Video yükleniyor...

Video Yüklenemedi

Bu video yüklenirken bir sorun oluştu. Bu geçici bir ağ sorunundan kaynaklanıyor olabilir veya video kullanılamıyor olabilir.

Ana Sayfaya Dön

Armed Driver Gets Shot By Carjacker, Then This Happened! A man in West Philly was carjacked and shot around seven in the morning. Then he returned fire. That matters because every time one of these stories comes up, somebody says the same thing: “Just give them what they want.”... But based on how this carjacking unfolded, there was no clean window for compliance. The gun came out, the driver was already shot, and now the only thing between him and whatever came next was whether he had the ability to fight back. Compliance is not a contract. There is no rule that says if you hand over the keys, the person robbing you at gunpoint is obligated to let you live. A gun does not guarantee you go home. It does not make you bulletproof. There are absolutely moments where drawing is the wrong move. But this man was shot first, still armed, and still in the fight. That is the whole argument.show more

Colion Noir

590,969 subscribers

23,541 görüntüleme • 21 gün önce •via X (Twitter)

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

12 Yorum

Intuitive Defense profil fotoğrafı

Intuitive Defense21 gün önce

Evil people desire to do evil things. Being armed gives you that fighting chance to get through the situation.

The Unsilent Majority profil fotoğrafı

The Unsilent Majority21 gün önce

If someone points a gun at me, my impression is they intend to kill me with it and I will act accordingly.

regular guy profil fotoğrafı

regular guy21 gün önce

If they point a gun at you, they want to be shot (at least subconsciously) - so give them what they want! 🤣

Mike Kilo profil fotoğrafı

Mike Kilo21 gün önce

I’m sure the carjacker needed the car more than its owner did.

Crooked Joe profil fotoğrafı

Crooked Joe21 gün önce

Thank Larry Krasner for the sad state of affairs in Philly

Rob Morrow profil fotoğrafı

Rob Morrow21 gün önce

West Philly you say? Born and raised?

James profil fotoğrafı

James21 gün önce

You get taken out, you're done.

Millie profil fotoğrafı

Millie18 gün önce

West Philadelphia???

Elevated Tactical profil fotoğrafı

Elevated Tactical21 gün önce

Read too fast, thought Adam Driver got shot

Alex Warren profil fotoğrafı

Alex Warren21 gün önce

Separate from the tactical and legal questions, the after-incident piece people forget is documentation. A current private record of description, photos, accessories, and ownership paperwork can save time when you need to identify or report a missing item.

Louis profil fotoğrafı

Louis20 gün önce

He was 100% correct, I will shoot a car jacker even before he shoots!!!

JaxD profil fotoğrafı

JaxD21 gün önce

Good point

Benzer Videolar

Two men allegedly kicked in his door. One of them brought a gun. The victim reportedly didn’t have one. Then the fight spilled out of the apartment… and one intruder got shot with his own gun. That is the part people need to sit with. The man inside had barricaded the door with a couch. A couch. That tells you he already knew trouble was coming. He already knew the lock might not be enough. But once two grown men kick through your door and end up beating you in your bedroom, the couch has done everything it can do. Now you are gambling with your life. And this man reportedly had to fight for a gun that did not even belong to him. So before anybody says, “See, he didn’t need to be armed,” no. He survived because he was desperate and the other guy was sloppy. That is not a plan. That is luck with blood on it. Be honest: If you knew trouble was coming, would you trust a couch to be your plan?

Two men allegedly kicked in his door. One of them brought a gun. The victim reportedly didn’t have one. Then the fight spilled out of the apartment… and one intruder got shot with his own gun. That is the part people need to sit with. The man inside had barricaded the door with a couch. A couch. That tells you he already knew trouble was coming. He already knew the lock might not be enough. But once two grown men kick through your door and end up beating you in your bedroom, the couch has done everything it can do. Now you are gambling with your life. And this man reportedly had to fight for a gun that did not even belong to him. So before anybody says, “See, he didn’t need to be armed,” no. He survived because he was desperate and the other guy was sloppy. That is not a plan. That is luck with blood on it. Be honest: If you knew trouble was coming, would you trust a couch to be your plan?

Colion Noir

20,972 görüntüleme • 3 gün önce

An armed civilian in Tulsa shot a robber in the head… And the robber still ran across the street before collapsing. Read that again. This is why “one shot, one stop” is not a plan. This man was approached outside a convenience store by two robbers — one with a knife, one with a gun. Two on one. At night. At a gas station. That is one of the worst places to get caught slipping. But he was armed, he was aware enough to respond, and he fought back. That’s the win. But the lesson is bigger than one robbery. A headshot does not always mean instant lights out. A handgun does not hit like the movies. And when your life is on the line, betting everything on one perfect shot can get you killed. Train for reality. Not internet comments. Not movie logic. Not “just aim for the head” nonsense. Because the threat may keep moving. There may be a second attacker. And the fight may not be over when the first round goes off. So be honest: Do you train for multiple attackers and follow-up shots — or are most people still living in the “one shot ends everything” fantasy? Drop your answer below, and send this to the friend who thinks handguns work like Hollywood.

