It’s long past time that a lot of these dangerous criminals get shot
No question about it
If they know there’s no consequences to their actions thrylll keep doing it
CBS, usually among the more staid of the corporate networks, declares in that editorializing tone characteristic of the New York Times: “A white bar owner in Omaha shot and killed a black protester. He won’t face charges.” The title, helpfully stripped of the rather important context of self-defense, has been blasted across social media. Anotherracist hate crime has been committed! Time for more cities to burn?
The Washington Post leads with this title: “ ‘What about James?’ Killing of black protester fuels more anger in Omaha.” Helpfully, the article informs us that Scurlock’s death “sparked discussion on [Omaha’s] legacy of racism,” a topic the writer finds pertinent to a bar owner defending his store from rioters and looters.
Perhaps most egregious of all, however, are the articles that shamelessly pander to the partisan proclivities of readers. Vice’s piece, which also places race front and center in a title that does not mention self-defense, ends by pointing out that Gardner is a self-identified libertarian and that he had posed for a photo with Donald Trump Jr. in 2017. A less informed reader might wonder what relevance such details have to the story, but the logic is simple: liking Donald Trump Jr. is evidence of a hate crime. It’s obvious.
Raw Story gets right to the point by mentioning that Gardner is “Trump-loving” in the headline. The Cut takes care to point out that Gardner “wrote a Facebook post that disparaged transgender women” in 2016, and claims in the headline that Scurlock was “shot and killed while protesting police brutality” (as opposed to shot and killed while assaulting a man trying to defend his life and property, as actually happened).
Elsewhere in Philadelphia, Police Chief Danielle Outlaw has declared that “vigilantes” using weapons in defense of lives & property & country “will not be tolerated.”