Previous Post
Next Post

Over the last couple weeks multiple pro-gun blogs have pointed out that despite the violence that occurred during the Charlottesville protests, no one on either side who was carrying a gun fired any shots. Proof that bearing arms during a protest is a civil right in support of free speech and the right to keep and bear arms. New video from the ACLU, however, seems to show a man pull a firearm and fire it towards counter-protesters.

In the video a man is seen walking away from counter-protesters before drawing his firearm, appearing to rack a round into the chamber, and firing a single shot in the general direction of the counter-protesters. To the right of the frame a flame is seen, which looks like an improvised aerosol flame thrower being used by counter-protesters.

According to the NY Times the man in question was taken into custody Saturday morning. No doubt anti-gun folks such as Shannon Watts will use this as fodder to bolster their argument that gun owners are too violent and unhinged to be allowed to carry firearms during protests.

I’m waiting to hear the whole story before passing judgement. Did the man feel threatened? Did the flame directed his way prompt him to draw his gun and fire? And why were police not present to (A) separate protesters on the two sides and (B) arrest him?

Given the number of people present, it’s remarkable that no one was hit. Did the man pictured fire a live round? There are lots of questions here and few answers so far. Watch this space.

Previous Post
Next Post


  1. Sure, one person fired a gun without killing anybody. So, since it happened outside Chicago that means I need to give up my constitutional rights. Sounds legit.

    • Hosing people down with an aerosol, liquid in any form, powder… is a threat. It could be an acid, poison, a biologic, or even a radio-logic. In today’s environment assaulting anybody with an unknown material is a serious threat and that kind of behavior certainly justifies defense of ones self or others. Is it just urine or is it an acid? Is the urine contaminated with the aids virus or something else. Play stupid games get stupid results. Assaulting or threatening to assault somebody with a flaming aerosol should have gotten that cretin a long nap on a slab.

      • Yeah, when the simple act of touching a cop can be charged as assault on an officer I’m inclined to put an extraordinarily low bar on the grounds to return fire.

  2. Which of the leftist Soros groups was the guy with and which was he firing towards? Lets just call them cabal A and coven B. Forget the other fictional names/titles.

    • I’ll say. First off he didn’t have a round in the chamber and secondly, he missed. WTF? If he was any closer he could’ve pistol whipped the guy.

      • He didn’t have a round in the chamber because he is at a protest. It looked like he didn’t plan on shooting anyone seeing he shot into the dirt where the bushes are, but he did want to stop the black man with the aerosol can from burning someone (causing great bodily harm). The black man was spraying him with the can before the black man lit the fuel and went after the guy with the flag.

        It’s ridiculous that the police were ~20 feet away watching it go down. SERIOUSLY! What kind of government is forcing the police to not “protect and serve” when there is felonies being committed in their presence? Is it not illegal for the police to ignore calls for help when on scene and to not make an arrest when violent crimes/felonies are committed?

        People throwing urine, mace and feces balloons, masked people assaulting reporters, a man trying to burn people with an aerosol can, a gun being fired, counter protesters hitting people in the head with staffs and a mini bat, a car being used to run people over, etc.

        When does the governor and mayor lose their job and be brought up on charges? They had all the resource to stop violence from occurring, instead they caused it to occur. For instance, the protesters would have not been in the situation where a guy was trying to burn them if the police didn’t literally push the protesters into the counter protesters, thus the gun would have never been fired.

        • The fact is that it is NOT illegal for the police not to protect citizens. The SCOTUS has ruled on this several times, the latest ruling being Castle Rock v. Gonzales, No. 04-278 in 2005.

        • Mr Long said he and his friend Deandre Harris were forced to flee when scores of the right-wing protesters charged at them, and they ran for cover in a car parking area. “The white supremacists told us to ‘die nigger’ in the garage.”

          He said he fought off his attackers with a stick and fled again but extremists continued to pursue the pair. “The Nazis tried to force their way into the stairway that we were hiding in. The fact was that they (photographers) just stood around recording everything. The fact that they didn’t help us . . . It was outrageous.”

          Fake news?

        • It is safer for the police to stand back and to arrest people later when they are IDed via video/photo on social media. They don’t have to risk any harm to themselves nor run the risk of inflaming tensions (sorry, pun intended) by trying to arrest one or two people out of a crowd of angry folks.

