This happened yesterday in Denver. Competing rallies downtown, Patriot Somethings vs Communist somethings. Guy in Black Guns Matter shirt gets in a yakkety match with a Pinkerton security guard hired to escort a TV news crew. Shirt guy sprays Pinkerton guy with bear spray, Pinkerton guy shoots shirt guy dead. Pinkerton guy charged with Murder in the first.

When will this madness end?

Fatal Shooting in Denver Amid Dueling Protests, Police Say - The New York Times

Attached Images

CA7658E1-5B71-4133-B57C-C45971C3AC53.jpeg (68.7 KB, 218 views)

__________________
“What you got, ain’t new.”

Darwin proof again.

Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk

__________________
Slava Ukraini!

You look for trouble and you'll always find it.

Michelle Malkin's twitter page has dissected multiple videos and pictures of the shooting. Her take on it there was an argument, security guard with ties to Antifa drew his gun, as he was raising it the other guy lets loose with a volley of bear repellent then gets shot in the face.

There has been at least three different spins by the cops and the local news agency that hired the bodyguard. It will be interesting to see what happens and what the real story is. Right now I think Michelle Malkin knows more about it than the cops are admitting to.

JMO, I think we’re just at the start of the crazyness. There seems to be a lot of pent up anger on all sides. So many people not working due to COVID is adding fuel to the fire.

__________________
Vegan by proxy.

With so many videos of the incident, the court case should be fairly straight forward.

__________________
No baby we aint

FTW ^^^^^^^^^!!!!

__________________
Some Might Say.

Unless there’s audio with the video, I had been thinking the video wouldn’t play that big a role. There’s no question that there was a confrontation and the security guard shot the guy with pepper spray.

Won’t everything for security guy hinge on whether he can articulate why it was reasonable for him to use deadly force?

__________________
Vegan by proxy.

A Pinkerton shooting someone at a demonstration, how 19th century.

That incident was a collection of bad decisions by all involved. It seems to be a case of when egos collide. The video is like a perverse display of the force spectrum, I’ll probably see it in a ConEd class next year. They went from verbal to hands on to less than lethal and lethal in no time.

I don’t know where all this is headed, but I don’t think it’s anyplace good. There are a lot of angry people out there, and they keep getting angrier. Some just seem to be angry for the sake of being angry. I suspect this will get much worse after Nov 3rd, as one side or the other will be much angrier.

The novelty has really worn off of 2020. I’d say I can’t wait for 2021, but I’m not so sure it’s going to be an improvement.

__________________
Wheel guns are real guns.

Denver PD stated they recovered two firearms at scene, one from the shooter and apparently the second from the victim. There is more video/audio and still shots of the incident leading up to and including the shot being fired. Have to wonder if the Denver TV stations crew was possibly trying to instigate or stage an incident to film.

I can't think of any circumstance where I'd offensively bear spray a security guard.

At best the Pinkerton guard will probably plead to a lesser charge, probably manslaughter. It won't be too hard for a good defense to show that he was attacked with a debilitating spray, thus placing him in danger from the sprayer. As an employee of Pinkerton, he'll have competent representation via the company.

In a year or more, the case will go to court and we shall all have forgotten about it and he'll probably walk away without too much pain.

__________________
Keep your powder dry.

I saw a little earlier where Pinkerton is saying he isn’t a Pinkerton employee, but may have some type of subcontractor relationship with them. The city of Denver is saying he isn’t licensed to work as a security guard or carry a pistol as a security guard inside the Denver city limits.

__________________
Vegan by proxy.

The news this morning said he was not licensed as a security guard. But, it’s still early... Still, no one should’ve been killed over this. That’s a good reason to stay away from all this craziness.

You spray me with mace or near spray and you can expect a bullet in return. Then again, I wouldn’t put myself in the positions these people do. I would never go to one of these protests regardless of which side I was on. Nothing good comes from a BLM protest and nothing good comes from counter protesters either. Neither side is ever swayed.

"However, after several right-wing individuals and groups claimed, without evidence, that the shooter was affiliated with antifa, Denver Police tweeted that "further investigation has determined the suspect is a private security guard with no affiliation with Antifa."


Yet another tragedy during a time when everything is dialed to max, and providing an echo chamber for unfounded extremist media claims from either side only amplifies.

Stay away from crowds.

__________________
Because of the metric system?

Don't go to protests on purpose, regardless of which side you're on . . .

