419
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 16 Jun 2025
419 points (99.5% liked)
politics
31035 readers
23 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles. Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing other users of being bots or paid actors.
- No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
- No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have comments or posts removed, weaponize reports, or violate the code of conduct, will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
https://imgur.com/a/z3J25EB
Ah, I see. That is much clearer.
The testimony given is that Gamboa had pulled out his weapon while hidden behind a barrier, and was in a firing position while running into the crowd is supported the video. At the very beginning of the video, it shows him walking, then running, while holding the weapon in his right hand.
I guess if he ducked away to surreptitiously pull the weapon out, he should have… I don’t know, slung it, rather than held it, and responded to the folks who drew on him, rather than try to run into the crowd.
I wouldn’t have stepped out of cover with my hands on it if that were the case. But also, if I were open carrying, I wouldn’t be wearing a ski mask.
Nothing about his actions read proper to me.
I agree that Gamboa's actions were at the very least inadvisable.
Pointing out: he starts running after the peacekeeper fires upon him, not before.
I don't think we know what happened before that video started. Peacekeepers said they shouted at him to drop the weapon. Was he aware of their presence before they shot? What exactly was said?
The eyewitness accounts I've seen so far in the news seem perhaps one-sided and I've been speculating that the police could have put some trust into the statements of the peacekeepers that they interviewed.
Regarding his ski mask, SLC is a ski town. Many people own balaclavas, and I saw many people at the protest wearing them. I saw pictures of people at the Thursday protest wearing them as well. The organizers pointed out to be careful about taking pictures as some people might not want their identities revealed. Personally, I wore a mask.
A guy in a mask with a gun looks scary, and I don't think what happened is surprising. However, many of the right wing militias open carry while wearing masks. They do so because it is legal and is in fact their right. What I'm ultimately saying is, given the evidence available, if I were on some (fantasy) jury, I would so far be thinking "reasonable doubt".
Unfortunately this is exactly the kind of situation these nuts want to happen. "He was just exercising his rights." He was there to intimidate, harass, and be a nuisance. Probably had wet dreams about some lib with a bat approaching him so he could claim self defense and be a "hero" like that other little bitch a few years back.
If a Democrat showed up to a Trump rally with a gun and a mask the cops would dump mags into them without hesitation.
Sure, but he was a leftist in a punk band with lyrics that were very aligned with the values of the protest. Personally, I'm not seeing the right wing mass shooter angle.
Edit: also not really seeing that his intention would be to get a rise out of the libs either... Though if he's a leftist it could be that he despises libs just as much as he despises conservatives. I've just never seen a leftist act with the same intention as right wing militia guys before. But who knows.
https://www.slugmag.com/soundwaves/episode-364-rade/
Honestly I just assumed he was a right wing nut because this aligns so closely with their typical mo.
"This" being the described story from the shooter's perspective. He made assumptions and that's what was reported in the story. I'm not sure how much of the narrative we should assume is correct. Not that they're lying, just that people make mistakes and memory becomes iffy in stressful situations. The video doesn't match the peacekeeper's order of events.
These fucks always try to score legal kills, same as Kyle Rittenhouse and George Zimmerman. It's not new, but innocent people always end up paying the price.