Full circle to the start of the thread.
At the time, it seemed relatively rare, now there seems to be one every other day, sadly commonplace.
I wonder if there really are more now OR just more reported.
Social Media Justice: A "Karen" faces consequences for threatening a Black man with cops
- Thread starter crappycraperson
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik and Imran hold a long overdue conversation about United's awful league form with 1 win in 7. They discuss a disappointing draw at Bournemouth, a not so disappointing draw against Liverpool and a crushing defeat at Chelsea - Is time nearly over for Erik Ten Hag?
Then in a special second half of the pod, Nik welcomes Natalie ( https://twitter.com/natalie_17) to discuss the fortunes of Manchester United Women as they booked a place in the FA Cup Final after a historic first ever win vs. Chelsea.
At the time, it seemed relatively rare, now there seems to be one every other day, sadly commonplace.
I wonder if there really are more now OR just more reported.
Obviously pulling a gun and pointing it at someone is beyond next level, but the mother isn't innocent in all this. Pretty much everyone agrees there.
She threatened to beat their 'white asses' after following them to their car. For what? A pregnant woman bumped into her daughter and didn't apologise. Crazy.
Thank god some semblance of common sense has returned to this thread. There’s a reason arrests & charges have been made in a gun carrying state.
Moving on. Wakey Wakey @Dante ; still waiting for a response on your attempts at gaslighting this conversation.
Not standing for this sh*t even if it is ‘only’ an internet forum; you made the comment below. . .
I asked what their race had to do with it & you then made the below statements. . .
Where do I mention their gender in relation to their emotions?
‘You seem to be hinting’ doesn’t cut it, I’ve not made any comments in that direction & you’ve only bought this up once I questioned you on why race was relevant.
I’ve called them idiots, mentalists [and probably many other things] but I’m curious as to how these are sexist descriptives or being used as such. Basically what the hell are you on about?
Are the descriptors, woman & mother misogynistic now? I’ve actually taken the time to call Jillian [the gun totter] by her name in instances so let’s not drop it.
You can be civil & shed light. If I’ve been a misogynistic &/or racist in the thread neither are my intention so I’d like to learn from whatever it is otherwise this is blatant gaslighting which is pathetic.
I think labelling peoples posts as racist & misogynistic are serious even if it is ‘only’ an internet forum. Racism is a bannable offence so don’t take being accused of it lightly.
Can anyone recommend a mod I can contact to review my posts related to this for both?
Sweet baby Jesus. Being in the karen thread just makes this more funny.I’ve been Amy Cooper’d.
Think the default now is for everyone to pull out their phones & start recording; you then get incidents like the Karlos guy that followed the lady home with a history of inciting incidents but ‘karens’ have been weaponising groups against black men since Emmett Till [& probably long before].
Incidents being on camera remove the ‘he said’, ‘she said’ from the discussion.
Probably the best post in this thread, amazing movieTbh if you don't go around with an intercontinental nuclear missile in your boot, can you even diffuse a parking lot argument?
Hope you can fcuking swim because you’re at risk of drowning in Irony there.
Fair point
And here comes my number 1 fan.
What happened to. . .
Why are you still here?
Or are you back here to get personal again. . .
For whatever reason you’re still dragging out this vendetta from weeks ago. Move on.
Thank you. Nice to know posts actually get read in here. Gaslighting is apparently acceptable in the CE forum now.
Looking at that video of the women pulling out a gun, if you apply the US/state "stand your ground law" whatever people's feeling, I don't actually see she did much wrong and rightly or wrongly doubt she gets prosecuted.
She was calm in the face of aggression, she tried to leave and the other lady blocked her from doing so and started pounding on her car, at this point in accordance to the law, the other lady is ramping up her aggression to where she could cause damage.
So as bad as it looks the lady pulling out a gun as form of de-escalation and to warden the other lady to back off is not that outrageous if looking how the situation played out in parallel to the boundaries of the law.
Heres a similar but much more extreme example where most would think it being a open and shut murder case but instead the "stand your ground" law came into affect and was being applied, eventually though the shooter was charged and prosecuted with manslaughter
She was calm in the face of aggression, she tried to leave and the other lady blocked her from doing so and started pounding on her car, at this point in accordance to the law, the other lady is ramping up her aggression to where she could cause damage.
So as bad as it looks the lady pulling out a gun as form of de-escalation and to warden the other lady to back off is not that outrageous if looking how the situation played out in parallel to the boundaries of the law.