    • … so I guess you did see the self styled communist pricks running around LIGHTING PEOPLE ON FIRE??

      Son, if I had been there I’d still be requesting ammo and a bulldozer for a Vietnam era anti communists dispose pit. Screw your fee-fees about this guy’s tactics. These ANTIFA pricks STARTED this crap AS THEY ALWAYS DO.

      If you attack, YOU GET DROPPED. If you have a problem with this then you’re a part of the reason why it’s gotten this far.

      • He wasn’t being attacked. That’s abundantly clear from the video. If he thought someone else was being attacked, he shouldn’t have screwed around and then purposefully chose to shoot one round into the ground before running away. He was trying to act tough, but wasn’t man enough to actually be tough.

        • ‘But the other guy’ is in no way a defense. From step one the violence was initiated by ANTIFA. No many how many obvious shills or FUDs try to change this hard reality.

          Once again… I don’t CARE about what you THINK is right. If you attack, YOU. GET. DROPPED. If you don’t like it, take it up with the judge when this goes to trail.

        • That made no sense at all. If there was an attacker at all here, it was the guy that walked away, then came back and shot a round, pretty intentionally it seems, into the ground in order to prove he’s a man. He’s not.
          Again, he wasn’t being attacked, that’s obvious. I won’t have to take anything to a judge here, and neither will you. This is cut and dry, the guy’s getting jail time.

        • TL:DR ‘I didn’t’ see it so it obvious didn’t happen.’

          Well obvious shill confined then. We’re done here. See you on the battlefield.

        • Noishkel, I’ve been on the battlefield, and I didn’t see you there. Or maybe I did, and you followed your hero’s example, stamped your feet, shit the bed, and ran.

        • *yawn* Ohhh, that stunk a bit I see. Well personally I don’t CARE About soldiers as a block. They’re just people susceptible to the same problems as anyone. Just like the soldier that abused me as a child.

          Yeah, I still think you just another apologist punk no matter how much you try to spin it. Social cohesion in the US is just gone and this nation is polarized to the point it might just blow. And you cant’ realized that and continue to apologized for some people that you can just piss off.

        • Noishkel, what are you even talking about? Who’s apologizing? I mean, I’m kind of giving you a break on your rambling bullshit by assuming English isn’t your first language, but other than that, nobody’s apologizing here.
          Oh crap, I’m picking on a “special” person aren’t I?

        • JWT, it seems you and many others saw video of the man with the gun, without being shown the prior portion of the tape. What clearly caught the video-maker’s eye (and camera) was the man with the torch. He was spraying lit and unlit flammable liquid at several protesters.

          It appeared to me when I saw the vid that the fellow who fired the shot simply became terrified by the flame attack. It is hard to deny that what he was doing was trying to let the flame-as-weapon user that he had crossed the line. I would agree.

          What, I might ask, do you think the appropriate response would be to a man using a flammable aerosol to attach you and your friends? Does the news reaction imply that we should all carry large cans of flammable liquid (and a stick) to every demonstration, so that we need not “overreact” with a pistol? Fine. Absurd, but fine. So be it.

        • ropingdown, I think that if the shooter actually considered the man a threat to others (not himself obviously since he left and then came back) then he should have stopped the threat. But that’s not what he did. He shot into the ground (he couldn’t know where the bullet ended up) and then walked off. That doesn’t immediately stop the threat, and he’s gone before he can even check on the threat.
          If it was a real threat, he should have ended it. But he was just mad and trying to look tough.
          I think that when he was being sprayed he would have been totally justified in shooting aerosol boy. The hobbit holding the confederate flag certainly was justified in shooting. But neither of them did.

      • I agree, in a defensive shooting you shoot to stop and follow through. But what this guy did was yell a slur, fire a shot into the ground near his target, then walk back into the marching crowd. At best, if he did any thinking at all, he may have thought “well this guy is using his spray to threaten people, I’m going to spray one of my own.” He did not act at all like someone who was defending himself or others.

        So if there was a threat, he responded irresponsibly poorly. If there wasn’t, he made an irresponsibly dangerous angry gesture.


      Yeah here’s a nice shot from USA Today showing just that. Yeah, notice the guy in the black hat trying to light the guy with the flag on fire? Yeah, that’s just fine I guess because muh protest.