__________________
Wisdom comes thru fear . . .

If the shooter was unlicensed and was hired by the news station, I see jail time and a major law suit.

__________________
Life Is A Gift. Defend it!

Problem is that I don't thik the winner is going to like the prize.

This has become a HUGE issue with the proliferation of concealed carry by individuals that do not understand the concept of self defense and a justified shoot. Hell, een I don't understand it sometimes other than to say it is an intensive FACT driven determination coupled with an intensive political decision.

What may be justified under a particular set of facts in one jurisdiction may very well get you indicted and possibly convicted of a homicide in another jurisdiction for the identical fact scenario.

A lot of internet commandos and good law abiding citizens are finding this out the hard way.

Caje's advice.... STAY THE F*** AWAY FROM TROUBLE OR SITUATIONS THAT YOU KNOW BETTER. No reason to insert yourself into ANY situation that may call for the use of deadly force. One of the first things asked in these type of situations is why were you (the shooter) even there in the first place-It goes to merde from there. And don't give me any " I won't let those so and so's dictate where I can go" nonsense. Use some common sense

__________________
Forum consigliere

^^^^Preach on, brother!

An awful lot of police continuum of force stuff (information? advice? bovine waste?) spills over into self-defense discussions online. If you're not a full-time, salaried, on-duty police/sheriff's/federal officer, that stuff does NOT apply to you. Ever.

Yep. Those who go to "counter-protest" are usually as dumb as those who go to protest. People answering "a call to arms" or some other nonsense. Nobody's opinion is EVER swayed by these protests or counter-protests. We laugh at the NFAC group while some cheer Proud Boys or some other one.

Shooting somebody, even justifiably, can ruin you, finically and personally. Not worth it. That Antifa soyboy you just shot isn't worth the price of the bullet you used to shoot him.

Lernt me a new word today. Urban Dictionary helped me out . . .

__________________
Wisdom comes thru fear . . .

Show me a rally and I'll show you trouble. I avoid them like rancid food.



------------------

__________________
So very Politically Incorrect

I've seen this discussed elsewhere, and I've seen a short video with still photos of the event in question.

It's really an ugly event.
I won't use terms like "security guard" since there's statements he wasn't a legit guard in that circumstance. Pinkerton denied he was one of theirs.

So, we have "shooter" and "shootee", for lack of a better term.

In the clip I've seen shooter grabs at the shootee for some reason. Shootee slaps him and backs away. Shooter draws as shootee backs away; shooter does not back up himself. Shooter appears to shoot AS the shootee is backing away and spraying;

there is a still image where you see the beginning of the spray cloud, AND you can see the empty shell in the air and the slide still out of battery. In other words, shooter had already pulled the trigger before being sprayed.

So I'm sorry, I can't see any justification of this. One guy is holding his can of spray, so you know what he has. He raises it as he backs away from you, which is a defensive posturing, not an assault. You don't get to shoot him for just that.
As the guy isn't licensed to be out there, he doesn't need to be trying to take the spray away from someone else, or otherwise messing with somebody. That's a matter for police or real security. You leave him alone, and if he sprays you the police will attend to him. You don't get to shoot him for finding him moderately offensive

So; if an angry person 6 feet away whips out his bear spray and points it at a person he's arguing with, what's about to happen?

Mr. Mouth would be alive had he just walked away with his bear spray in his pocket. Mr. Security Guy wouldn't be in jail if he had backed away and had urged his customers to do the same.

Idiots.

I agree with those that make every attempt to avoid these "peaceful protests" that seem as often as not to turn into full blown riots. That being said I've swapped my carry revolver with 5 rounds of 44 special to a pistol with 14 rounds of 45 ACP. Safety in numbers.

These were from another forum, caution- it shows the shooting. I don't want to break rules so take it down if it's inappropriate.


I posted it, because it seems clear to me- guy with spray was backing away.
Shooter was engaged with him prior in some sort of altercation, got smacked in the face with an open hand, and reacted by drawing on him and then firing.

This looks TO ME, like an emotional reaction to being smacked. Not self-defense if I were on jury. And if he's not official security or PD, no justification for his action. He apparently had no authority to mess with the spray can guy.

Added- the shooter is not in any sort of uniform, just a guy in street clothing. Nothing to indicate he is anyone other than another guy in the crowd.

Again, idiots.

10,000% agree about the people involved being idiots.

