Minnesota man who shot 5 BLM protestors found guilty - Polidicks

[QUOTE]MINNEAPOLIS - A jury on Wednesday convicted a Minnesota man of assault for opening fire and wounding five mendemonstrating against the fatal shooting of a black man by Minneapolis police officers. Allen Scarsella, 24, of Bloomington, was found guilty on all charges of assault and riot. Scarsella showed no emotion as the Hennepin County jury’s verdict was read.CBS Minnesota reports that the jury deliberated for seven hours. Scarsella and three other men, all wearing face masks, went into an encampment outside a police station in north Minneapolis to livestream Black Lives Matter protests that had closed down a city block. Scarsella, who has a permit to carry a concealed weapon, brought a .45-caliber handgun and fired at demonstrators in what his attorneys say was self-defense. CBS Minnesota reports that jurors saw numerous text messages Scarsella sent friends, including one saying, “Cool – the gun I’m getting is proven to kill black guys in a single shot.” Only one of the five victims attended the trial. Cameron Clark, 26, Jamar Clark’s cousin, was shot by Scarsella in the right leg. Clark said he remembers Scarsella provoking protesters with racial slurs and luring a group of black men up the street where he turned and shot at them.[/QUOTE] [URL="http://www.cbsnews.com/news/minnesota-man-who-shot-5-black-lives-matter-protesters-found-guilty/"]Source[/URL]

Good thing justice was served.

we need a total and complete shutdown of white people entering the United States until our country's representatives can figure out what the hell is going on

This was pretty much going to be a given. They all went there to stir shit, and even if the shooting was in self defense they instigated the situation in the first place. Play stupid games win stupid prizes.

[QUOTE]CBS Minnesota reports that jurors saw numerous text messages Scarsella sent friends, including one saying, “Cool – [B]the gun I’m getting is proven to kill black guys in a single shot.[/B]” Only one of the five victims attended the trial. Cameron Clark, 26, Jamar Clark’s cousin, was shot by Scarsella in the right leg. Clark said he remembers Scarsella provoking protesters with racial slurs and[B] luring a group of black men up the street where he turned and shot at them.[/B][/QUOTE] holy shit

Wasn't facepunch defending these people a while back? [QUOTE=NoobieWafer223;49179138]Protesters chase White videographers and [i]get shot doing so[/i] and then the media says it was White supremacists just shooting black protesters. Hmph... Sounds to me like a cold-cut case of self-defense. Either way you try to spin it. Were they right to shoot them? Probably not. But did they have [B]the right to?[/B] Absolutely.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=Svinnik;49179536]Watch this incident be twisted around by the BLM protesters. The movement has some good ideas but their methods are disgusting[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=archival;49179733]Someone got shot for doing something that fully justifies that reaction? Better associate ourselves with that kind of behavior by protesting in defense of that person, now people might think twice about all young black people being like this if we all act in a way that fully reinforces that stereotype. Were helping.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=Billy-Bobfred;49179681]BLM is a huge fucking joke "lets chase down a group of people and attack them" "lets mob a police precinct" "lets have a wifebeater for a figurehead, for 2 weeks until we find another dead guy :)"[/QUOTE] Holy crap

They seemed like a group that took all the shitposting on /pol/ too litteraly

[QUOTE=Aldawolf;51777634]Wasn't facepunch defending these people a while back? Holy crap[/QUOTE] I'm going to assume that this was before the trail, and people probably didn't have all the information. Not saying that makes jumping to conclusions okay, but I can see where they're coming from.

[QUOTE=Aldawolf;51777634]Wasn't facepunch defending these people a while back? Holy crap[/QUOTE] what do you expect? the perps were white and the victims were black theres a lot of 'well both sides are at fault technically !!!' too [editline]5th February 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=imperialrock;51777653]I'm going to assume that this was before the trail, and people probably didn't have all the information. Not saying that makes jumping to conclusions okay, but I can see where they're coming from.[/QUOTE] [quote=from the article linked]Miski Noor, a media contact for Black Lives Matter, said “a group of white supremacists showed up at the protest, as they have done most nights.”[/quote] [quote=from the article linked]At least two of the three men who had been taunting protesters were firing guns, said Wronski-Riley, who described the incident as “really chaotic, really fast.”[/quote] no, they knew

