I wish so badly I could edit the title to more accurately reflect what happened. “Police shoot reporter in the back.”
“Hit by rubber bullet” as if it was a stray. Watch the live broadcast and it’s clear as day the shooter lifted his gun and aimed straight at her without provocation
They should have used the photo of the officer aiming at her.
And the title… I hate the passive voice shit with pigs.
“Hit by rubber bullet”
The man aimed at her and opened fire. It’s on camera. “Shot by cop.”
“Intercepted non-lethal round from law enforcement.”
"Crossed paths with lawfully-launched projectile. "
“Interfered with first-amendment suppression.”
In the article they show the video of her being shot at and also describe what happened as the officer aming and shooting her
People seem to be rising up, at least. Finally. Hopefully momentum keeps them going and they start organizing a bit better and being more impactful… Let’s start the revolution.
National Anthem need some lyric change:
And the rockets’ red glare, the bombs bursting in air, Gave proof through the night that our flag was still there;And the riot-police gear,
gunshots echo through the air,
Gave proof though the night
that our flag is no longer there;What legal reason would the police have for shooting journalists who are in no way in the midst of any violence?
edit: looks like they are going to claim she was blocking traffic, even though the car could have used the other lane.
There is no legal reason, whatever they say here is bullshit.
Is it standard to shoot people who are blocking traffic?
Cops are a sack of hammers looking for nails in these situations.
Yes
In America where drivers have more rights than anyone. Yes, it is acceptable to shoot people who are blocking traffic.
In capitalist america, they shoot you for blocking traffic
The car that hadn’t even come round the corner yet?
If that’s what they will do to a unarmed attractive female Australian white reporter while being filmed, what they are doing to minorities must be fucking horrendous.
Let’s not jump to conclusions here, there is still time for them to kidnap her and deport her to El Salvador!!
I know “deport” is technically correct by the definition of the word, but I feel like we need to start using different terminology when they’re sending people to a mega prison in a third country that they’ve likely never been to and have no historical or familial connection to.
This is rendition. They (we) are kidnapping and imprisoning people with no due process. It’s shameful. I’m ashamed.
Prison? We’ve seen the photos. Time to call it what it is.
It’s a concentration camp.
Concentration Camp is the term we’re looking for.
It’s a Concentration Camp.
Human Trafficking.
desaparecido
Exactly. They’re already willing to beat them to death on camera. What the fuck are they doing with so many of them flooding the streets and kidnapping people?
Are you saying were not attractive? LOL.
A 9News reporter has been caught in the crossfire of chaotic protests that have engulfed parts of Los Angeles.
Did we watch the same video? The cop did that on purpose. There wasn’t anyone else to shoot at there.
Also, crossfire? Nobody else was shooting. It was just cops.
My local news said «when the police aimed at her and shot» at lest some can see what’s up
The only other people were other press. There were camera and microphone operators. Looking at the video, it’s so obvious that the cop aimed at the press and then shot.
Is there any way to tell what kind of cop that was?
My extensive experience leads me to think he is a bastard
Well that totally narrows it down…
easy way: they were a cop. all types are the same: bastard traitor terrorists.
A bastard.
I’d like to present a different view. It doesn’t excuse the shot, but it could offer an explanation better than “the officer took aim and shot the journalist for shits and giggles”
The officer clearly took aim and shot the journalist on purpose. But when the camera turns 180 to GTFO you see a crowd. It would seem, to me at least, that the members of the press were positioned between the police and the protesters.
It can be hard to tell from that angle, and with no context, how the lines were drawn. But let’s, for the sake of the argument, just go with this assumption. It would appear that the police wanted to get the press to fuck on out of there, so there would be no bystanders before pushing the protesters back.
Doesn’t that make it OK? Not really. One could argue that police wouldn’t want to hurt the press, and getting them out was necessary. One could also be lead to believe that the police could have other motives for not wanting the press there with their pesky cameras.