      I really racial nationalists. But as long as it’s just talk, then whatever. But ANTIFA is actually looking to cause bodily harm and but your BS is covering for the more evil people.

        • Son there is no video on the PLANET that will NOT make it a literal crime to try to use a weapon to light someone on fire.

          I don’t give a greased up hot damn about your idiotic opinion. This how it is: If you attack, YOU. GET. DROPPED.

        • Here I’m gonna do it for you this time jwt…
          I think FLAME DELETED and FLAME DELETED…because my opinion FLAME DELETED.

          There ya go FUDDly.

        • FUDD, as in Elmer Fudd or one who espouses to believe in the second amendment word for word, but is ok with certian goverment imposed caveats. There should be No support for CCWs or background checks. No support for the NFA and no room for “dialouge” with the other side of the isle…they have proved time and again that they have no room for any reasonable dialouge with our side when it won’t benifit them.
          If the second amendment was truly adheared to, buying a MP5SD and a LAW rocket should be just as simple as going to a butcher for some pork chops, period. The reason that it isn’t like that is the acceptance of their “common sense” laws we keep adhearing to. The endless compromise and accepance of the excuse that the supreme court of the united states cannot clearly define that wich was already clearly defined from the begining.
          Aside from that I’ll venture to say that any wavering in support for any amendment is a wavering in support to them all…and we all know how much respect TTAG has for the first amendment, haha. Your politically correct additudes are the ones that have been getting us fucked over for years. Sometimes the truth doesn’t sound good or look pretty… but its still the truth.

        • Ed, nice rant, but it had absolutely nothing to do with the topic. If you can find anywhere that I have backed down on the support of the 2nd, please feel free post it here. Use the search function. I’ll wait.

      • All that aerosol is bad for the environment. Where’s the EPA in all of this? (Straight face fail)

  3. So a possible national socialist fired a gun in the direction of a group of socialist, one of whom was threatening use of a dangerous weapon, and regular people in the heartland of America care why? Alt-Right is another way to say left.

    • ZFG. Socialists firing improvised flamethrowers into crowds pose a reasonable danger of death or great bodily harm.

    • I do so love the National Socialist = Socialist/Communist non-sense that ends up on almost every single one of these posts. They are extreme and stupid opposite ends of the political spectrum and neither work within a democratic system of government. The “National Socialist” part of the National Socialist German Workers party to their name to attempt to win over disaffected workers who might join the socialist groups instead. Nazi ideology outright opposed Marxist theories and ideals and was incredibly socially conservative. Hitler often blamed “socialist Jews” for Germany’s economic problems and strongly favored individual property rights which they believed created strength unlike communists which favor tearing down individual property rights in favor of the greater population. While Hitler clearly believed in racial superiority and racial struggle, most communists focused on class struggle. Hitler believed in limiting democracy since those that were racially inferior should not influence the government. He was a dedicated social Darwinist.

      • Actually you are dead wrong. The largest component of the Nazi Party was indeed socialist in nature right up until “the Night of the Long Knives.” Ernst Roehm wanted Hitler to nationalize industry and financial sector. That is straight out socialism. If you read Niall Ferguson’s “War of the World” you will discover that there was strong overlap between who the Nazis and Communists wanted gone. Stalin did not begin the preparation of his version of the Final Solution until late his life and died before he could execute it. (See the Doctors Plot) What we call Communism is the Socialism of Class. Nazism is the Socialism of Race. They are both socialists. Historically, Hitler’s Germany was more egalitarian than any Communist country. ever

        • “Ernst Roehm wanted Hitler to nationalize industry and financial sector. That is straight out socialism.” Not necessarily. Nationalization in order to redistribute wealth to the citizenry would be, but nationalization is not inherently socialist. Dictatorships often have nationalized industries but aren’t actually socialist.

          “What we call Communism is the Socialism of Class. Nazism is the Socialism of Race.” Now you’re just making up concepts. The communism is a form of socialism. Nazism is a form of extreme nationalism, not a socialist system. They are not both socialists.

          “Historically, Hitler’s Germany was more egalitarian than any Communist country.” Okay now you are just cracking me up. Vietnam, as an example, is far more egalitarian than Nazi Germany which literally executed millions of people for sexual orientation, metal issues, race, and religion. Hell, China is more egalitarian by far.