[QUOTE=papaya;51777570]we need a total and complete shutdown of white people entering the United States until our country's representatives can figure out what the hell is going on[/QUOTE] What does this even mean

[QUOTE=Boaraes;51777675]What does this even mean[/QUOTE] I think he's making fun of Donald Trump

[QUOTE=imperialrock;51777653]I'm going to assume that this was before the trail, and people probably didn't have all the information. Not saying that makes jumping to conclusions okay, but I can see where they're coming from.[/QUOTE] While they didn't have all the information, it's a bit fucked if your first reaction is to blame the black people who were victims instead of just not taking a stance or something (it's really not that hard to not jump to any conclusion). It's always the white people involved who get the benefit of doubt.

[QUOTE=Lambeth;51777680]I think he's making fun of Donald Trump[/QUOTE] I'm not sure what Donald Trump has to do with this case, to be honest.

[QUOTE=Aldawolf;51777634]Wasn't facepunch defending these people a while back?[/QUOTE] Before the trial, when there wasn't any real evidence of what happened other than "person is chased, shoots them". Now that the trial is over we know what happened, so it's easy for you to sit on your high horse and talk down about people.

[QUOTE=Boaraes;51777675]What does this even mean[/QUOTE] muslim ban satire, hurrdurr

[QUOTE=Boaraes;51777708]I'm not sure what Donald Trump has to do with this case, to be honest.[/QUOTE] Well that person was directly quoting trump and swapping out muslims for white people.

[QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;51777709]Before the trial, when there wasn't any real evidence of what happened other than "person is chased, shoots them". Now that the trial is over we know what happened, so it's easy for you to sit on your high horse and talk down about people.[/QUOTE] they were described as white supremacists and were taunting and harassing the protestors in the article in the thread they linked

It's Facepunch, and unfortunately we have a lot of prejudice here against Black Live Matter because of how the movement started. Back when Michael Brown died, a lot of people didn't see any reason for the protestors to be protesting because Michael Brown was in fact a massive cunt and was the cause of his own death. Thing was, the protestors weren't just protesting the death of Michael Brown, but the whole damn way the town was run. As we now know about Ferguson with the DOJ report, it was absolutely rotten to it's core with corruption by racial profiling and prejudice against them in order to suck whatever money they could out of the already poor black populace of the town. People here didn't do their research to see any indication of that corruption such how the police force of around 50 officers had only 3 black officers in a town where the populace was 50/50 black and white, or how almost no government officials in general were black, so instead they came to the conclusion that people were just protesting because they want to go crazy and riot, not for any actual reason. That entire sentiment has stuck around today as Black Lives Matter continues to be not just about the deaths, justified or unjustified, but about the way the government has been treated blacks, and thus whenever something happens between BLM and another group of whoever, then a lot of people on Facepunch are much more inclined to believe the other party than they are to believe BLM since they see BLM as just a bunch of anarchists, not people protesting for any actual reason.

[QUOTE=Cyke Lon bee;51777723]muslim ban satire, hurrdurr[/QUOTE] I guess that would make sense if whites killed blacks more than blacks killed whites, but since the latter is the case this satire falls flat, I'm afraid.

[QUOTE=Boaraes;51777708]I'm not sure what Donald Trump has to do with this case, to be honest.[/QUOTE] Kind of a dumb post, but I think he's poking fun at Trump bogeymanning Muslims while we're in the midst of a [I]real[/I] domestic threat in terms of US race relations spiraling out of control (which Trump is only exacerbating, for the record).

[QUOTE=Boaraes;51777763]I guess that would make sense if whites killed blacks more than blacks killed whites, but since the latter is the case this satire falls flat, I'm afraid.[/QUOTE] It's probably more of a commentary on how white shooters are generally seen as "lone wolves" rather than some kind of terrorism threat like muslims have been labelled as.

[QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;51777709]Before the trial, when there wasn't any real evidence of what happened other than "person is chased, shoots them". Now that the trial is over we know what happened, so it's easy for you to sit on your high horse and talk down about people.[/QUOTE] It doesn't really change what I think of BLM regardless, even after this, self appointed leaders of their movement still call for the death of police officers, I don't have any time for movements that endorse violence.

