• partial_accumen
    arrow-up
    132
    arrow-down
    54
    ·
    6 months ago
    link
    fedilink

    A man was shot and killed while exchanging gunfire with Harris County Sheriff’s Office deputies following a traffic stop in north Houston Sunday.

    He wasn’t shot because he was a Sovcit idiot, he was shot because he was shooting at police. Why even mention he was a Sovcit idiot? It doesn’t change the story at all.

    The site might as well have: “Man with blue pants shot, killed during exchange with Harris County deputies”

    • gregorumEnglish
      arrow-up
      135
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      6 months ago
      edit-2
      6 months ago
      link
      fedilink

      FTA:

      Deputies conducted a traffic stop on the vehicle with expired tags and a broken taillight on FM 1960. Sheriff Ed Gonzalez said the man refused to exit his vehicle and identified himself as a sovereign citizen.

      Deputies engaged the man in conversation for over an hour in an attempt to remove him from the vehicle, Gonzalez said.

      Refusing to comply with their demands, he drove away from the scene and engaged in a brief pursuit with deputies before his vehicle was brought to a stop on the corner of FM 1960 and Ella Boulevard.

      After stepping out of his vehicle, the man, armed with a pistol, began shooting at deputies. They exchanged gunfire and the man was shot dead. No deputies were injured during the exchange, Gonzalez said.

      Ahem

      He wasn’t shot because he was a Sovcit idiot

      Oh, yes he was.

      he was shot because he was shooting at police.

      His “ideology” dictated a pathology that led to a predictable outcome. The article is a clear and concise description of the standard sovcit idiot playbook, however cops are usually successful in arresting the dopes before it gets shooty. Not always.

      • Fredselfish
        arrow-up
        81
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        6 months ago
        link
        fedilink

        An hour of talking to the man. Must been white because a black man would not get this treatment if asked to exit vehicle. Matter of fact they probably wouldn’t have asked.

        • bobs_monkey
          arrow-up
          30
          arrow-down
          0
          ·
          6 months ago
          link
          fedilink

          Either way, refusing to get out of your car when a cop tells you to is never going to end well for the driver, regardless of race. Especially in Texas, and doubly so when you try to take off on them. Cops don’t tend to like people flouting their authority.

          • jkrtn
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            0
            ·
            6 months ago
            link
            fedilink

            IDK some power-tripping assholes will take any excuse to open fire. I can respect people who don’t move at all for their own safety. They’ll be enraged and power-tripping, so likelihood of being dragged out of the car and unconstitutionally beaten is high. But they have fewer excuses to pretend they fear for their lives.

            Really cannot drive away, tho.

        • HopeOfTheGunblade
          arrow-up
          14
          arrow-down
          0
          ·
          6 months ago
          link
          fedilink

          You know what amazes me, is that there are black sovcits. I saw video one of them shot lately, and honestly I appreciated the cops being as boundedly patient with him as I’ve seen them be with white sovcits, but holy shit I do not get how black people are willing to play that particular game given all of the times the cops have, in very genteel language, failed to uphold professional standards when interacting with someone with more than a minimal amount of melanin.

          • Fredselfish
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            0
            ·
            6 months ago
            link
            fedilink

            Really didn’t know that, thought it was white hicks that believed in that crap.

            • Serinus
              arrow-up
              15
              arrow-down
              0
              ·
              6 months ago
              link
              fedilink

              The real lesson we should get out of all of this is that we’re not that much different.

              White people should absolutely care about Black Lives Matter, even just for selfish reasons. Because as soon as a cop decides, he will treat you or your kids in the exact same way. They have a predilection to treat black people as inferior, but as soon as you do anything they don’t like you’re in the exact same bucket.

              We should all be on the same side, and it’s for some kind of real police accountability.

        • tate
          arrow-up
          13
          arrow-down
          0
          ·
          6 months ago
          link
          fedilink

          Sovereign citizen is an extreme delusional fantasy that only the whitest idiots are entitled enough to indulge.

          • halcyoncmdrEnglish
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            6 months ago
            edit-2
            6 months ago
            link
            fedilink

            I say we indulge them and take that to its logical conclusion.

            Sovereign citizen? Ok so not a citizen of the United States. Do they have a Visa to be in the country? No? Then they’re here illegally and should be deported. Process them like any other illegal immigrant.

            In the meantime, we all know they’re actually US citizens, but if they keep claiming they aren’t a citizen then they obviously must have stolen that citizen’s identity. Process it that way.

            They’ll very quickly admit they are actually a US citizen, and thus must comply with US laws, when they’re looking at being deported to a country they know nothing about and losing everything they have here for fraud and identity theft.

            • EmpathicVagrant
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              0
              ·
              6 months ago
              link
              fedilink

              If they truly believed any of what they utter they would have done the paperwork to relinquish their citizenship.

      • SolidGrueEnglish
        arrow-up
        15
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        6 months ago
        link
        fedilink

        I misread your post, but the prima facie is that he drew a weapon on law enforcement, that as a result.of being a sovcit idiot.

        Chorine in the gene.pool. What a bitch.