Colion Noir

42,519 görüntüleme • 2 ay önce

“Just give them your stuff and you’ll be fine.” That’s the lie people repeat until a case like this exposes it. A man in London was targeted over what the robbers believed was a £300,000 watch. The watch was fake. He was outnumbered. He had every incentive to hand it over and survive. They stabbed him anyway. That is the problem with the compliance argument. It only counts the people who handed over their property and lived to tell the story. It ignores the people who complied and still got hurt, because they are not around to explain what went wrong. This man was not in a negotiation. He was marked before he ever left the restaurant. A security guard allegedly filmed him, sent the information out, and four men followed him to his car. So where was the compliance supposed to happen? Gun control did not stop the violence. Disarming normal people did not remove evil from the street. It just left the victim with fewer options when evil showed up. If you choose to comply in that moment, that is your call. But do not legislate the rest of us into your victim mentality.

“Just give them your stuff and you’ll be fine.” That’s the lie people repeat until a case like this exposes it. A man in London was targeted over what the robbers believed was a £300,000 watch. The watch was fake. He was outnumbered. He had every incentive to hand it over and survive. They stabbed him anyway. That is the problem with the compliance argument. It only counts the people who handed over their property and lived to tell the story. It ignores the people who complied and still got hurt, because they are not around to explain what went wrong. This man was not in a negotiation. He was marked before he ever left the restaurant. A security guard allegedly filmed him, sent the information out, and four men followed him to his car. So where was the compliance supposed to happen? Gun control did not stop the violence. Disarming normal people did not remove evil from the street. It just left the victim with fewer options when evil showed up. If you choose to comply in that moment, that is your call. But do not legislate the rest of us into your victim mentality.

Colion Noir

47,249 görüntüleme • 28 gün önce

Yes on the videos we have so far. The initial encounter was him filming them. There was no gun being brandished. They jumped out of vehicles to go to try to intimidate him. Unfortunately there's no video yet between then and when they had them on the ground. When they had him on the ground they were pistol whipping him, at first it looked like a baton, but it's actually a gun. They had him down with at least five officers. You got to wait for a second so he tried to stand up they shot him in the back he was motionless after they shot him in the back. Then there were four more shots or more after that unloaded into his body from a posture of standing above him. Not a defensive posture. He's supposedly has a gun. It looks like ICE took something out of a holster. So it's likely that he did have a HOLSTERED GUN in an open carry state that is not a reason to shoot someone to death. He was not brandishing it -- again it was his camera. That was the reason for the initial approach was to intimidate him about his camera. It is perfectly legal to film ice This is out not murder once again. Now there is some sort of speculation on social that a gun was dropped and a bullet went off. That would be the ICE AGENTS who took the gun out of his holster. I'll post some videos for people to see in the order that they happened.

Yes on the videos we have so far. The initial encounter was him filming them. There was no gun being brandished. They jumped out of vehicles to go to try to intimidate him. Unfortunately there's no video yet between then and when they had them on the ground. When they had him on the ground they were pistol whipping him, at first it looked like a baton, but it's actually a gun. They had him down with at least five officers. You got to wait for a second so he tried to stand up they shot him in the back he was motionless after they shot him in the back. Then there were four more shots or more after that unloaded into his body from a posture of standing above him. Not a defensive posture. He's supposedly has a gun. It looks like ICE took something out of a holster. So it's likely that he did have a HOLSTERED GUN in an open carry state that is not a reason to shoot someone to death. He was not brandishing it -- again it was his camera. That was the reason for the initial approach was to intimidate him about his camera. It is perfectly legal to film ice This is out not murder once again. Now there is some sort of speculation on social that a gun was dropped and a bullet went off. That would be the ICE AGENTS who took the gun out of his holster. I'll post some videos for people to see in the order that they happened.

