's more like he had it ready and low (as seen in that grainy photo - not aiming it, but up against his shoulder and down at 45 degrees, ready to fire) then may have pointed it. The driver probably had his firearm ready since he was already being harassed by the mass of angry people before Garrett ran up to the driver's window. Even if Garett hadn't pointed it directly at the driver, him holding it up to his shoulder and making any sort of movement could have been interpreted as such in the chaos of the angry mob who swarmed the car. At this point, it's already justified self-defense, no direct pointing required (yet still may have occurred)

He died because a crowd of people decided that cars aren't allowed on the road they claimed for themselves. They aggressively swarmed the car in a split second after he already stopped (to avoid hitting anyone) and then a guy with a gun ran up looking like he could shoot. Stupidity was the real killer.

[–]FediNetizen 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

But if the driver who was defending himself shot Garett for no reason, why was he released?

As mentioned in the press conference, the driver and the other guy that fired at the driver's car were both detained and questioned by detectives, and released pending investigation. And it wouldn't be that he killed Garrett for no reason, but because he panicked when he saw a gun, even if it wasn't pointed at him.

And to be clear, because of the angles, I don't think he could have believed the gun was being pointed at him when it wasn't. Garrett had been going to these marches for several days now, and bringing his rifle with him. We know from other photos of him carrying that he keeps it with the stock by his right shoulder and the barrel down and to the left. Since he was walking up on the driver's side, the gun wouldn't be pointed anywhere near the driver.

The reason why it matters is when the driver was on the phone with police right after the shooting, the driver told police that he had drawn his weapon and shot Garrett because Garrett had pointed his rifle at him. If Garrett wasn't pointing his rifle at him, the guy was lying on the phone to make his case sound more sympathetic.