Heres a similar but much more extreme example where most would think it being a open and shut murder case but instead the "stand your ground" law came into affect and was being applied, eventually though the shooter was charged and prosecuted with manslaughter
Last edited:
It's not a simiar example at all. In one case someone is shoved to the ground, while in the other someone is sat in his car, pick a gun, leaves the car and brandishes his weapon.
The whole point is the stand your ground law, in this case the women has a right to protect her property as well. People can have their own personal outrage trial, but its irrelevant if there is a law in place that protects you in committing such acts
That's not the all the point, these are two different situations that will have different laws applied to them. In the first case Michigan brandishing laws are applicable, it wasn't self defense, she left the safety of her car and waved a firearm with intent to cause fear which is illegal. The video that you provided shows someone being shoved to the ground and firing at the aggressor while he was in a vulnerable position.
I can't believe you are being more defensive about the actual shooting
You are completely negating the fact of the women threating her and then proceeding to block and bang on her car trying to prevent them from leaving. Everything that transpired, even if pushing it will likely be within the boundaries of law considering once things de-escalated, she left
yeah... but noI can't believe you are being more defensive about the actual shooting
You are completely negating the fact of the women threating her and then proceeding to block and bang on her car trying to prevent them from leaving. Everything that transpired, even if pushing it will likely be within the boundaries of law considering once things de-escalated, she left
Do you understand that being charged is not the same as being convicted?
Their lawyer will be presenting their case based around what is permissible within the law
do you understand the police dont charge people if they believe their actions are within the law.
Just like the guy who shot somebody in your other video i expect them to be prosecuted and loose their case
Does this same trail of thought apply to all the police justice being dished out
Also it's clearly explained why the guy was eventually charged in the other video having previously not being even though he killed someone..
Last edited:
Because you have to look at the actual context which you seemingly aren't. I can see why the victims attorney claims that the shooting wasn't justified since his client backed up after shoving the shooter but the action happens quickly, maybe the shooter shouldn't have used his firearm but there is in my opinion a clear mitigating factor. In the case of the Michigan case, the action is lengthy, the couple are safe in their car and they decided to leave if and brandish a firearm, it's not a reaction. And they are not blocked, look at where their car actually is when they stop it, they are totally out of the parking space.I can't believe you are being more defensive about the actual shooting
You are completely negating the fact of the women threating her and then proceeding to block and bang on her car trying to prevent them from leaving. Everything that transpired, even if pushing it will likely be within the boundaries of law considering once things de-escalated, she left
Again you are chosing to forget what transpired previously. This only became a talking point because people got to see the full video and not they purposely cut up one.The threats and in your face aggression followed by trying to block them from leaving and banging on her car.
When she pulls out the gun, she was not verbally threating to shoot and was backing off. You can clearly see that the lady with the camera was backing away as well, when that happened the lady with the gun left.
I don't, because previously the couple slowly went back to the safety of their car, they turned their backs at people that were very close to them which means that they didn't actually felt that they were in a life or death situation and they weren't.
You are mischaracterizing what happened previously which was a shouting contest, you are trying to turn it into something else even though everyone's behavior at the time points to the contrary of what you are claiming, you don't walk slowly to your car turning your back to someone who you believe is imminently going to assault you. Which means that at best they started to feel that the use of a firearm was justified when they were in their car.
I can't believe you are being more defensive about the actual shooting
You are completely negating the fact of the women threating her and then proceeding to block and bang on her car trying to prevent them from leaving. Everything that transpired, even if pushing it will likely be within the boundaries of law considering once things de-escalated, she left
Skip to 1.30. As the camera pans up, the daughter shouts ‘ma watch’ as the car reverses; the mother says “oh you’re going to hit me” then gets hit; after being hit she strikes the window & makes another threat. Feel free to argue the mother was obstructing the vehicle but the car creates the first contact.
Someone’s completely negating the facts here & it isn’t @JPRouve
Actually watch the video then take in his comments.
They are being verbally assaulted. They get into their car, roll up their windows which in effect removes them from the verbal assault. The car reverses with enough room to turn away & a collision occurs.
There’s then a choice; either pull away & leave or stop & escalate.
Both sides act terribly here but attempting to normalise the response of a Jillian Weustenberg here for being irritated is wrong.
also @Sky1981 who claimed the man sat in the car and did not draw a weapon - the video clearly shows him outside the car with a drawn weapon... basically exactly what the police said after charging him and the reason the University terminated his contract... he got out the car and threatened people with a loaded weapon... hence he has been charged with felony assault
But hey you were told about this yesterday then refused to admit you were wrong
How about now... still saying he sat calmly in the car and did not draw a gun?