Kristine (@schachin on Threads) 🇺🇦

23,566 görüntüleme • 7 ay önce

Babu Owino: If you give instructions for people to be shot in the legs, Rex Masai was killed; he was shot in the leg. If you kill everybody, who will you rule? You have to know that Presidents come and go, but the nation will still remain intact. You are the 5th President of the Republic of Kenya, you came and you shall leave. Leave this nation a better nation, not a bitter nation

Babu Owino: If you give instructions for people to be shot in the legs, Rex Masai was killed; he was shot in the leg. If you kill everybody, who will you rule? You have to know that Presidents come and go, but the nation will still remain intact. You are the 5th President of the Republic of Kenya, you came and you shall leave. Leave this nation a better nation, not a bitter nation

Citizen TV Kenya

223,132 görüntüleme • 1 yıl önce

The Secret Service shot a man today for carrying a gun in DC. The Secret Service Deputy Director says there was no indication the man was going to shoot the President or VP. But in DC, carrying a gun is “enough” for the Feds to call you an attempted assassin and shoot you.

The Secret Service shot a man today for carrying a gun in DC. The Secret Service Deputy Director says there was no indication the man was going to shoot the President or VP. But in DC, carrying a gun is “enough” for the Feds to call you an attempted assassin and shoot you.

Frankie Stockes

40,779 görüntüleme • 4 ay önce

There was a parent who lost a child to the needle. Not lost to death, which at least lets you grieve and one day stop. Lost to the street. To the years of disappearing, the phone that stops being answered, the front door left unlocked every single night for a decade on the chance the child might finally come through it. And the parent never stopped. Did not move on. Did not decide the child was too far gone. Drove to the worst parts of town to scan the faces under the overpass. Searched for years, going gray with it, burying the hope a hundred times and digging it back up every morning, because a parent does not get to stop loving a child just because the child is lost. And then came the day it finally happened. The child, hollowed out, certain they were beyond all loving, looked up, and there was the parent's face. And neither of them could speak. They just held on, and they wept, the kind of weeping that has years of grief and years of longing pouring out of it at once, the child sobbing the only word they could find, sorry, sorry, and the parent saying the only word that mattered, which was not "where have you been" and not "do you know what you did to me," but only, over and over into their hair, you're home, you're home, you're home. Now understand. That is not just a real story about a parent and a child. That is God, and that is humanity. No one is forgotten by the Father. He did not fold His arms and wait at home for you to crawl back and prove you were worth it. The moment you were lost, He came after you. And the cost He paid to reach the very bottom of your pit was not patience, and it was not effort. It was His Son, sent down below all of it, so there would be no depth where His face was not already waiting for you to find it. So hear this, wherever it finds you. You were never forgotten, not for one second, not in the worst of it. The door has been unlocked every night since the day you left. He is still driving the worst parts of town. He is still scanning the faces under the overpass. He is still weeping over the ones who are certain they have fallen too far to ever come back. And the moment you turn around, you will not hear "where have you been." You will only hear, said over and over into your hair, the one thing that has been true since before the foundation of the world: you're home, you're home, you're home. Stop running. Come home.

There was a parent who lost a child to the needle. Not lost to death, which at least lets you grieve and one day stop. Lost to the street. To the years of disappearing, the phone that stops being answered, the front door left unlocked every single night for a decade on the chance the child might finally come through it. And the parent never stopped. Did not move on. Did not decide the child was too far gone. Drove to the worst parts of town to scan the faces under the overpass. Searched for years, going gray with it, burying the hope a hundred times and digging it back up every morning, because a parent does not get to stop loving a child just because the child is lost. And then came the day it finally happened. The child, hollowed out, certain they were beyond all loving, looked up, and there was the parent's face. And neither of them could speak. They just held on, and they wept, the kind of weeping that has years of grief and years of longing pouring out of it at once, the child sobbing the only word they could find, sorry, sorry, and the parent saying the only word that mattered, which was not "where have you been" and not "do you know what you did to me," but only, over and over into their hair, you're home, you're home, you're home. Now understand. That is not just a real story about a parent and a child. That is God, and that is humanity. No one is forgotten by the Father. He did not fold His arms and wait at home for you to crawl back and prove you were worth it. The moment you were lost, He came after you. And the cost He paid to reach the very bottom of your pit was not patience, and it was not effort. It was His Son, sent down below all of it, so there would be no depth where His face was not already waiting for you to find it. So hear this, wherever it finds you. You were never forgotten, not for one second, not in the worst of it. The door has been unlocked every night since the day you left. He is still driving the worst parts of town. He is still scanning the faces under the overpass. He is still weeping over the ones who are certain they have fallen too far to ever come back. And the moment you turn around, you will not hear "where have you been." You will only hear, said over and over into your hair, the one thing that has been true since before the foundation of the world: you're home, you're home, you're home. Stop running. Come home.

Kirk Rollins

21,168 görüntüleme • 2 ay önce

This deputy is way out of line and you can bet there was a law suit coming after this. The guy is clearly not armed, he even shows the deputy he is not armed. It's almost like the deputy got worse once he saw her was not armed. The slam to the wall was already bad enough but then this deputy took to the next level.