One could argue that police wouldn’t want to hurt the press, and getting them out was necessary.
Ah yes, getting them out by shooting them with less lethal bullets. What an dishonest shit argument. Also journalists have special protections since 2020 from the police targeting them. I wonder why this was necessary
It bars police from “intentionally assaulting, interfering with, or obstructing” their newsgathering.
https://apnews.com/article/gavin-newsom-california-27c9b8a1c530df4344b4909fd8d7993d
I was not arguing in favor of the police officer there. I presented two arguments with a varying degree of malicious intent.
I don’t buy the argument you’re quoting either, but I do buy that the officer would try it if questioned through his union. If for nothing else than, it’s better PR than the second proposed argument.
This is not the kind of situation where anyone’s gonna get sat down and debriefed. The LEO that are responding to these situations are already vetted. The people who said they might not be comfortable didn’t get put on the list. The humans who are there in uniform are most likely there because they want to be and are itchy to shoot.
Were you born yesterday?
On reddit they said these people are like fox News over there so they are pro trump they wouldn’t claim the police did anything wrong but still obviously have to say something as it’s live TV
Channel 9 are not quite Fox News level but definitely Fox Lite. They’re careful in their written news articles to only be centre-right, but their video and TV news broadcasts are heavily favoured to right-wing bias and favourable story selection, and always very critical of any left wing interests.
I’m not sure of their YouTube channel is available worldwide, but if you check that out if you can and you’ll quickly see it’s got all the same talking points as Sky News Australia (News Corp - Murdoch, Sky News is the Aussie version of Fox News).
They’re pretty much your bog standard right-wing media. They don’t endorse ridiculous conspiracy theories or the overthrow of democracy like Fox News does in America or Sky News does in Australia, and they basically try to stick to relatively factual reporting. But they also, as you say, bias towards the right in story selection. And they’re relatively low-brow, going for sensationalism rather than good journalism, more often than not.
They always do
Are we great again yet? Or do we need to be made great again again again and again?
You do realize that the people who voted for Trump are loving all of this. They want a police state. Because they believe that they will never be subject to it.
Let the leopards eat their faces.
Unpopular Opinion: Y’all were never great. The country had one brief period of some sanity before it got dropkicked out the door by Reagan. The only difference between the United States and Russia is good PR and even better propaganda. The United States is offensive to common sense and human decency on every fundamental level, from it’s inception until today. Things are just more obvious now. That’s the only difference.
Oh come on! At one point, through almost an accident of history, our country was still able to make things, build things, and pump out babies while the rest of the organized world had to reassemble their firebombed and nuked cities.
The US threw over 100,000 of its own citizens in concentration camps 60 years before Reagan was president. You’re giving the man far too much credit.
You think the U.S. was great in the late 70? I guess if you were a straight white guy then of course.
You think the U.S. was great in the late 70?
Would you mind pointing out where I said that?
Go ahead.
I’ll wait.
Well the brief period of time before Reagan was the late 70s… A truly horrific time for the U.S. but you seem to think it was a period of sanity.
They said, quoted verbatim:
Y’all were never great.
You seem to think it was a period of sanity.
Would you mind pointing out where I said that?
Go ahead.
I’ll wait.
Actually, screw this. Let me just cut this off now so I can get on with my life.
The country had one brief period of some sanity
The operative word in that sentence is the word SOME. Stop painting my opinions to be all or nothing, stop shoving words down my throat, and actually read what I have to say. I also did not specify the period I was talking about, only that Reagan drop kicked it out. You made an enormous amount of assumptions and pretended as if they were reality. They’re not.
If you are curious next time, the correct thing to do is ask for elaboration or clarification.
Please stop wasting my time.
Near highest crime rate in u.s. history was “some” sanity? Wierd.
You’re either a troll or literally incapable of understanding that “some” means certain things I pick, not you.
Whatever the reason, the outcome is the same.
Come on… other than the eugenics movement the 20’s sound decent. Lots of nice art deco a few years later….