      • tdiinva’s right. Socialists are socialists, whether they organize their authoritarian government around class talking points or racial talking points. The evils of authoritarianism and democide are caused by collectivists alone. Not individualists, not libertarians, and thus not right-wing as most Americans understand it. There’s no such thing as a libertarian terrorist, or libertarian suppressor of human rights, or libertarian genocidal mass murderer. You can’t believe in respecting liberty and individual rights and also believe in violating those principles in order to victimize people. Anyone that conflates libertarians and Nazis is an obvious liar. How is a libertarian supposed to herd innocent people into gas chambers for mass murder without violating the non-aggression principle? Compare the most radical, extremist, and fundamentalist libertarians to any other political ideology. The extreme libertarians are relatively benign anarchists and minarchists that simply don’t believe in interfering in the affairs of others. That’s as nutso as it gets. Awareness of the fact that all the politically motivated murder and oppression comes from collectivist ideologies seems to me a pretty good case for individualism.

      • Unfortunately that would be wrong. The easiest way to put this is Communism = International Socialism, Nazism = National Socialism, Fascism = National Socialism. Stalin, Mussolini and Hitler were all of the same leftist political persuasion. Both Communism and Fascism/Nazism are just a little bit apart on the far left of the political pendulum.

        If the National Socialists are calling themselves “alt-right” then they are either trying to appropriate the word “right” but fill it with their own meaning or perhaps it’s just been mistakenly portrayed as “right wing” when really they mean Left as in, “alternative to the right”. Either way, calling a pig a dog doesn’t make a pig a dog.

  4. Twenty seconds into the video, the camera follows him as he walks away. Maybe 75 feet away are a bunch of cops wearing yellow vests, who apparently can’t hear a 155+ db gunshot over the crowd…

    Not buying it.

    A white supremacist points his gun at your party and even fires it, and there is no mass exodus and panicked screaming, as is the norm when anyone fires a gun in a public place.

    Not buying it.

      • Yeah, you’d think there would be police intervention. It’s like someone told them not to do anything short of people getting plowed into with a car…………….

    • Same here, this story sound rather fishy. Too long a turn time for the story to hit. Overall muted response. There should be a police report out, especially if he discharged a live round. If there are no charges. . .

      Lot of false flag operations going on these days. The progressives are figuring out that they need a lot of actual incidents to get a ban movement going again. I expect socialists groups (both national and globalist) to start pushing their members to start using firearms.

    • Pictures of the flaming aerosol can guy were viral on the day of the rally but everyone missed this gunshot? How is that possible. How did the entire media miss this for 2 weeks.

      • Probably, because normal people were screaming at the picture in the news paper, “How is it all those people have guns and nobody is shooting the flame thrower guy?!?!?”….. i know I was.

        If the ultimate purpose of a gun is to “stop the threat” I’d say the gun was used effectively: flame thrower guy stopped. The responible thing for the DGU would have been to go over to the police and report it.

      • Well, honestly the dude with the aerosol flamethrower was probably pulling that thing like it was a party toy, and thus provided a lot of picture opportunities.

        A dude firing a gun once can ostensibly be lost in the hours-long din tense nature of the entire fiasco.

        I wasn’t there, but I can’t entirely blame the cops for non-action for the guy shooting. They probably didn’t hear him over the noise of everybody else, and if anybody DID notice it, they probably didn’t tell their CO-eq. (is that how riot cops are structured?) and assumed the “it’s not my problem I don’t want to head into that unless I’m directly ordered to” mindset.

    • Nope.
      I’ll call it: CO2 airsoft pistol. Not loud enough for the nearby cops to be alerted as a gunshot – but those things can be annoyingly loud.

      • “I’ll call it: CO2 airsoft pistol.”

        That’s quite possible.

        When fired, just a white wisp of vapor, but *no* muzzle flash. Short-barrel handguns are not known to have no muzzle flash.

        Combine that with the puzzling lack of reaction from *anyone* around him when it goes off. In that environment, expecting for something to go down, If I heard a gunshot, I’d be hitting the deck *fast*.