This deputy is way out of line and you can bet there was a law suit coming after this. The guy is clearly not armed, he even shows the deputy he is not armed. It's almost like the deputy got worse once he saw her was not armed. The slam to the wall was already bad enough but then this deputy took to the next level.

Chuckling Charlie

27,003 görüntüleme • 5 ay önce

He thought the gun showing in his pocket made him look dangerous. The criminal saw something else. An opportunity. That is the part people miss. Most people see a gun and leave you alone. But you are not carrying because of most people. You are carrying because of the person who does not care. The person who sees you bent over. Sees your guard down. Sees the gun exposed. And thinks: I can take that. Your gun is not a warning sign. Not to everybody. To the wrong person, it becomes a target. A homing beacon. And now the thing you brought to protect yourself is in another man’s hand. That is why awareness matters. That is why concealment matters. That is why control matters. Because having a gun on you does not replace paying attention. It makes paying attention even more important. Be honest: does visible carry make you safer, or does it make you a target?

He thought the gun showing in his pocket made him look dangerous. The criminal saw something else. An opportunity. That is the part people miss. Most people see a gun and leave you alone. But you are not carrying because of most people. You are carrying because of the person who does not care. The person who sees you bent over. Sees your guard down. Sees the gun exposed. And thinks: I can take that. Your gun is not a warning sign. Not to everybody. To the wrong person, it becomes a target. A homing beacon. And now the thing you brought to protect yourself is in another man’s hand. That is why awareness matters. That is why concealment matters. That is why control matters. Because having a gun on you does not replace paying attention. It makes paying attention even more important. Be honest: does visible carry make you safer, or does it make you a target?

Colion Noir

254,479 görüntüleme • 3 gün önce

JUST IN: Dan Bongino says the shot that Secret Service took to take out Thomas Crooks was one of the most difficult shots the USSS has had to take. Bongino says USSS had a 9-inch window to take the shot because there was a tree in the way. "The counters sn*per team that took out the shooter was a Secret Service team." "[The shot] was one of the most difficult shots that any CS team has taken in a long time. They had obviously seconds to respond." "The shot, from what I heard, there was about a nine-inch window. They had to shoot in from about 400 yards and there was a tree in the way and they still got the shot off."

JUST IN: Dan Bongino says the shot that Secret Service took to take out Thomas Crooks was one of the most difficult shots the USSS has had to take. Bongino says USSS had a 9-inch window to take the shot because there was a tree in the way. "The counters sn*per team that took out the shooter was a Secret Service team." "[The shot] was one of the most difficult shots that any CS team has taken in a long time. They had obviously seconds to respond." "The shot, from what I heard, there was about a nine-inch window. They had to shoot in from about 400 yards and there was a tree in the way and they still got the shot off."

Collin Rugg

4,174,986 görüntüleme • 2 yıl önce

A judge told him to stay away. He came anyway. That’s the part people don’t want to deal with. A court order does not stand in your driveway. It does not lock the door. It does not put a hand on somebody’s chest and say, “not today.” It takes a person who has already shown that boundaries are optional, hands him a document explaining that this boundary is very important, and then it hopes. In Fort Worth, police say one man was not supposed to be on the property because of a court order. He showed up anyway. Then gunfire erupted. I’m not pretending I know who drew first or who was legally right in every second of that fight. But I do know this: Paperwork did not stop him. So stop letting people convince you that a court order is a self-defense plan. It may help legally. It may create a record. It may matter after the fact. But when the person shows up anyway, the only thing standing there is you and whatever you built your safety around. Would you trust the paper, or would you want options? Drop your answer below.

A judge told him to stay away. He came anyway. That’s the part people don’t want to deal with. A court order does not stand in your driveway. It does not lock the door. It does not put a hand on somebody’s chest and say, “not today.” It takes a person who has already shown that boundaries are optional, hands him a document explaining that this boundary is very important, and then it hopes. In Fort Worth, police say one man was not supposed to be on the property because of a court order. He showed up anyway. Then gunfire erupted. I’m not pretending I know who drew first or who was legally right in every second of that fight. But I do know this: Paperwork did not stop him. So stop letting people convince you that a court order is a self-defense plan. It may help legally. It may create a record. It may matter after the fact. But when the person shows up anyway, the only thing standing there is you and whatever you built your safety around. Would you trust the paper, or would you want options? Drop your answer below.

Colion Noir

19,587 görüntüleme • 28 gün önce

Fox News’ Bret Baier: “It is an overwhelming force, and one thing that really strikes you is that this happened in daylight. This wasn’t under the cover of darkness. This was not overnight at 3 a.m. there time. This was when the sun was up. So there is a confidence in this military that they have the ability to take targets out indiscriminately even in sunlight.”