Since this is a self defense forum, I have a tactical question as it relates to the dynamics of the shooting as it happened, not the mental stability of the parties involved or whether they should have found better things to do that day.

The shooter has a red dot sight. He also has a WML. Pretty sure the WML has a laser. When you look at the hi-res photos on Getty taken by the Denver Post photographer, you can see the red dot from the WML laser reflected on the right lens of the dead guy's sunglasses. From the reflection of the dot, I'm guessing he got shot in the orbital socket. Just a guess.

The self defense tactical question is, the guy that got shot stepped straight back to deploy his OC. From a tactics standpoint, would he have had a better chance of surviving if he would have stepped to his right instead of straight back?

__________________
Vegan by proxy.

My understanding is the Denver City security guard requirements include a displaying visible identification in addition to registration. The shooter seems to have missed the administrative legalities as well as the criminal law elements.

Certainly there is a role for personnel protection amongst the news media. However, the news media effectively brought the shooter to the scene. Perhaps this will result in the media backing off a bit.

I am familiar with the location this shooting occurred. From other video coverage, there was a police SWAT/tactical team within 20 yards of the shooting (likely closer to 10-15 yards). Expect that will also not break in the shooter’s favor.

can we call a murder a murder?

yes, both idiots.

I see nothing to justify the shooting. The spray guy was backing away and opening space, the shooter could easily have backed away too.

I see zero in the picture that tells me I need to obey the shooter- no uniform, no badge, nothing. He's a guy in the crowd, wearing Wayfarer sunglasses, a baseball cap, and an untucked shirt.

I’ll wait for the autopsy and investigative reports . . .

__________________
Wisdom comes thru fear . . .

At this point I haven't seen anything on who started the argument, what was said or what it was about. That's going to make a difference. If the shooter started it, I'd think Murder 1 would be in order. If the victim started it, Murder 2 or maybe Manslaughter. But IMHO, the shooter was dead wrong regardless.

I was expecting another argument about what's best for bear defense

First, I don't believe he stepped back 'to deploy his OC'. The OC was already in his right hand, held down at his side during the physical confrontation. The frame by frame clearly shows the shooter starting his drawstroke prior to the OC coming up. IMHO the victim raised the OC in response to the shooter drawing the gun. Obviously not the best response, but it was already in his hand, so that's what he went with.

To answer your question, many folks train to get off the 'X' with lateral movement. Whether that would have helped, or only delayed the result here is hard to say. The movement is intended to cause the aggressor to have to process more, and give time for 'reaction' to catch up to 'action'. I have seen it work in force on force training, but that doesn't mean it will always work.

Another point I haven't seen discussed:

The shooter obviously trains... that should be clear from speed and shot placement from concealment. What I find disturbing is that he clearly trained to a headshot from concealment, a tactic I see as a countermeasure to body armor: ie. how to engage a police officer. If this is widespread training methodology among those with the shooter's political ideology, the good guys need to be adjusting tactics.

I'd say everyone involved got some of what they deserved.

I certainly don't mean to defend the shooter in this scenario, but body armor is a spreading reality and criminals wear it, too. I've read several times online where folks talked about training for headshots to counter bad guys in armor.

I haven't seen any other footage.

What did the guy with spray do to deserve death?

Whacked another guy in the head? The bear spray didn't start the confrontation & maybe slapping off the shooters hat & glasses didn't either. It all comes down to a shooting is only justified if threatened w/ bodily harm or death. What really started this whole mess?

I've since seen more footage.

The only thing I think the victim is guilty of, is poor judgement (underestimating the situation).
The more I see, the more apparent it seems that he was baited into this.

They were in a group, leaving a rally. Apparently a veterans against antifa type of thing.

The shooter was claimed to be a reporter's "bodyguard", but 1, didn't have the proper authorization to officially act as that, and 2, has a pretty long history of strong leftwing stuff. Been in a number of protests, and apparently helped spread info on organizing.
The reporter and gunman followed a loud agitator (Black Guns Matter guy) around, picking conflicts with the crowd as they left. They interviewed this agitator before, there's some footage of it.

He picks a fight with a group, which includes the victim. The reporter and gunman are on the periphery, filming everything.
The victim turns away from the agitator, leaves the video, and there's a gunshot within seconds. Piecing several different videos together, it looks like this was instigated by the reporter and gunman, to at least get "dramatic footage on film"; but the gunman was all too eager to escalate rapidly. He reached for the victim, who slapped him and began to back away. The gunman drew his gun, and the victim sprayed his bear spray can as he was getting shot in the face.