Last edited:
At first I didn't see it but you can see the gun at 1:48.
He still did nothing wrong in my eyes.
If he shot the woman yes we have a case. He didnt. They called the police.
IF I have a legal gun with the proper license I'd do the same thing.
Last edited:
Jaysus. Didn’t realise they both got out of the car with guns drawn. America is so fecked up.
Tbh I wouldn't describe the weapon drawn part as very clear, he's holding it by his side and it's seen very briefly.
You lot are very unfair towards the couple. It's easy for us to discern things from the safety of our home. It's not always 20/20 when you're there without hindsight.
They did not know what's gonna happen. They didn't know is she's not armed. They didn't know if she's looking for trouble. They didn't know if she got back up.
Plus They have to confront the girl, if they run away it'll be a hit and run and they could be charged with legal issue which could end up very costly.
They pulled their gun, tell her to calm down and back off and called the cops. Could have would have but they didn't shoot them. That's where I draw the line. They're not being trigger happy, they did their part trying to deescalate, trying to run away infact, if not for the daughter hitting the car they would have got away and none of this would happened.
I know about BLM and the current issue, but this case is clearly not racially motivated in my eyes. The man and wife did nothing wrong, morally, and substantially and I stand by my view.
They did not know what's gonna happen. They didn't know is she's not armed. They didn't know if she's looking for trouble. They didn't know if she got back up.
Plus They have to confront the girl, if they run away it'll be a hit and run and they could be charged with legal issue which could end up very costly.
They pulled their gun, tell her to calm down and back off and called the cops. Could have would have but they didn't shoot them. That's where I draw the line. They're not being trigger happy, they did their part trying to deescalate, trying to run away infact, if not for the daughter hitting the car they would have got away and none of this would happened.
I know about BLM and the current issue, but this case is clearly not racially motivated in my eyes. The man and wife did nothing wrong, morally, and substantially and I stand by my view.
Brandishing a firearm is illegal, even in shall issue states. People with carry permits should know this.
@Sky1981
I mean, I have sympathy for them because noone should have to put up with what the mother and daughter did, but to react by pulling a gun and pointing it at someone in a threatening way when you are not in danger physically is unacceptable and frankly ridiculous- whether it was racially motivated or not, which I don't think it was.
They just lost their temper because of belligerent people getting in their faces and harassing them for no good reason.
I mean, I have sympathy for them because noone should have to put up with what the mother and daughter did, but to react by pulling a gun and pointing it at someone in a threatening way when you are not in danger physically is unacceptable and frankly ridiculous- whether it was racially motivated or not, which I don't think it was.
They just lost their temper because of belligerent people getting in their faces and harassing them for no good reason.
Probably. But he's guilty on technicalities at best in my eyes. He shouldn't lose his jobs over this.
Has this been portrayed as racially motivated?
I don't think I could really defend the couple here, they seem to be dealing with the initial argument well, I'm not sure what to make of the whole thing there because we didn't see the actual 8ncident. At best you could give them a bit of leeway for the initial reversing towards the lady behind the car, though it's actually a pretty dangerous thing to do. At that point the car is in position for them to drive off, the actions they take after that are on them.
That's exactly how I see it. From the little we know the mother and daughters are way out of line from start to finish and in my opinion that type of behaviour should be punished but the couple's action after they calmly went into their car is also unacceptable, they aren't in the Wild West.
Yes. I have empathy. I would put myself in their position, they lose their job, got a criminal record, just because it's their bad luck they meet this couple on their day out.
Would we lose our cool if it's us and our wife on that position? Remember, they do not know better. We do
I can understand the need to stop and get out of the car though
I wouldn't want unfinished business of bumping someone with my car left unfinihsed.
In a country like America that could be a lawsuit.
oh, and come on, they're not hititng the girl, the girl was looking for an excuse to continue the fight.
IF the woman who had been bumped by the car had a legal gun and a proper licence would she have been justified in pulling it on the driver as she had just had a car run into her?
I didn't talk about the girl being hit, so I don't know why you mention it. And at no point they care about the girl well being or make sure that they aren't at risk of a lawsuit, they went out to threaten them with guns.
let's just agree to disagree we have a different view on this matter.