Fox News’ Bret Baier: “It is an overwhelming force, and one thing that really strikes you is that this happened in daylight. This wasn’t under the cover of darkness. This was not overnight at 3 a.m. there time. This was when the sun was up. So there is a confidence in this military that they have the ability to take targets out indiscriminately even in sunlight.”

RedWave Press

327,686 görüntüleme • 6 ay önce

.Ben Shapiro says that even if Pretti was disarmed before he was shot, that doesn't mean the shooting was automatically unjustified: "The question becomes: did the officer who shot him know that he had been disarmed?...If you're an officer... and you hear someone yell gun and then a shot goes off, and you don't know the gun has been removed from the guy, then you absolutely could fear for your life..."

.Ben Shapiro says that even if Pretti was disarmed before he was shot, that doesn't mean the shooting was automatically unjustified: "The question becomes: did the officer who shot him know that he had been disarmed?...If you're an officer... and you hear someone yell gun and then a shot goes off, and you don't know the gun has been removed from the guy, then you absolutely could fear for your life..."

Daily Wire

117,856 görüntüleme • 7 ay önce

A pilot put a passenger jet down on a river and got every person on board off alive. Within days, investigators were asking him what he had eaten for lunch. He told them a tuna sandwich. Then they asked whether he had had a candy bar. Whether he had had a soda. That is not small talk. There is a precise reason those 2 questions could have ended his career, and Tom Hanks lays it out in about 4 sentences. The pilot is Chesley Sullenberger. Hanks played him, spent time with him first, and says the man walked him through the entire script telling him which parts never happened. As Hanks was told it, the stake was money. If the board could establish that the pilot did 1 thing wrong, the insurance on an airplane he puts at 17 million dollars would not have to be paid out. Every question in that room was built for that. It went on for the better part of a year. In the film it takes days, because films cannot afford a year. What was happening to him has a name in psychology. Baruch Fischhoff described it in 1975 and called it creeping determinism. Once you know how something ended, the ending looks like it was always coming, and every road you did not take looks like it was sitting right there, clearly marked, the whole time. Which is why the question "why did you not do this instead" is close to unanswerable. It is asked by people who know the ending, to a person who did not have it. There is a second effect underneath, well documented in aviation and in medicine. The person at the centre of the investigation frequently comes out of it in worse condition than the people he saved. Researchers gave that person a name. He is the second victim. Hanks is 67 when he says this, and what he admires is not the landing. It is a distinction he makes in 1 sentence near the end, and it is the whole reason he told the story at all. He saved everyone on that plane. Then he spent a year proving he had not eaten a candy bar.

A pilot put a passenger jet down on a river and got every person on board off alive. Within days, investigators were asking him what he had eaten for lunch. He told them a tuna sandwich. Then they asked whether he had had a candy bar. Whether he had had a soda. That is not small talk. There is a precise reason those 2 questions could have ended his career, and Tom Hanks lays it out in about 4 sentences. The pilot is Chesley Sullenberger. Hanks played him, spent time with him first, and says the man walked him through the entire script telling him which parts never happened. As Hanks was told it, the stake was money. If the board could establish that the pilot did 1 thing wrong, the insurance on an airplane he puts at 17 million dollars would not have to be paid out. Every question in that room was built for that. It went on for the better part of a year. In the film it takes days, because films cannot afford a year. What was happening to him has a name in psychology. Baruch Fischhoff described it in 1975 and called it creeping determinism. Once you know how something ended, the ending looks like it was always coming, and every road you did not take looks like it was sitting right there, clearly marked, the whole time. Which is why the question "why did you not do this instead" is close to unanswerable. It is asked by people who know the ending, to a person who did not have it. There is a second effect underneath, well documented in aviation and in medicine. The person at the centre of the investigation frequently comes out of it in worse condition than the people he saved. Researchers gave that person a name. He is the second victim. Hanks is 67 when he says this, and what he admires is not the landing. It is a distinction he makes in 1 sentence near the end, and it is the whole reason he told the story at all. He saved everyone on that plane. Then he spent a year proving he had not eaten a candy bar.

Stefan.