Take that with the mid 50’s though the late 70’s and you’re talking about a solid half century. It’s not a bad run given our assumed trajectory ;-)
I was always kind looking forward to seeing the dystopian wasteland phase.
Oh yeah, that beautiful time when white people could lynch someone of color and get away with it, such nice times.
Not like that’s changed since then
I love how we can tell your skin colour and socioeconomic status from this comment
You seem to have forgotten the concentration camps FDR stuck 120,000 American citizens in between 1942 and 1946
Calm down kids, it’s called sarcasm.
That is an incredibly bad take. One so fundamentally poor, indeed obtuse, that this comment has to be filed under, " you’ve got to be fucking kidding me"
Don’t expect a response from me. I won’t waste time on stupidity.
You can refute it with some facts. No one is stopping you.
I’m no history scholar, but here’s a quick run down:
Declare independence.Kill most of the natives and relocate the rest off of their land to reserves.
Civil war (which, I think, was mainly about allowing the owning of slaves).
A brief time when things were ok?
The world wars happened. Which, in the second at least, the us initially wasn’t interested about being involved with until Japan said “lol, no”.
Another brief period of not bad?
Reagan. Haha, this was the bit in recent history where things get well iffy.
The Bushes and Clinton. Things continue to get fucked.
Obama. Which was 50/50 depending on which country you lived in.
Then it was the Orange Shitgibbon. Where the rest of the world though it couldn’t get any worse.
Biden. Who refused to do fuck all tRUMP and his crimes or treachery. Plus all the genocide stuff.
To now, Orange Shitgibbon 2: Dictator Boogaloo.
Who is fucking things up in ways that if I time travelled to 15 years ago and tried to tell everyone I would be locked up. They’d probably believe I could travel in time, but not that a fucking failed reality TV star could do so much damage.Again I’m no history buff, so you can explain the eras where the us want fucking things for everyone else if you so choose.
Another brief period of not bad?
The 50s and 60s were the peak of Robert Moses and similar figures in American urban planning. Explicitly racist, destroying the liveability of cities in ways that are still ongoing to this day, with only some of the very most progressive cities even starting to try to turn things around.
It was also the peak of the red scare, during which the “freedom of speech” Americans are so proud of took a back seat to witch hunts over political ideology. Along with that you get the height of US intervention in foreign governments, with the US involvements in Pinochet’s regime in Chile probably being the most striking example, but far, far from the only.
So nah, it might have been a period of time when the US was perhaps less bad than today, but it’s still not great.
Had nothing to do with any of that. The comment is because the laziest, most generic thing you could have said was exactly what you said now. However you weren’t an asshole to me, so I’ll respond.
So my comment wasn’t that America hadn’t committed atrocities, we have. It’s heartbreaking, and I have heritage heavily affected by those atrocities
You’ll note I Mentioned hype. See that’s really what it’s all been. In fact. Every country has its share of atrocities( and every one should be stamped out and the perpetrators held accountable), but not all countries atrocities have been committed by the supposed " police" of the free world.
That impression of the United states is what I was referring to.
America was never greater than any other country. It was just billed so, and you know what? Many other countries bought into that, relying on us to a point they would sometimes cripple themselves military, but also causing the United states to feel fat, bloated complacent,and outsource many vital industries to other nations.
Much like “Animal Farm”, the noble goals of our past have been sacrificed for the opulence and vices of the elite and rich who keep us down. The leaders of every country playing shell games with us
You want great again? America never was GREAT. We WERE doing well, moving forward, like many other countries with rich and varied histories. But Insidious men and women over the generations wormed their way into positions of leadership, as money tends to buy power , in all countries. And now every government is rife with them
It’s isn’t America that needs to be great again. It’s people that need to be. And until this orange lunatic is gone, the United States we have lost any claim to great.