There was some stuff on the news that witnesses said the agitator was talking with the reporter and gunman, immediately before this all went down.

I'd say the victim noticed the photographer and gunman filming everything and caught on to the game. Came to say something along the lines of "f--- off with this", gunman stepped in.

The victim is on another video, entering the rally earlier, and blocks the camera as he walks by. He seemed to be vigilant of being recorded, and took exception of that. But he didn't seem to attach any danger to it, which was his mistake.

One further observation;

my limited understanding is that this "video" is actually a series of still photos taken by the news photographer, in rapid succession, and not an actual video


It's uploaded to the internet as a GIF, which can be made either from video, or a series of stills. Stills could be why it's jerky, as compared to video compression during the conversion to GIF format. What we see as frames are actually individual photos (as I take it).

There's a gap, missing the draw and leveling of the gun. Goes from reaching into shirt, to gun leveled with shell already ejected in air, and slide slightly out of battery.

Maybe the news crew wanted "dramatic photos" and the camera was flying. But when shooter pulls his gun the photographer might have paused, "*** did he just pull out a gun?"; and then resumes with the gunshot.

Maybe the news crew wanted drama, but wasn't expecting this. If so, they really didn't vet their "security guy" that well.

Here’s a link to the frame by frame sequence of photos that includes the two missing photos. In the article, you need to scroll down a bit for the photos.

PHOTOS: A frame by frame account of the Denver protest shooting

The fake security guard draws his weapon after being slapped, but before the guy that got shot sprays his pepper spray.

Not surprisingly, fake security guy’s lawyer is saying his client saw a pistol on killed guys waist. After killed guy slapped the security guy and stepped back, the security guy thought killed guy was going for his pistol.

__________________
Vegan by proxy.

Saw an interview last night with a guy that was at the rally. While he did not directly witness the actual shooting he said that the TV crew consisted of 4-5 people - the shooter, an agitator, cameraman, producer?, reporter. Further, he said the TV group would move off to the side and huddle periodically, and then the agitator would move out into the crowd followed closely by the shooter and the others. Like most here have said, it was a bad situation to be in. My guess is that when the chips fall shooter will go to jail for a long time, and the other part of the "crew" may have some culpability, and the family of the deceased will end up with a LOT of money from the TV station and company that hired/employed the shooter (if any).

As more of the story emerges, I am coming to the conclusion that the TV crew was trying to instigate an aggressive encounter in order to be "first on the scene". I think they succeeded, but with a lethal outcome. If this hypothesis turns out to be correct, the TV crew needs to be charged with conspiracy and as accessories to the murder. *


* I am not an attorney nor spokesperson for an attorney or legal firm.

__________________
VCDL, GOA, NRA

I saw this mentioned on another forum and wanted to check it for myself. This image is from the photo at the moment of the head slap. I cropped it, lightened it, and sharpened it to bring out the image.

It looks like the guy that got shot could be carrying an FDE pistol in a shoulder holster or vest pocket. It looks like the fake security guard is trying to grab his pistol when the guy that got shot slaps him.

Attached Images

GunGrabCapture.JPG (70.2 KB, 478 views)

__________________
Vegan by proxy.

I’d say this shot is important. Pepper guy points spray at photographer up close, Not-a-Pinkerton steps in, reaches for spray, gets slapped, shoots pepper man in the face.

Note 6 second gap between this shot and next one.

What a mess.

Attached Images

F8E2DDA6-DFB7-40FF-9D4F-A13520FCCB9D.jpg (60.7 KB, 97 views)

__________________
“What you got, ain’t new.”

The victim had a handgun in a shoulder holster on his left side, and it appears the shooter was reaching for that or the pepper spray when slapped. In either case, the shooter made physical contact with the victim (with no lawful authority to do so) and that resulted in the slap.

It's becoming more and more clear that at least four people were involved (shooter, reporter, agitator and photographer) in an organized operation intended to create news by instigating a confrontation and filming the result. I sincerely hope the Denver PD is pursuing a thorough investigation.

From a personal defense standpoint, it's apparent that attending these type of events is extremely dangerous and you shouldn't make any assumption about where the threat is coming from. This was a pro-police rally, and the police were only yards away from where this occurred.

We can criticize the victim in this, but who would have expected to by murdered by 'the Press'?

Be careful folks. The rules we play by are not being observed by the other team.