210,938 görüntüleme • 18 gün önce

🚨BREAKING: ICE agents just threatened to shoot a U.S. citizen for exercising his First Amendment right to observe and film ICE activities… and it was all caught on camera. In the video, agents come up to a man’s car after stopping in front and behind him, aggressively pounding on his window and yelling: “This is your warning… stop fucking following us. You are impeding operations.” The man says, “This is my house. I’ve got to get to my house.” The agent then tells him, “This is your warning… go home to your kids.” Which is a chilling thing to say when a U.S. citizen is literally driving through his own neighborhood… and being told he isn’t allowed to do so. Then the camera pans to the other window, where another agent stands with his gun drawn. Not holstered. Gun in hand. The man rolls down his window and calmly says, “You should go to church.” The agent replies, “You’re making bad decisions.” Bad decisions… like driving in your own neighborhood? Filming? Breathing? And then the original agent comes back to the car yelling: “You are not going to like the outcome. I guarantee that.” They’re not being vague. They’re not cautioning him. What they mean by “the outcome” is spelled out seconds later: “Go home to your children. It’s Sunday. Did you not learn from what just happened?” This is a threat. This is intimidation. This is armed government agents using lethal force as a warning against constitutional rights. They are telling the public that anyone who observes them, anyone who films them, anyone who doesn’t immediately disappear, can expect the same outcome as Renee Good. And that is exactly how we know the government does not believe that shooting was self-defense. Because you don’t use “self‑defense” as a warning to people who haven’t done anything wrong.

🚨BREAKING: ICE agents just threatened to shoot a U.S. citizen for exercising his First Amendment right to observe and film ICE activities… and it was all caught on camera. In the video, agents come up to a man’s car after stopping in front and behind him, aggressively pounding on his window and yelling: “This is your warning… stop fucking following us. You are impeding operations.” The man says, “This is my house. I’ve got to get to my house.” The agent then tells him, “This is your warning… go home to your kids.” Which is a chilling thing to say when a U.S. citizen is literally driving through his own neighborhood… and being told he isn’t allowed to do so. Then the camera pans to the other window, where another agent stands with his gun drawn. Not holstered. Gun in hand. The man rolls down his window and calmly says, “You should go to church.” The agent replies, “You’re making bad decisions.” Bad decisions… like driving in your own neighborhood? Filming? Breathing? And then the original agent comes back to the car yelling: “You are not going to like the outcome. I guarantee that.” They’re not being vague. They’re not cautioning him. What they mean by “the outcome” is spelled out seconds later: “Go home to your children. It’s Sunday. Did you not learn from what just happened?” This is a threat. This is intimidation. This is armed government agents using lethal force as a warning against constitutional rights. They are telling the public that anyone who observes them, anyone who films them, anyone who doesn’t immediately disappear, can expect the same outcome as Renee Good. And that is exactly how we know the government does not believe that shooting was self-defense. Because you don’t use “self‑defense” as a warning to people who haven’t done anything wrong.

Jesus Freakin Congress

681,314 görüntüleme • 8 ay önce

‼️They Never Play These 911 Calls — “He’s Just Been Shot” And The Rooftop Witness Says It Wasn’t Tyler Listen to the first voices after the bang. Not a press conference. Not Blake Neff. The 911 tape. “Who was shot in the neck?” “Charlie Kirk was.” “He got rushed off in a black SUV.” “Right in the neck, so I don’t think he has long.” “Did you see it happen?” “Yes. I saw everything.” Parking-lot callers: the whole campus is running. A dad’s daughter texts “shoot.” Dispatch puts the school on lockdown and tells him not to text back because the phone will make noise. Then the only person who filmed the figure on the roof before the shot. He stopped recording about five seconds before it fired. He saw a long gun. He watched the man clear the edge, drop, look, run, drop again — tactical movement, all black, face mask, skin covered, about 175 yards out. He thought it was event security until it wasn’t. He reported it on campus that day. He has told Candace the same thing since: that is not the outfit they pinned on Tyler Robinson. Not a t-shirt and jeans. Tactical. And the gun he saw does not match what they are waving in court. There is still no video of Tyler aiming or firing. Dispatch said the same thing the media buried. “All black, black long gun, black tactical helmet, a black mask, possibly a tactical vest.” Then another unit: “on top of the building on the far north side, just east of the library… jeans, black shirt, black mask, long rifle.” One shot. Staging at the roundabout. Meanwhile radio tells units the FBI gave “clear direction not to interview” until they arrive. An officer asks to document that there was no autopsy — death certificate signed by the hospital doctor. Then the side channel: Charlie’s wife is landing, Jesse is grabbing a car, nobody can even agree if it’s Signature or Duncan. Play the tape. Then tell us again the evidence is “overwhelming.” ⚠️If this work matters to you, consider donating. They are trying to cut off the income that keeps this investigation alive. The link is in the post below.👇

