Posted on 08/27/2017 6:55:02 AM PDT by xenias
FnA
Calling it a flamethrower is like calling a musket an assault weapon. It doesnt mean it’s not dangerous but it’s not a freaking flamethrower, and yes I’ve had a friend spray one toward my face as a joke. Hyperbole does not make a convincing argument.
It throws flames. It’s a flamethrower.
The cops did nothing because the man shooting flames is in a government-certified victim group.
>>Exactly right, but the cop also has the duty to prevent these things from happening and when they can’t apprehend the offender.
I was only addressing the guy who did not think that the thing that threw flames was a flamethrower. The cops, who claim that they can’t retreat, did nothing when this man was attacking people with a flame-throwing weapon. So, the laws of civilization ceased to apply when the paid law enforcement people stopped enforcing the law.
The cops get their paychecks from the bureaucrats. The bureaucrats get their power and donations from the Statists. The People are on their own.
Agreed, but they shouldn’t have to. The Chief should gird his loins and keep order.
Less chance for Flame-Bro to light up and Heather Heyer to get squashed.
Protesters should not be in the street unless it has previously shut down by police barricades and traffic diverted. PRE-PROTEST PLANNING.
We were always taught at weapons requalification training, that you have the right to use deadly physical force to prevent someone in the process of setting fires/committing arson. That’s in NY State Criminal Procedure Law, or at least it still was when I retired in 2003.
Someone points an object spitting flame at me, I’m not going to ask him politely “Hey, is that a REAL flame thrower, and I am in danger?”
I have a family that depends on me. My life and well being are important to me and mine. Period.
“What I find more troubling than the spray can “flamethrower” is the guy holding the giant marigold over his crotch. What’s going on with that?”
Someone is wearing that flower. Probably the person filming the event.
Flower photo-bomb!!
MSNBC already has
Yup. Mostly just scary looking. In the face/eyes, could be a problem though.
Yup, no bias there.
involving white supremacists and anti-fascist activists shows a white nationalist firing his gun in the direction of a black man anti-fascist activist. There, fixed it.
I cannot spot the “gun” in the picture, maybe I am blind...
If they caught a Trump Supporter doing that, it would called a Flamethrower.
Actually, it would be called an Assault Flamethrower.
Right. Where is the gun? Who fired it? First time I have heard of this.
A Nazi Storm-Trooper style Assault Flamethrower.(Ahem!)
There’s other video from other events where liberal bullies are throwing makeshift molotovs, and in one case, lighting a girl’s hair while she’s giving an interview.
This is something the antifa movement considers acceptable.
Clearly so, and blue shirt guy to his left is clearly waiting in line for his turn. In fact, if you zoomed out the shot, you’d probably see a line stretching around the block. Flamethrower guy is standing guard against the pudgy Nazis, thwarting their attempt to horn in on the marigold action.
>
Calling it a flamethrower is like calling a musket an assault weapon. It doesnt mean it’s not dangerous but it’s not a freaking flamethrower, and yes I’ve had a friend spray one toward my face as a joke. Hyperbole does not make a convincing argument.
>
And why the Socialists win the debate(s), each and every time...
Yes, LET’S start using language like the Left: It is *EXACTLY* a flame-flower; a device, by use of a propellant, used to cast a flammable liquid.
They’d use the same to throw YOU into jail (see the recent ‘Mr. Stick’ happenings). Just as they are getting away with conflating ‘white nationalists’ (as if THAT were ‘bad’) w/ racists/KKK/Nazis [let alone casting those groups as ‘alt-Right’ instead of the LEFT].
Course, we all know govt is on the side of the Socialists and the Rights, being part of the Stupid Party, too foolish to know when/how to fight back.
Wow ratchet down your hyperbole about 90%. The only thing someone is going to burn alive with a flaming aerosol can is a few bugs. Even if the guy was close enough and did burn the other guy, it hardly falls in the category of an act that justifies shooting. The guy with the can is a moron, the guy with the was engaging in a criminal act.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.