        I think BLoving is on to something with that. An *actual* gunshot would get my attention, and there was little reaction from the crowd…

      • +1… yep… big demos like that are loud as crap and cameras do a poor job of capturing the cacophony. Ive been to pleanty of demos over the decades in San Francisco and even the small ones (a few hundred people) are deafening. I can see how the cops wouldn’t hear a gun shot even from that distance.

  5. Looks like a warning shot fired. Always a dumb move, but better than aiming at the guy and making a martyr out of him. Of course, the spray can flame thrower could be considered a deadly weapon…

    • Right. Flame thrower guy claims he was attacked by a rolled-up confederate flag. He was there for peaceful protest. He FOUND the aerosol can on the ground (at just the moment he needed it) and had the presence of mind in this high-drama situation to pick it up, dig a Bic out of his pocket and turn the thing into an improvised weapon.

      Do you think the spell-checker will complain if I type the word BULLSHIT?

  6. Wow! There are sooooooo many things wrong with this story I don’t even know where to begin. Something is rotten in Denmark…..or Charlottesville…..or wherever. No shot heard….. nobody hit despite wall to wall people in the general direction that the person “supposedly” fired….no mass panic at hearing a gun shot (which always happens). Sorry…..not buying any of it.

  7. Some groups have identified him by name as a senior person in Klan leadership. Time will tell. Much more to the story looks like.

    And on the matter of police response, when the Berkeley police are faced with a huge mob of masked armed individuals, they decided in the interest of “safety” to stand down and let those people take over a protest site Sunday? From a legal perspective, police may have no obligation to protect an individual, but since they obviously were there to prevent violence between groups, and their stand-down lead to attacks and injuries amongst many people in the protest area, I wonder about the civil litigation that will be coming.

  8. I will mention that the cops were sufficiently far enough away the ambient noise probably drowned out the report of the shot.

    The shooter made a grave error in judgement. His demeanor indicates to me, he didn’t feel a threat of imminent harm. He simply chose that moment to make a point. At least he intentionally aimed (to me) not to strike anybody. He’ll pay a heavy price, as he should.

  9. I’ll let the courts decide if a law was broken or there is a crime to be punished. Just a couple of take aways.

    1) I am so glad no one was killed or injured. That whole knowing what is in front of and behind your target answer was clearly “A crowd of people.” This could have been catastrophic.

    2) De-escalation (of ones own self) is something I need to continue to practice. In retrospect we can see this guy didn’t need to use deadly force. I would hate to be in a situation where I am facing legal jeopardy (and losing my guns) for something that wasn’t absolutely necessary.

  10. So just so we are clear…..someone draws, aims and shoots a gun at someone=arrest.

    Someone who draws aims and shoots a flamethower at someone= hero!

    Got it!

  11. Regardless of whether it was a C02 airsoft or bb pistol, a blank, or whether he feared for his life and thought he was in grave danger (I would disagree with this, if I were a juror, for the record), in many places brandishing a replica weapon or firing warning shot (even a blank) is a felony offense, or in a poorly-defined grey area that often ends up in the shooter getting time regardless of whether it’s felonious. A bullet fired at concrete can ricochet and harm bystanders. I’m not a lawyer, but it seems probable that this person’s actions necessitate a jail sentence and revocation of his carry license, if he has one.

    Knowing that, I’m not sure which part of this video footage would lead any of you to call B/S or say that something is “fishy”. Do you think this is elaborate leftist CGI propaganda? Give me a break. What is happening here is a crime.

    • Was it a crime? Undoubtedly.
      Should he be arrested? I’d be concerned if he wasn’t – don’t know that he wasn’t.
      What we’re saying is – why was this not made public (and loudly) until now? That is why we are suspicious of the whole matter – whether it was staged or not a real gun after all; neither truth would play well to the media’s narrative so they don’t bother talking about it.
      Yes, that does make us paranoid nutbags – but as we like to point out: you’re not paranoid if they really ARE out to get you.

      • He is a Maryland resident and was arrested on a charge of “Discharging a firearm within 1000 feet of a school”.

        • I just did a bit of digging and that guy could be in some pretty deep stuff. The offense is a Class IV felony in Virginia under Sec. 18.280 (C) of Virginia’s Penal Code and a conviction means not less than 2 years nor more than 10 years in the slammer and a fine up to $100K.