‼️They Never Play These 911 Calls — “He’s Just Been Shot” And The Rooftop Witness Says It Wasn’t Tyler Listen to the first voices after the bang. Not a press conference. Not Blake Neff. The 911 tape. “Who was shot in the neck?” “Charlie Kirk was.” “He got rushed off in a black SUV.” “Right in the neck, so I don’t think he has long.” “Did you see it happen?” “Yes. I saw everything.” Parking-lot callers: the whole campus is running. A dad’s daughter texts “shoot.” Dispatch puts the school on lockdown and tells him not to text back because the phone will make noise. Then the only person who filmed the figure on the roof before the shot. He stopped recording about five seconds before it fired. He saw a long gun. He watched the man clear the edge, drop, look, run, drop again — tactical movement, all black, face mask, skin covered, about 175 yards out. He thought it was event security until it wasn’t. He reported it on campus that day. He has told Candace the same thing since: that is not the outfit they pinned on Tyler Robinson. Not a t-shirt and jeans. Tactical. And the gun he saw does not match what they are waving in court. There is still no video of Tyler aiming or firing. Dispatch said the same thing the media buried. “All black, black long gun, black tactical helmet, a black mask, possibly a tactical vest.” Then another unit: “on top of the building on the far north side, just east of the library… jeans, black shirt, black mask, long rifle.” One shot. Staging at the roundabout. Meanwhile radio tells units the FBI gave “clear direction not to interview” until they arrive. An officer asks to document that there was no autopsy — death certificate signed by the hospital doctor. Then the side channel: Charlie’s wife is landing, Jesse is grabbing a car, nobody can even agree if it’s Signature or Duncan. Play the tape. Then tell us again the evidence is “overwhelming.” ⚠️If this work matters to you, consider donating. They are trying to cut off the income that keeps this investigation alive. The link is in the post below.👇

Project Constitution

119,511 görüntüleme • 5 gün önce

CONFIRMED: Charlie Kirk's NECK DID STOP the bullet and was shot from the front, BUT it was NOT from a .30-06 round. It was a SMALLER ROUND. This just FLIPPED the ENTIRE case on it's head because we now know that the gun the FBI showed us is NOT the gun that shot the bullet that killed Charlie. - The front wound is a CONFIRMED "ENTRANCE WOUND," but not caused by a .30=06 caliber bullet. - Charlie's neck/bones did stop the bullet because a fragment was found beneath the skin where they said they did. - An AUTOPSY always shows the gun and caliber in the report if it is confirmed by the doctor, but NO GUN or CALIBER detail were listed at ALL on Charlie's autopsy because it was NOT a .30-06 caliber bullet. - This is why Charlie's neck/bones DID stop the bullet because it was a SMALLER ROUND from a DIFFERENT GUN. Everything you are hearing is what MANY of US have TOLD you from the very beginning. cc: Candace Owens

CONFIRMED: Charlie Kirk's NECK DID STOP the bullet and was shot from the front, BUT it was NOT from a .30-06 round. It was a SMALLER ROUND. This just FLIPPED the ENTIRE case on it's head because we now know that the gun the FBI showed us is NOT the gun that shot the bullet that killed Charlie. - The front wound is a CONFIRMED "ENTRANCE WOUND," but not caused by a .30=06 caliber bullet. - Charlie's neck/bones did stop the bullet because a fragment was found beneath the skin where they said they did. - An AUTOPSY always shows the gun and caliber in the report if it is confirmed by the doctor, but NO GUN or CALIBER detail were listed at ALL on Charlie's autopsy because it was NOT a .30-06 caliber bullet. - This is why Charlie's neck/bones DID stop the bullet because it was a SMALLER ROUND from a DIFFERENT GUN. Everything you are hearing is what MANY of US have TOLD you from the very beginning. cc: Candace Owens

The SCIF

590,467 görüntüleme • 11 ay önce

A lot of you complaining about shooting in 2k25 dont understand how the shooting actually works and are just calling it bad so let me break it down real quick The shooting itself is pretty EASY, if you cant green your first few shots you're just mistiming and need to learn your timing or get better, for example you can green your first 2 jumpshots very easily. NOW LETS GET TO THE PROBLEM. But after say for example you make 2 shots in a row, MOST OF THE TIME 2k will give you NO GREEN WINDOW at all on the next shot, leaving it completely up to RNG (random) whether your next shot will go in (will most likely miss). So essentially 2k is punishing you for greening multiple shots in a row by forcing you to eventually miss your next shot most of the time. In this clip in a ranked 1v1 match, my opponent greens 2 shots in a row then i confidently leave him WIDE OPEN for the 3rd shot knowing that he will 100% MISS because of the algorithm and he does...then i do the exact same thing again after he makes 2 more shots in a row, i leave him WIDE OPEN for his 3rd shot knowing he will miss again and he does indeed miss... You should not be PUNISHED for timing your jumpshot correctly by being given no green window after you make a sequence of shots, THAT IS THE PROBLEM WITH THE SHOOTING...it is not hard to time your shot in general, the issue is after you make a few shots, you're given NO GREEN WINDOW, which is leaving it up to RNG which should not be a thing. And if there's any brainrot kids who can't understand me saying that the shooting is easy but then also saying that the way they made the algorithm to make you miss is bad, i am specifically talking about the times where it gives you no green window after making a few shots, which is not on every single shot... 2k needs to revert this because it should not be impossible to make specific jumpshots, especially after making a few shots you think you would be rewarded and it would be easier to make the next ones correct? Well they made it harder instead.

