all 14 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 26 points 1 year ago (7 children)

As I can interpret, from this horribly written article:

A man (Arturo Gamboa, 24) was seen ducking behind a wall and grabbing a rifle (an AR-15 is how it's named in the story). 2 men in bright vests (peacekeepers. as in..who? It's not clear who they are) confronted Arturo with pistols drawn. Arturo raised his rifle and moved toward the crowd, and the peacekeepers opened fire. They injured Arturo and killed Arthur Folasa Ah Loo, 39. Arthur was an innocent bystander.

Arturo has been charged with murder for creating the situation that lead to Arthur's death. The peacekeepers remain unidentified.

  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] [S] 4 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    The peacekeepers were, I believe, working with the protest organizers. They have people in bright vests keeping people in the right designated areas, attending to emergencies, or giving armed response when shit goes down.

    You have no idea how psyched I am that they are armed. Well, not happy that this is where we've ended up, but about the fact that they're out there ready to defend the people. This isn't the first video I've seen about them jumping into action with this sort of "armed maniac" situation.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    I saw another post here with pictures of this guy carrying his rifle at other protests. He may have just be a leftist 2nd amendment enthusiast.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] [S] 1 point 1 year ago (3 children)

    Who was so enthusiastic he felt like he had to raise his rifle and move towards the crowd with it, to show his enthusiasm?

    I think he was about as leftist as the people on Lemmy who were super vocal about Gaza and the US economy, before the election, and then moved on and stopped caring about any of those issues or their relationship to the US presidential administration as soon as the election happened.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    I really can't tell what "raised" means in this context. It doesn't say anywhere that he pointed his rifle at anyone. There isn't enough information in this story to infer intent. And I definitely can't deduce the political leaning of someone barely mentioned in a news story, regardless of your feelings on Gaza and the economy.

    1. He had a rifle.
    2. He was shot by unnamed people.
    3. The unnamed people also killed a bystander.
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] [S] 0 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    I really can’t tell what “raised” means

    "Raising a rifle" has a single fairly unambiguous meaning to most people I know; although we have only the story's word for that being what happened, it's not like a confusing type of description of events, along with the other elements (him retrieving the rifle instead of having it carried with him, running towards the crowd ignoring people trying to talk with him, and so on.) I actually think they did a pretty good job of explaining the circumstances which sort of clearly point to one conclusion, without doing anything other than presenting the factual circumstances.

    There isn’t enough information in this story to infer intent.

    If we assume that what's in the story is accurate, then yes, to me there is.

    And I definitely can’t deduce the political leaning of someone barely mentioned

    Correct. So why did you speculate that he may have been a leftist? I never said anything about his political leaning or the underlying motives.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    “Raising a rifle” has a single fairly unambiguous meaning to most people I know;

    Yep, it sure does. But this is a poorly written article from The Guardian. I'm not sure Brits know what an AR-15 is.

    If we assume that what’s in the story is accurate, then yes, to me there is.

    Don't assume anything. It makes you an ass.

    why did you speculate that he may have been a leftist?

    Because it's speculation. I see nothing in this one, poorly-written story that says anything other than some armed people in vests shot someone else carrying a rifle, and killed a bystander in the process. I'm almost certain the guy with the rifle didn't shoot anybody, but that's just...ahem...speculation.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] -8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (5 children)

    Police shoot ‘No Kings’ demonstrator to death at Utah protest.

    Edit: Reading comprehension.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] [S] 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    As it happens, the world is more complex than your pre-established prejudices you jump to. The police's action was to find and arrest the actual shooter, which is, believe it or not, a good thing.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    It was a genuinely rough read with all the passive voice.

    But yeah, okay, I did totally believe a cop shot someone to death. I've been conditioned to expect it, because it happens so frequently.

    You can dial it back now.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] [S] 2 points 1 year ago

    It's literally in the subtitle: "Arthur Folasa Ah Loo, 39, was apparently shot by member of event’s peacekeeping team." And then at the beginning of the story, it explains in detail the situation, which honestly wasn't all that complex, a short direct event with 3 people involved in it. I and apparently all the downvoters managed to read it and make perfect sense of it.