[QUOTE=Boaraes;51777763]I guess that would make sense if whites killed blacks more than blacks killed whites, but since the latter is the case this satire falls flat, I'm afraid.[/QUOTE] It's more taking the worst example of one particular race and extrapolating it to assume all people of that race are like that. I'd be pretty offended if someone told me all white people are like donald trump for instance.

[QUOTE=Saxon;51777792]It doesn't really change what I think of BLM regardless, even after this, self appointed leaders of their movement still call for the death of police officers [b]and break some dudes shop,[/b] I don't have any time for movements that endorse violence.[/QUOTE] oh no, [i]not the poor shop windows!!!!![/i]

[QUOTE=papaya;51777798]oh no, [I]not the poor shop windows!!!!![/I][/QUOTE] I realized that sounds dumb (which is why I edited it out) But why is it okay for a movement to go and break shit like they do? Maybe not all of them are bad, but all I've seen is a movement defined by violence and the destruction it leaves in its wake.

[QUOTE=Aldawolf;51777634]Wasn't facepunch defending these people a while back? Holy crap[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=NoobieWafer223;49179138]Protesters chase White videographers and [i]get shot doing so[/i] and then the media says it was White supremacists just shooting black protesters. Hmph... Sounds to me like a cold-cut case of self-defense. Either way you try to spin it. Were they right to shoot them? Probably not. But did they have [B]the right to?[/B] Absolutely.[/QUOTE] "cold-cut case" lmfao

[QUOTE=papaya;51777798]oh no, [i]not the poor shop windows!!!!![/i][/QUOTE] Oh no, not the property damages that the owners must pay for because of things not in their control!

[QUOTE=TornadoAP;51777761]It's Facepunch, and unfortunately we have a lot of prejudice here against Black Live Matter because of how the movement started. Back when Michael Brown died, a lot of people didn't see any reason for the protestors to be protesting because Michael Brown was in fact a massive cunt and was the cause of his own death. Thing was, the protestors weren't just protesting the death of Michael Brown, but the whole damn way the town was run. As we now know about Ferguson with the DOJ report, it was absolutely rotten to it's core with corruption by racial profiling and prejudice against them in order to suck whatever money they could out of the already poor black populace of the town. People here didn't do their research to see any indication of that corruption such how the police force of around 50 officers had only 3 black officers in a town where the populace was 50/50 black and white, or how almost no government officials in general were black, so instead they came to the conclusion that people were just protesting because they want to go crazy and riot, not for any actual reason. That entire sentiment has stuck around today as Black Lives Matter continues to be not just about the deaths, justified or unjustified, but about the way the government has been treated blacks, and thus whenever something happens between BLM and another group of whoever, then a lot of people on Facepunch are much more inclined to believe the other party than they are to believe BLM since they see BLM as just a bunch of anarchists, not people protesting for any actual reason.[/QUOTE] I feel like when these stories happen the victims are held up to some impossible standard. Like in the instance of [URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Eric_Garner"]Eric Garner.[/URL] Should he have been selling untaxed cigarettes? Probably not. Did he deserve to die for that? Most certainly not. [QUOTE=Boaraes;51777820]Oh no, not the property damages that the owners must pay for because of things not in their control![/QUOTE] I think human lives are more important personally. Windows can be replaced and I would think most restaurants have insurance.

[QUOTE=Aldawolf;51777634]Wasn't facepunch defending these people a while back? Holy crap[/QUOTE] Weren't you banned for being a shit poster? I'd hardly call 4 people making a kneejerk reaction to an incident that was developing at the time to be a majority of facepunch's opinion. Maybe instead of generalizing entire groups you can do your research especially when you did the same to gamergate and refuse to believe it's anything other than a mysogynist despite the evidence.

[QUOTE=Lambeth;51777826]I think human lives are more important personally. Windows can be replaced and I would think most restaurants have insurance.[/QUOTE] How is that a proper justification for destroying others' property? Just because someone died to a police officer, it's understandable if people set cars alight and smash windows? I'm sorry, but I don't understand. It's counterproductive and morally wrong.