A lot of you complaining about shooting in 2k25 dont understand how the shooting actually works and are just calling it bad so let me break it down real quick The shooting itself is pretty EASY, if you cant green your first few shots you're just mistiming and need to learn your timing or get better, for example you can green your first 2 jumpshots very easily. NOW LETS GET TO THE PROBLEM. But after say for example you make 2 shots in a row, MOST OF THE TIME 2k will give you NO GREEN WINDOW at all on the next shot, leaving it completely up to RNG (random) whether your next shot will go in (will most likely miss). So essentially 2k is punishing you for greening multiple shots in a row by forcing you to eventually miss your next shot most of the time. In this clip in a ranked 1v1 match, my opponent greens 2 shots in a row then i confidently leave him WIDE OPEN for the 3rd shot knowing that he will 100% MISS because of the algorithm and he does...then i do the exact same thing again after he makes 2 more shots in a row, i leave him WIDE OPEN for his 3rd shot knowing he will miss again and he does indeed miss... You should not be PUNISHED for timing your jumpshot correctly by being given no green window after you make a sequence of shots, THAT IS THE PROBLEM WITH THE SHOOTING...it is not hard to time your shot in general, the issue is after you make a few shots, you're given NO GREEN WINDOW, which is leaving it up to RNG which should not be a thing. And if there's any brainrot kids who can't understand me saying that the shooting is easy but then also saying that the way they made the algorithm to make you miss is bad, i am specifically talking about the times where it gives you no green window after making a few shots, which is not on every single shot... 2k needs to revert this because it should not be impossible to make specific jumpshots, especially after making a few shots you think you would be rewarded and it would be easier to make the next ones correct? Well they made it harder instead.

HankDaTank

538,453 görüntüleme • 2 yıl önce

A masked robber walked up on a man pumping gas. Broad daylight. Nice area. Normal morning commute. The kind of place people tell themselves this stuff does not happen. Then the man at the pump reached for his waistband. He was a concealed carry license holder. And suddenly the robber was the one running. That is the part people need to see. The victim followed the rules. Took the class. Paid the fees. Got the permission slip. The robber? He just woke up, put on a mask, grabbed a gun, and went looking for somebody to take from. That is the real-world difference. One man had to earn the ability to defend himself. The other did not need permission to attack him. And the “nice area” did not stop it. The cameras did not stop it. The only thing that stopped it was the man at the pump being armed, aware, and willing to defend himself. Be honest: Would you rather “just give up the keys,” or have the ability to protect yourself if the robber decides the keys aren’t enough?

A masked robber walked up on a man pumping gas. Broad daylight. Nice area. Normal morning commute. The kind of place people tell themselves this stuff does not happen. Then the man at the pump reached for his waistband. He was a concealed carry license holder. And suddenly the robber was the one running. That is the part people need to see. The victim followed the rules. Took the class. Paid the fees. Got the permission slip. The robber? He just woke up, put on a mask, grabbed a gun, and went looking for somebody to take from. That is the real-world difference. One man had to earn the ability to defend himself. The other did not need permission to attack him. And the “nice area” did not stop it. The cameras did not stop it. The only thing that stopped it was the man at the pump being armed, aware, and willing to defend himself. Be honest: Would you rather “just give up the keys,” or have the ability to protect yourself if the robber decides the keys aren’t enough?

Colion Noir

27,422 görüntüleme • 1 gün önce

#WATCH | Delhi | On the opposition's demand for a statement from the Union Home Minister in Parliament, Congress MP Priyanka Gandhi Vadra says, "Yes, it is not fulfilled. This shows the government does not feel responsible towards the people. This is the forum where they have to answer questions and give statements. There was a huge demonstration. The youth of the nation came out in cities all over; they were beaten up, shot. Does the govt not owe a statement as to how this happened?"

#WATCH | Delhi | On the opposition's demand for a statement from the Union Home Minister in Parliament, Congress MP Priyanka Gandhi Vadra says, "Yes, it is not fulfilled. This shows the government does not feel responsible towards the people. This is the forum where they have to answer questions and give statements. There was a huge demonstration. The youth of the nation came out in cities all over; they were beaten up, shot. Does the govt not owe a statement as to how this happened?"

ANI

24,966 görüntüleme • 1 ay önce