    You just couldn't understand it because of your prejudices. You can only draw one type of conclusion in this type of situation, and this wasn't it, so you couldn't comprehend and reached a totally different conclusion and then broadcasted it to everyone who would listen. It had nothing to do with passive voice. And now, you're doubling down on the same prejudices that led you to be unable to read the article and make sense of the clear explanation. That's why I was kind of blunt with you: Because you're going to keep failing to understand the world, sometimes in situations that are a lot less clear-cut and immediately obvious than this one, for as long as you cling to those prejudices (which are pretty popular prejudices to cling to in the modern left.)

  • source
  • parent
  • 24 comments in c/globalnews@lemmy.zip view that post
    [–] 104 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (8 children)

    For the people who didn't read the article, or found it confusing, here's some context, put into a timeline from the slightly confusing article:

    Arturo Gamboa was marching with the crowd in Salt Lake City, when he separated from the march, moved behind a wall and returned with a rifle. Two of the march's peacekeepers saw this and confronted him with their handguns drawn. At this point, Gamboa raised his rifle into a firing position and ran toward the crowd. One of the march's peacekeepers fired three rounds. He hit Gamboa, and also hit innocent bystander Arthur Folasa Ah Loo. Ah Loo has died.

    Not from the article: there's a video circulating of a bunch of people sitting in an entryway. One of the people there picks up a backpack belonging to someone else and moves away, saying "He's got a rifle in here". They call over the police, who force the guy down and arrest him.

    The video is from when the crowd is sheltering after the shots were fired. Gamboa, who was injured, tried to hide inside the crowd. One of the people there noticed the shape of the hidden rifle, and the blood on his hand, took the backpack away and they called the cops over.

    Edit: I went to the SLC sub on The Other Place:

    Video of the first shots being fired (no gore) Note that it looks like the news article may have the confrontation / running away / firing sequence out of order. I'm gonna turn off notifications and you guys can debate this among yourselves.

    Video of the guy finding the gun and calling the cops over

    Video of people helping others over a wall to escape the area. Among the people helping others up: Batman!

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 66 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    You were able to write a more clear straight forward summary of information than the trained Guardian reporter who put together this story.

    It goes to show how major media go out of their way to share simple straight forward information in the most complex way in order to maintain some strange control over the narrative of any given event.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 35 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

    Drives me nuts when I have to skim like 6 paragraphs to actually get to the thing the headline described.

    Nope, don't care that the neighbor Janet heard a noise down the street but "couldn't tell what was happening". No, I do not care what about the mayor's recent tree planting initiative. Why are you telling me that this was happening "only 3 blocks down from where the little league team, the Munchkins Brigade, were playing"? Is that relevant?

    Just tell me what happened! Who did what to whom, how, and why?! Why should I care? Is that so fucking hard?! That's all I'm here for. It's literally your entire job. But no, they need people to scroll past 13 in-your-face ads crowding out the actual words of the articles before they leave the page. So now journalists and editors are literally trained to bury the lede under miles of foreplay bullshit. I hate the modern internet.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 29 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Wow thats... unfortunate for arthur. Why was the dude pulling a rifle? Agitator?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 45 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Seems like he was going for something similar to the guy who drove a car through one of the protests. Not agitating just another right wing terrorist.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 31 points 1 year ago*

    Fuck I'd hate the be the guy who stopped him. Non-zero chance that he didn't actually stop a mass shooting, and ending up being the only party present who actually killed an innocent person. Seriously, I hope that guy has strong friend / family support and really good therapy, he's gonna need it all.

  • source
  • [–] 11 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Wow sometimes there's a story that just proves that people don't bother to read the article at all. It's the third post I've seen about this story and in every single one of them at least half the comments didn't bother to read the article and have no idea what they're talking about.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 16 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    "... by a member of the event's peacekeeping team". Peacekeeping. Sure.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
    [–] 3 points 1 year ago

    Wow this fuck up!

  • source
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago

    What a shithole country.

  • source
  • [–] -3 points 1 year ago (3 children)
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    The man, Arthur Folasa Ah Loo, 39, had apparently been shot by a man who had been part of the event’s peacekeeping team

    Second sentence of the article.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (1 child)

    Why is it missing from the headline? Passive voice strikes again.

    And what is a 'peacekeeping team'? Surely that is not the police because then it would say police. Right?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment