Wounded police officer sues BLM for inciting violence

You have connect the dots to this particular act or it is irrelevant. Vague claims that the BLM has some bad actors somewhere who committed criminal conduct in the last couple of years is not going to show responsibility for this shooting. This shooter may not even be aware of these prior acts, by people he has never heard of in a county miles away, let alone that those acts impacted on his choices?. How are you proving there was a proximate cause to this specific crime?

 

When did Fox News insinuate to go out and commit a violent act?

Inquiring minds want to know.

 

You can keep up this splitting hairs game, but this so called lawsuit is going nowhere.

 

And who exactly is the leader of the movement?

 

Honestly I would be surprised if this went anywhere. When you join the police you acknowledge that you may be injured or even lose your life on the job. You're expected to deal with those situations when they occur. If a judge ruled in this officer's favor then what's to stop the police from suing anyone else if they get hurt on the job? This could set a precedence that could be a very slippery slope.

 

I'm guessing you didn't read the article.

DeRay Mckesson is the main one.

 

Good. BLM and anti-FA are domestic terror groups. To hell with both of them.

 

Liberals dismiss this, but boy did they go ape **** over a poster connected to Palin apparently convincing someone to shoot

How interesting. Hmmmm

 

Great.

Now pretend that's the argument to defend a KKK member.

 

Okay....I am pretending. Now what?

 

Nothing. I'll just remember it for the next time someone whines about an organization whose last attributed death was in the 80's.

 

Does any of this pretending have anything to do with my point on how difficult it is to get an incitement charge to stick or use it as the basis of a lawsuit secondary to appellate court support of the first amendment? I was making a point about a legal case.

 

Here's more:

http://hotair.com/archives/2017/07/...ficer-sues-black-lives-matter-deray-mckesson/

Injured Baton Rouge Police Officer Sues Black Lives Matter, Deray McKesson
JOHN SEXTONPosted at 7:21 pm on July 7, 2017

The officer who is suing the protest group, and five of its leaders, is not named in the lawsuit itself, but based on information in the suit it appears he is Sheriff’s Deputy Nicholas Tullier. Tullier was severely injured during the attack last summer by Gavin Long. From CBS News:

During the ambush, Long shot Tullier in the head, stomach and shoulder, leaving him with brain damage. By December, the 42-year-old father of two had emerged from a vegetative state, regained some movement of his body and was able to communicate nonverbally…

Friday’s lawsuit claims Mckesson was “in charge of” a July 9 protest that “turned into a riot.” Mckesson “did nothing to calm the crowd and, instead, he incited the violence” on behalf of Black Lives Matter, the suit alleges.

The suit describes Long as an “activist whose actions followed and mimicked those of” the sniper who killed officers in Dallas days earlier. The suit also claims Black Lives Matter leaders incited others to harm police “in retaliation for the death of black men killed by police” and “all but too late” began to denounce the shootings of police after the Baton Rouge attack.
Officer Tullier has had his life destroyed by Gavin Long. And there’s little doubt at this point that Gavin Long’s motivation was exactly what it seemed to be, i.e. he wanted to attack police over recently reported police shootings of black men. He had even searched for the home addresses of the two officers involved in the shooting of Alton Sterling.


Here I’ll add the usual caveat that I am not a lawyer. With that said, what I’m not seeing in this case is the incitement to kill. Where is the direct link between what Deray McKesson does and what Gavin Long did. The closest I see from the news reports is the claim that McKesson wasn’t quick to denounce the Dallas shooting which took place about a week before the Baton Rouge shooting. I’m not even sure if it’s true that McKesson didn’t denounce it, but even assuming it is that seems like a thin reed on which to base the case.

I’m not denying that both Long and McKesson were inspired by the same events. I’m not even opposed to the idea that Long was following some of what BLM was saying about these incidents, though I haven’t seen proof of that. But, ultimately, Gavin Long was fairly clear that he believed “100% of revolutions, of victims fighting their oppressors… have been successful through fighting back, through bloodshed.” He felt violence was the only way police behavior would change.

So am I defending Black Lives Matter and Deray McKesson here? There have been many incidents where BLM supporters crossed a line to what might be considered incitement to violence, i.e people marching in the street chanting “What do we want? Dead cops!” or others chanting “Pigs in a blanket, fry ’em like bacon!” In Deray McKesson’s case, he has engaged in some conspiracy theorizing about the death of Sandra Bland, which was irresponsible. But McKesson has clearly taken the position that protest (and tweeting) can change things. He has not, so far as I’m aware, suggested murder was necessary, much less openly urged people to shoot cops.

To be clear, I’m not a fan of BLM and Deray in particular, though I could support some of the reform ideas they also support such as body cameras for police officers. My objection to BLM is that the movement has been built on a foundation of lies, first about the Trayvon Martin case, then about the Michael Brown case (“Hands up, don’t shoot!”), then the Sandra Bland case and so on. Even after the truth comes out in each instance, BLM leaders continue to wink at the falsehoods because they are effective at getting people into the streets. That’s not to say there aren’t some real police shootings worthy of outrage. There are. But the highest profile cases, the ones that have kickstarted BLM and generated the most media and attention, often don’t match up very closely with the narrative BLM activists are promoting.

What’s really frustrating about this, of course, is that the left frequently does not take a consistent approach to violence committed by someone against the left. We all know what happened with Sarah Palin and Jared Loughner. The facts didn’t matter so long as the far-left could claim a right-wing “climate of hate” was responsible. When the same “climate of hate” argument is turned around after an incident like the one in Dallas, or Baton Rouge, or Alexandria the climate of hate argument is suddenly of no interest.

So here it is. I’m being as consistent as I can. Protesters, even dishonest ones like Deray, aren’t responsible for a person who decides to get violent for the same cause, just as pro-lifers aren’t responsible for every person who shoots up a Planned Parenthood. But if we’re not going to apply the “climate of hate” argument in this case, then we shouldn’t apply it in any case.

 

It's not difficult at all.

This group is no different than the KKK, and they were prosecuted just fine.

 

When anarchists are videoed chanting threats like "What do we want? Dead cops" and "Pigs in a blanket, fry 'em like bacon." They should be arrested for making terrorist threats. If that's what they want to stand for, that's what they can go down for.

 

Got a link?

 

Yea..... that would be nice if it were true however, it isn't people of BLM are going to court.

 

They should change their name to BLMOWEBC

Black lives matter only when ended by cops. That's what it always ment.

 

This is true. Blacks in Chicago can kill more blacks in one weekend than cops in an entire year.

 

For what, that the KKK was prosecuted?

 

LMAO...What a hypocrite. Maybe if cops weren't running around murdering blacks just for the hell of it, BLM wouldn't need to exist.

 

Cops are running around murdering blacks for the hell of it? Where the heck do you live?

 

No prosecuting is easy. All you need is a grand jury, a probable cause showing and a prosecutor with an ego. Winning the case and any appeals is the hard part. Got a link to a conviction on an incitement to violence case involving the KKK in the last 30 years, that was not overturned. Now it is easier to successfully sue a defendant in civil court for incitement and damages. Got any links to successful efforts there against the KKK in the last 30 years that were not overturned

Remember this is about incitement to violence!

 

Sure.

Here you go.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/11/12/klan.sued/

http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/11/14/klan.sued.verdict/index.html?eref=rss_us

That took all of 30 seconds.

 

Buehler? Buehler?

I've got another one if you need it.