When you have to invent a strawman like that, you have an extremely weak position.
I don’t recall seeing anyone post that there were no gang members involved in any fight at all. So you are arguing against a position that nobody here has put forth.
What has been stated is that there was at most ten or twenty people out of over a hundred and seventy involved in any brawl that occurred and that the undercover officer seen in the photographs may have incited said brawl...which if incited by wearing false colors would still be illegal activity on the part of whatever gang members may have joined in.
In no way does said brawl justify shooting or arresting any non-participants.
“In no way does said brawl justify shooting or arresting any non-participants”
Of course not.
I do not see how your post relates to anything I posted.