So your take was bad. To me. We were never that great. But like all things,age steps in and we see that the old man may have looked good when we were young, but now that we’ve gone through things and now what to look for, we can tell that like all of us, he was just limping through life.
Now we have an interconnected world with separated people. .
So yes. IMHO ad take. But probably not for the reasons you thought
I initially said I wouldn’t respond because I figured I’d get the replies I did, because people online don’t pause and think, just insult.
You didn’t though. Thank you for that. It’s a sign that we can still talk through things.
Thank you for your reply. Honestly I feel that if you had have replied initially with something the same as this comment then you’d have a lot more people agreeing, and even rooting for and with you. I know I would have, mainly because everything you’ve said is spot on. Unarguably so.
Good luck for your future. I am rooting for you and people like you.
Your right of course. I’m tired is all. I am Old, cranky, angry and enraged at the injustice we see.
Makes me have a short temper, and with so many ass hats around, Im in strike first mode .
You didn’t deserve that. My apologies to you.
Troll
Also… Oh nooo… I won’t get a response from you… oh noooo… Whatever will I do?
Bruh, I only knew you made a comment because a friend pointed out the silliness of it.
We’re getting greater. Gotta get rid of anybody with pronouns, skin, or who is awake.
That includes you, queers, and you, darkies! And you, brownies! And don’t forget the people that believe in gods. And likely the people that don’t, too. And anybody that disagrees.
Ok. Now, who’s left?
Now who doesn’t fit in? Who’s the deviant, now? We gotta keep pruning and killing and sowing unhappiness.
Only once we reach the end, will we be great.
Rubber bullets are lethal at that range. Not “less lethal”; lethal. And that cunt cop 100% knows this. It’s in the training. This was attempted murder of a member of the press.
Ok.
So, when people throw around the phrase ‘rubber bullet’… it tends to conjure in most people’s minds… a projectile, made of rubber, that is about the same size as a bullet.
They are not the same size as a bullet.
They are the same size as a grenade launcher round, between 30mm and 40mm, generally speaking… which is about 3x to 5x the size of most actual bullets from a pistol or rifle, albeit not travelling as fast as either of those.
They also tend to have a metal inner core.
So its more like a slug round from an 8 to 4 gauge shotgun, with rubber coating, were you to roughly extrapolate existing shotgun gauge size/naming conventions:
Also, the actual usage manuals for these things state that… you are not to fire them directly at someone closer than approximately 200-400 feet, what you are supposed to do is fire them at the ground at a shallow angle, such that they bounce or ricochet upward at a shallow angle…
… because there is so much energy in one of these rounds that they need to be dissapated by that bounce, otherwise they are quite likely to cause serious injury or even kill someone.
That is to say, ‘less than lethal’ means ‘potentially lethal’ when used improperly, and cops routinely use them improperly all the time.
This cop who fired that round, at that range (under 200 feet, under the minimum safe distance for any kind of firing)… not only was he too close to safely fire the thing at all, it looks like he just fired it directly at her, between her knees and hip, without a bounce.
When cops say, when people say cops ‘need better training’, the technical details I have just outlined are part of that better training… which, in practice, they disregard all the time.
Similar wild deviations exist between manufacturer suggested usage guidelines for tasers, and how they are routinely, actually used by cops.
Another example of intentional bullshit perversion of proper use procedures is the cop ‘at ease’ stance, where elbows are bent and each hand is roughly up at each pectoral… this is a common, general ‘idle’ stance… and it often is used to obscure the view of chest mounted body cams.
In conclusion: Yes, this absolutely was an intentional attempt to murder or grievously injure a journalist, basically 2nd degree attempted murder if this was done by not-a-cop.
Also, the actual usage manuals for these things state that… you are not to fire them directly at someone closer than approximately 200-400 feet, what you are supposed to do is fire them at the ground at a shallow angle, such that they bounce or ricochet upward at a shallow angle…
This is incorrect, but a very widespread misunderstanding.
