I don't know who that is but if I did I would still disagree with you in that it has been shown to be problematic to post names right after shootings.
If they are going to post others, post them all. All or nothing. Just don’t base it on race or what [uck fay]ing pronoun one is using.
Libs of TikTok posted something about the shooting in Maryville with the whole “you won’t hear about this because it doesn’t fit the agenda” bit and I for one just wish people didn’t have to use every awful thing that happens as a football
You don't know this, at all. It simply fits the narrative of what you want to believe. There could be all kinds of considerations here, like different cities' and police departments' potentially different policies and so on and so forth. I always hate the "You know if...." stuff if there's not much to support the idea more than one's own perceptions. You believe it to be true, ok. But, that doesn't make it so, especially if there's nothing more to the argument than "you know".
I’m all for not making these shooters famous. I also think the shooters being juveniles plays a big part in their identities not being released yet either. Not sure why they would be at this point.
This was inner city gun violence, likely from some disrespect, which happens all day everyday, but usually not at a parade. Some teenage punk with shit parents.
Anybody who can recognize an unsupported opinion. Yes, I know you're trying to play it off here as your usual schtick of being the unfortunate target of know-it-all judgy liberals, but you made a statement with zero supporting evidence as to whether it's true or not, just what you "believe". Anyone on the political spectrum presenting an opinion as one they simply "believe" to be true is inherently not as equal to the one providing support.
So uni you are sticking with “worried about copycats”? Ok. I don’t think that valid at all. More laughable considering the circumstances
I don't have any solid opinion on the matter and haven't expressed one, either, as I don't have anything other than them being minors.
Rittenhouse was a minor. Name was out pretty quickly. Minors being old enough to use a gun on somebody but protected because they are minors seems off to me. Kinda lose your I’m just a minor status when you shoot people, imo.
but but, completely unrelated kid with face paint was reported on by some Deadspin reporter complaining once and their name coming up when they voluntarily spoke out on the deceptive reporting, Uni! Why did the police do it differently than a completely different person on a completely different matter!? Must be a conspiracy against white people. Has to be!
Doesn’t need to be all that drama. Kid and his family labeled racist because he painted [uck fay]ing chief colors on his face like a damn Chief. Outed and attacked, by the left. Just another point to show the absurdity of some. Just take the point whether you like it or not. Your reasoning of “copycat concern” is ridiculous. The minor reasoning doesn’t make sense when you consider other minor names not being protected.
They are still "innocent until proven guilty", though. And, Rittenhouse was in Wisconsin while these guys were in Missouri. The policies may be different in the different places or changed since then, or even something we haven't thought of considering. But, it is probably better to seek out reasons which confirm your own bias instead of realizing you just don't know, I guess.
ONE guy wrote an opinion and didn't use a name. ONE guy. And look what you are stretching it into. You bringing up that kid makes no sense since 1) his name wasn't in the story and 2) it is completely unrelated... My lord, one guy writes a story and it is "the left." Almost like you have a buttload of preconceived ideas.
Yeah there were no attacks on the kid and family from the left at all. Just ONE GUY! Whatever. Just glad no more copycat gang parade shootings happening because names weren't released.
