Started By
Message

re: Has the dead guy's body armor been discussed yet

Posted on 1/27/26 at 12:23 pm to
Posted by jawnybnsc
Greer, SC
Member since Dec 2016
5998 posts
Posted on 1/27/26 at 12:23 pm to
He reached for the mace as well. There is absolutely no doubt that he intended to interfere. What he intended to happen after that is anyone's guess. My hunch is that it was a suicide mission and he volunteered for it.
Posted by RobbBobb
Member since Feb 2007
34201 posts
Posted on 1/27/26 at 12:33 pm to
quote:

on national TV saying dude assaulted a federal agent??? Lied to America.

Another moron that doesnt know the definition of assault
quote:

I worked for DHS

Which is either a) a lie or b) hilarious that a person that doesnt know what an assault consists of, is complaining about the abilities of others
Posted by jawnybnsc
Greer, SC
Member since Dec 2016
5998 posts
Posted on 1/27/26 at 12:55 pm to
Every bit of that is bullshite. You're not accounting for what he was doing beforehand. You're not accounting for the coordination on Signal. You're not accounting for the fact that he pushes up on the agent and then grabs at his mace. You're not accounting for the fact that he was given commands that he ignored.

HE BROKE THE LAW!
HE INTERFERED WITH ARMED AGENTS!
HE DID SO WHILE STRAPPED!
HE WAS EITHER UNINTENTIONALLY IRRESPONSIBLE, OR HE VOLUNTEERED HIMSELF AS A SACRIFICE!
Posted by ItTakesAThief
Scottsdale, Arizona
Member since Dec 2009
10742 posts
Posted on 1/27/26 at 1:05 pm to
Did the guy in the back have the best vantage point of him reaching to his holster?

Or the worst vantage point to not be aware the gun was removed.
Posted by TBoy
Kalamazoo
Member since Dec 2007
28531 posts
Posted on 1/27/26 at 1:32 pm to
quote:

You're not accounting for the fact that he pushes up on the agent and then grabs at his mace. You're not accounting for the fact that he was given commands that he ignored.

WTF are you talking about? This is ALL made up. Fiction.
Posted by Swamp Angel
West Georgia Chicken Farm Territory
Member since Jul 2004
10154 posts
Posted on 1/27/26 at 1:54 pm to
quote:

Are you functionally retarded?


Even if I was, I'd still have twice your IQ. I believe you could be outsmarted by three medium-sized rocks.

Anyway, have a nice day.
Posted by BigGreenTiger
Member since Mar 2022
794 posts
Posted on 1/27/26 at 2:35 pm to
quote:

The JD6 folks were not yelling and screaming at police.




quote:

They were not carrying sidearms with extra magazines



quote:

and wearing body armor.

Posted by rwestmore7
Member since Nov 2007
1003 posts
Posted on 1/27/26 at 2:40 pm to
Body armor or a legally carried firearm may increase scrutiny, sure, but neither justifies deadly force on its own. Law enforcement training is explicit that equipment and appearance are not substitutes for an imminent threat. Plenty of people wear soft armor because they are afraid of being shot, not because they intend to shoot someone. And that’s where the hypocrisy shows. If this were framed as vigilante self defense like Kyle Rittenhouse, the same people would argue that carrying a gun and wearing armor shows fear and preparation, not intent. Suddenly here it’s treated as proof of dangerousness. You can’t have it both ways.

Regardless, none of that changes what’s visible on video. Five agents on one unarmed person on the ground. The question is still how an imminent threat existed at that moment. If someone has evidence as concrete as the video itself that explains that, I’m open to it. Until then, pointing to armor or speculation doesn’t override what people can plainly see.
Posted by rwestmore7
Member since Nov 2007
1003 posts
Posted on 1/27/26 at 2:41 pm to
Are you stupid or just plain brainwashed?
Posted by jammajin
Member since Jul 2024
1977 posts
Posted on 1/27/26 at 2:42 pm to
Combine that with the likely miss fire of that crappy p320,

Pretti was a radicalized domestic terrorist. Nobody ever said he was a good one or a smart one.

Posted by Robin Masters
Birmingham
Member since Jul 2010
35892 posts
Posted on 1/27/26 at 2:42 pm to
quote:

because they are afraid of being shot,


Now in what likely scenario would someone believe they would be the target of a law enforcement bullet???

Use your head for something other than a hat stand
Posted by Willie Stroker
Member since Sep 2008
16602 posts
Posted on 1/27/26 at 2:46 pm to
quote:

It’s literally in the OP. Body armor in the title is simply a catch all term used for clarity

Show me the best pic of him that shows the body armor or plate carrier.

I have not yet seen it. I just want to understand if this is a trending narrative or if there is evidence to draw such a conclusion.
Posted by rwestmore7
Member since Nov 2007
1003 posts
Posted on 1/27/26 at 2:47 pm to
Hmm... one where the government already shot one protester? Ding Ding Ding
Posted by Robin Masters
Birmingham
Member since Jul 2010
35892 posts
Posted on 1/27/26 at 2:50 pm to
quote:

Hmm... one where the government already shot one protester? Ding Ding Ding


You mean where the protestor was using a deadly weapon on an agent?

Exactamundo!
Posted by Snipe
Member since Nov 2015
16651 posts
Posted on 1/27/26 at 2:52 pm to
quote:

My hunch is that it was a suicide mission and he volunteered for it.


Doubtful.

He was likely just another fool who had been told his whole life that conservatives are evil and you do not have to obey any law or order given by people you deem to be evil or in the wrong. Most of these people are only recently finding out that there is a whole world of reality out there beyond they social media accounts. And in real life "talk shite, get hit" is the standard.
Posted by nealnan8
Atlanta
Member since Oct 2016
4692 posts
Posted on 1/27/26 at 2:58 pm to
quote:

He voluntarily assumed the risk he’d get shot.

As did Ashley Babbit.
Posted by rwestmore7
Member since Nov 2007
1003 posts
Posted on 1/27/26 at 3:00 pm to
wtf are you talking about? The agent took his gun from him where it was stored in its holster that he was legally carrying with a permit. It must be so nice living in an alternative reality.
Posted by Robin Masters
Birmingham
Member since Jul 2010
35892 posts
Posted on 1/27/26 at 3:21 pm to
quote:

are you talking about? The agent took his gun from him where it was stored in its holster that he was legally carrying with a permit. It must be so nice living in an alternative reality.


I was referring to the previous protestor who got killed. The point, which sailed a great distance over your sloped head, was the thought process used by Pretti when he decided to wear a vest. Your claim that he wouldn’t have worn one because that is only something someone who fears getting shot would do is pretty fricking stupid considering….wait for it…he ended up getting himself shot.
Posted by Willie Stroker
Member since Sep 2008
16602 posts
Posted on 1/27/26 at 3:49 pm to
quote:

The agent took his gun from him where it was stored in its holster that he was legally carrying with a permit. It must be so nice living in an alternative reality.

Had it even been established that he had a holster?

I can’t tell if he was just carrying it inside his waistband like some 1970s tv show or if he had an inside the waistband holster. But I have not seen any disclosure of a holster.
Posted by rwestmore7
Member since Nov 2007
1003 posts
Posted on 1/27/26 at 4:11 pm to
Shall not be infringed as long as it’s in a holster. Get out of here with your semantics
first pageprev pagePage 8 of 10Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on X, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookXInstagram