Michael Strickland found Guilty

[Jewboo]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i5WiVwWFRtc

>Conservative blogger, Michael Strickland, a former contributor at The Gateway Pundit and Progressives Today, was jailed in Portland, Oregon in July of 2016 after he pulled a gun on a gang of thugs who were going to attack him at a black lives matter protest.

>In 2015 Michael was jumped by an anti-gun activist who broke his arm in three places at an anti-Second Amendment event.
>Victoria Taft reported on Mr. Strickland’s 21 count felony indictment which you can read in full here.
>Strickland, 37, was found guilty of 10 counts of unlawful use of a weapon, 10 counts of menacing and one count of second-degree

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Strickland_(blogger) (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Strickland_(blogger))



comment at 8chan:

>people with masks approaching you while threatening you

>keep trying to get close enough to sucker punch you

>pull out gun in defense

RIGHT WING TERRORIST PULLS GUNS OUT ON PEACEFUL BLACK LIVES MATTER PROTESTERS

[cheka.]

wow. felonies for threatening to defend yourself

[midnight rambler]

Yet another case of being stupid in a no stupid zone.

[Joshua01]

stay away from the liberal left coast states. They no longer are American territories. I wouldn't set foot out there any longer. The cancer will spread east until we finally take steps to stop them.

[madfranks]

Yet another case of being stupid in a no stupid zone.

I get it, there is a very, very fine line nowadays when you can and cannot act. Today, you literally have to wait until you're on the ground having the shit beat out of you by a group of niggers, maybe 30 seconds from death, before you can legitimately pull a weapon to defend yourself. If you pull the gun 1 second too soon, you will be considered the aggressor. It's a hard truth to swallow, but there it is.

[cheka.]

i still don't get it. he didnt do anything but indicate he would defend himself

[madfranks]

i still don't get it. he didnt do anything but indicate he would defend himself

"Indicating he would defend himself" = "White supremacist with a gun threatening to shoot and murder peaceful BLM activists." Get it now?

[cheka.]

"Indicating he would defend himself" = "White supremacist with a gun threatening to shoot and murder peaceful BLM activists." Get it now?

so he got convicted for warning criminal nigs against attacking him. would he have come out better by not warning, just shooting them as they attacked? he saved multiple nig lives by doing it his way

[TroyOz]

When he saw the nig nogs, he should beelined the other way, nothing good can come from lingering where the ferals prowl.

If they come after you...it's fair game.

[crimethink]

His only error was not going to POST training and getting a badge. Then he could do whatever he wanted.

[midnight rambler]

I get it, there is a very, very fine line nowadays when you can and cannot act. Today, you literally have to wait until you're on the ground having the shit beat out of you by a group of niggers, maybe 30 seconds from death, before you can legitimately pull a weapon to defend yourself. If you pull the gun 1 second too soon, you will be considered the aggressor. It's a hard truth to swallow, but there it is.

No, apparently you don't get it. If you hang out where YOU KNOW there's shit being slung there's a very good chance you're going to get shit on you.

When you spot trouble of that nature the very first thing to do is to safely exfiltrate the area at your very earliest opportunity.

[Neuro]

No, apparently you don't get it. If you hang out where YOU KNOW there's shit being slung there's a very good chance you're going to get shit on you.

When you spot trouble of that nature the very first thing to do is to safely exfiltrate the area at your very earliest opportunity.
Personally I would heed your advice, but on the other hand he had as much right as the BLM protesters to be there, he (apparently) had a right to carry a gun, and he has the right to self defense if his life or limb is threatened. They on the other hand doesn't have the right to threaten him. He was convicted, they weren't, it is an obvious misstep of justice, by a racist court. You can bet that the verdict had been very different if he had been a lone journalist/writer black man with a gun, getting in the way of a KKK-rally. The two situations are certainly morally/ethically equivalent.

[midnight rambler]

Personally I would heed your advice, but on the other hand he had as much right as the BLM protesters to be there, he (apparently) had a right to carry a gun, and he has the right to self defense if his life or limb is threatened. They on the other hand doesn't have the right to threaten him. He was convicted, they weren't, it is an obvious misstep of justice, by a racist court. You can bet that the verdict had been very different if he had been a lone journalist/writer black man with a gun, getting in the way of a KKK-rally. The two situations are certainly morally/ethically equivalent.

How about being realistic and practical? Now there's a novel concept. /s

[Neuro]

How about being realistic and practical? Now there's a novel concept. /s

As I said first I personally would heed your advice. Nevertheless in the situation Strickland got himself in, and which he was within his right to get himself into, he was also in his right to defend himself. And for that a racist anti white court condemned him, and sided with the aggressors!