"...What's the whole story here? Was he antagonizing anyone? I'm sure @JackPosobiec knows the whole story and wouldn't post something without context. Right? I mean, I see things objectively, without bias, so I like to get the whole side rather than have biases blindly confirmed..."
Gee. I think this commenter had a point. After all, I am sure there was a valid explanation of why 20 guys appeared in a rush to surround and beat someone...Jack Posobiec is just a partisan hack.
I am certain somebody was disrespected. The guy probably didn't avert his eyes and look at the ground. Heck, even stupid birds know enough not to look a violent predator in the eyes.
That's just asking for it.
I was gratified to read the post of this objective, unbiased Twitter user.
/s
> I am sure there was a valid explanation of why 20 guys appeared in a rush to surround and beat someone <
Oh, yes. There’s is certainly more to this story. It would be of value to society to know what the details are. And I tend to agree with you. This is most probably a disrespect thing, and not a robbery thing.
Not that the victim deserved it, of course. Heck, he might not have even known that he did something “wrong”. It’s just part of the joy of urban living, I guess.
I read hit response also and noted his virtue singling attempt oat redirection via “unbiased questioning)
Of course, he wants us to ignore ethe fact that there is no excuse for a large group of men to physically assault another man when no PHYSICAL provocation occurred.
Even assuming the guy was verbally aggressive it does not excuse this feral attack from a mob.”
So, when eye contact "baits" a violent predator into attacking, be ready to kill it.