      • SolidGrueEnglish
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        6 months ago
        edit-2
        6 months ago
        link
        fedilink

        deleted by creator

      • partial_accumen
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        27
        ·
        6 months ago
        link
        fedilink

        He wasn’t shot because he was a Sovcit idiot

        Oh, yes he was.

        Lots of Sovcit idiots are pulled over and NOT shot.

        If a Sovcit is pull over and not shot, and a Sovcit is pulled over and shot, the status of the idiot being Sovcit or not doesn’t make them be shot. Its when the idiot starts shooting at police he’s shot, just like when non-Sovcit idiots shoot at police, they’re shot.

        So no, the idiot being sovcit didn’t change the outcome.

        • TheDoozer
          arrow-up
          22
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          6 months ago
          link
          fedilink

          Being a sovcit led to the altercation which led to the shooting which led to the death.

          Just because not every sovcit gets shot doesn’t mean his being sovcit isn’t relevant. Not everyone who pulls a sword on police gets shot, but pulling a sword on police would be relevant if the person pulling the sword out got shot.

        • gregorumEnglish
          arrow-up
          12
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          6 months ago
          edit-2
          6 months ago
          link
          fedilink

          Yeah, but this guy wasn’t “lots of other sovcits”. He was this guy who took it way too far and suffered the consequences of his batshit ideology in a very predictable way. He did not commit his actions in a vacuum— he followed a very specific script of escalation in accordance with sovereign citizen ideology, and that is what is to blame, for it’s that influence which is undoubtedly what led him to this very predictable end.

          The article (which I quoted) spells that out very clearly and unambiguously.

          • partial_accumen
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            21
            ·
            6 months ago
            link
            fedilink

            he followed a very specific script of escalation in accordance with sovereign citizen ideology, and that is what is to blame, for it’s that influence which is undoubtedly what led him to this very predictable end.

            If your statement is true, why don’t all Sovcit idiots engage in gunfire with police, if its prescribed that way in their batshit insane ideology?

            • gregorumEnglish
              arrow-up
              17
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              6 months ago
              edit-2
              6 months ago
              link
              fedilink

              This isn’t a conversation about ALL sovcits, just this one and what they did. Besides, since when do adherents to any beliefs system always follow every tenet, or even universally agree on what they even are?

              lol, your arguments are fallacious and spurious

            • CrashumbcEnglish
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              6 months ago
              link
              fedilink

              Their cowards? Many people talk a great game about their ideology but fail to follow through.

              Many(most?) religious texts require stoning people to death for violating certain rules. Just because most don’t, doesn’t mean it isn’t relevant if one person does because of that text

      • inb4_FoundTheVegan
        arrow-up
        26
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        6 months ago
        link
        fedilink

        the man refused to exit his vehicle and identified himself as a sovereign citizen. Deputies engaged the man in conversation for over an hour in an attempt to remove him from the vehicle.

        It’s obviously relevant context. This situation wouldn’t exist if he wasn’t a sovidiot.

      • Steve
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        0
        ·
        6 months ago
        link
        fedilink

        Its implying a motive

    • Optional
      arrow-up
      40
      arrow-down
      0
      ·
      6 months ago
      link
      fedilink

      Why did he open fire on the cops?

      Meth? Personal grudge? Former cop whistleblower fighting for his life? Just hates cops and shoots at people all the time? Suicidal? It’s part of the Who What Where Why When formula.

      It’s a valid question, and valid to include in the story and, yes, in the headline.

      • Arbiter
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        0
        ·
        6 months ago
        link
        fedilink

        The article says he may have had felony warrants.

        • bobs_monkey
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          0
          ·
          6 months ago
          link
          fedilink

          Probably not the first time this yoyo thought laws don’t apply to him. Special little snowflake, that one.

    • jordanlund
      arrow-up
      23
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago
      link
      fedilink

      The fact that he was a SovCit idiot prompted him to shoot at the cops. It’s relevant background.

      • CaptainSpaceman
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 months ago
        link
        fedilink

        Except they dont say “gunfire exchange” so the headline def means to slant towards sovcit being the victim

        • jordanlund
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          0
          ·
          6 months ago
          link
          fedilink

          You have to read more than the headline:

          “After stepping out of his vehicle, the man, armed with a pistol, began shooting at deputies. They exchanged gunfire and the man was shot dead. No deputies were injured during the exchange, Gonzalez said.

          • CaptainSpaceman
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            6 months ago
            link
            fedilink

            Im just commenting on the clickbait and slanted headline and its intended effects.

            I did read the article and thats how I came to see the slant, and why I chose to comment on it.

        • kent_ehEnglish
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          0
          ·
          6 months ago
          link
          fedilink

          the headline def means to slant towards sovcit being the victim

          Or lazily slanting towards ACAB.

    • interdimensionalmeme
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago
      link
      fedilink

      That would be like describing 9/11 as “Man flies plane into building, twice”. I imagine the cops screamed at him to submit, he refused then violence.

    • WarmSoda
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      6 months ago
      edit-2
      6 months ago
      link
      fedilink

      Because they had a conversation for an hour and a half talking to the guy before he drove off on them. That’s an hour and a half of sovcit circle talk bullshit.