Guidelines from the Geneva Human Rights Platform suggest that rubber bullets should be directed at the lower body (the guidelines actually caution against “skip-firing” or shooting at the ground first, because it makes them too unpredictable). The potential for a rubber bullet to ricochet, Heisler explains, makes for a dangerous situation. https://www.inverse.com/mind-body/rubber-bullets-cannot-be-used-safely
What you are calling a misunderstanding is based on… not citing manufacturer guidelines, nor police training documents.
Skip-firing is (correctly) declared too dangerous because of the potential to ricochet into the head, which can be lethal.
The older, ‘less lethal’, 40mm rubber rounds, police were using 5, 10+ years ago?
Yeah, their official training docs did state that you should skip-fire them, because the older rounds were of a much more primitive design, and would in fact cause greivous injury when used in direct fire, ie point at what you want to hit.
The cops did not want to give up their toys, so they invented a new official usage doctrine that ‘made them safer’, while also not really following it in many cases.
This resulted in, within the last 5 to 10 years, the development of 40mm launchers and projectiles that are of a bit more advanced design, with lower muzzle velocities, which are now marketed with the phrase ‘Direct Impact’ somewhere in the name or description of the thing.
And these are not really ‘rubber bullets’ either, they are basically a dense foam that deforms much more than an actual bullet would.
So … I don’t know if you can identify exactly what weapon and round was used in this instance.
If it was an older models, and many police agencies often keep many older models around, then uh yeah, those things are unsafe to use in the manner depicted.
If they are the newer models, then it was used in the ‘correct’ manner, as described by modern mfg guidelines and training/usage manuals.
So… yeah.
This is all rather complicated because … well just in general police are secretive and lie all the time about how they actually do things, and different police agencies have different loadouts and gear, there is not 100% standardization across every city, country, and federal LE agency… and the same variation applies for usage doctrine, both theorertical and actual.
I’ll admit that my info is maybe a bit out of date, but not fundamentally wrong: if we could identify the exact weapon and round used, that would be helpful.
EDIT:
So uh, in addition to … large sized ‘less lethal’ impactor rounds giving people heart attacks with a chest shot, breaking limbs, permantly blinding someone or literally killing them with a headshot…
Exploding testicles.
A good number of cases of men being hit in the crotch, and yep, ruptured testes, blew apart your balls.
Fun Stuff!
Kinda makes you wonder why the manufacturers would design a weapon that needs to be shot at the ground for an inaccurate bank shot rather than just ramp down the speed of the projectile.
You can see the cop aims low. His intent was to harass and drive away. A real chud.
There have been cases of reporters getting hit with plastic or less-lethal rounds in the head… With a helmet on… And being brain damaged for life.
The reporter must be made of steel because she laughs it off but those rounds can blind or break bones.
She’s laughing it off because she is relatively young, in good shape, has media training… and is in all likelihood currently in shock, flooded with adrenaline.
Within 6 hours she will have a bruise the diameter of a soccer ball, and she almost certainly has a or multiple fractured bones, though they are likely hairline, fissure or impacted partial fractures, not complete breaks.
EDIT: Reporter must be made of steel you say?
She’s also working for a right leaning network.
Ah, I missed that, my default human empathy response still generally doesn’t like seeing people shot for no good reason.
It’s the BLM protests all over again… Including them taking shots at the press.
Need more pixels
Its kinda weird how dude looks like a cutout cop in both photos.
ENHANCE!
CIS/NCIS (mmm gibbs) really did fuck my expectations about resolution.
You have to say “alexa” first.
I’m surprised they’re using rubber bullets and not proper ones.
The rest of the world sees the USA, Mexico and Canada as basically one country, and laugh at this.
I know nobody that sees those three as one country. They are vastly different in terms of politics.
It’s one economic unit.
Looks like a bean bag, a rubber bullet at that range would have done more damage.
Removed by mod
Nice bait
You’re saying the shooting was justified?
They’re a one day old account posting nonsense. They aren’t serious
Loser shit