  12. When I first saw this over the weekend, I commented that it appears the guy fired a blank since no one was reported to have been shot, and it looked like he aimed right into the crowd. I’m not sure what he would be charged with other than some miscellaneous offense like “menacing”, “assault”, or “discharging a firearm in X location”. These days, I’m not surprised that municipalities have even outlawed firing blanks in all but some narrow circumstances like official sporting event foot races.

    “So, was that guy firing blanks? Because I haven’t heard of anyone suffering from gunshot wounds, and he was aiming directly at the crowds. It will be interesting to see what the “shooter” is charged with if that is the case.”

  13. As a former LEO I feel the guy was justified in putting one in the dome of the guy with the improvised flame thrower. But whatever. The PANTY-FA faggots won’t try this shit in the heartland.

  14. To be fair, disregarding his choice of words, he did draw and fire in response to a man using a spray can flamethrower on the people coming down the stairs.
    Compare the images, it is the same spot at the same time.

    • No, not justifiable. He had already walked away and then came back. Pulled a gun, yelled “nigger” and pointed the gun. He then fired one round intentionally into the ground and fled. He wasn’t being attacked at the time he shot, he had a clear avenue of escape. Again, he walked away and then came back. He didn’t stay to see where the round went. If he felt he was protecting others, he didn’t, since the perceived threat was still there, and he fled the scene of the crime. He was clearly just trying to act tough. And it is an act. If he was actually tough he would have stuck around.

      • He was sprayed with the aerosol along with another man, but he walked away before the aerosol attacker could light the fuel. The aerosol attacker then lit the fuel and attempted to burn the man with the flag (who was being forced in that direction by riot police). The man then drew his unchambered gun and tried to get the aerosol attacker’s attention by calling him the “N word.” When the aerosol attacker continued to try to burn the flag holder (causing great bodily harm) the man chambered and fired into the dirt to stop the imminent threat. Once the threat was over the man holstered and left the danger zone. The white man could not depend on the police as the government made it clear they were not there to protect them.

        The aerosol attacker then went on to menace a group of white men as they left the park to go home. The aerosol attacker and his associates took staffs and bats from the protesters and threaten the white protesters multiple times in order to initiate mutual combat. The black men tried a few times to get in position to hit the white men when the white men were not in a defensive posture. Eventually, the aerosol attacker and his associates attacked the white men in-front of a parking garage (where the white men parked their cars), which started an armed brawl. One of the black men — who took a mini bat from the protesters a few minutes before — struck one of the white men in the head (incapacitating him) as that white man ran from a person he hit. The black men then played innocent victim when the police arrived and insinuated the media were not on their side.

        That small group of black men, based on their actions, where there for violence not peaceful protest.

        Maybe a brawl would have broken out at the moment the aerosol attacker was shooting flames if the man with the gun didn’t scare him off. The aerosol attacker went in the opposite direction of the men with the guns, then started a brawl down that street.

        The aerosol attacker didn’t seem all that worried/scared until men with guns were there to stop him and his associates from committing felonies. Don’t forget the aerosol attacker was wearing a mask to conceal his identity.

        • I’m sure that is what his attorney will argue, but that does not appear to be what is shown on the video. The shooter walks well away, completely out of danger, and then returns. No one was burned buy aerosol boy. And he did not immediately stop after the shot. The shooter shoots, and then leaves into the crowd. I don’t believe he ever intended to hurt anyone. It was clear that he pointed down at the ground. He was just trying to seem tough. That’s why I think the light charge that is pending is appropriate, instead of something like attempted murder or terroristic threats or something equally stupid.
          As far as aerosol boy, no one is trying to excuse his actions here. He’s a dirtbag and belongs in prison.

    • If that’s the case, it seems pretty light, but a fair charge. After all, it seems obvious that he intentionally pointed at the ground, and no one was hurt.

    • This seriously stinks. There is tons of earlier video of this guy brandishing his pistol and acting like a general asshat available a week ago. But now we learn, from the ACLU of all places, that there is a video of him shooting in the crowd!? This would have been the headliner if it wasn’t for the schizophrenic in the Charger. And now this KKK guy only rates a couple of lines deep in a NYTimes article and a tweet? And why are they only charging this guy with shooting near a school. There are guys like Cantwell being held without bond and facing 3 felonies for using bear mace against a guy trying to club him.
      Now I think the rumors of government informers playing KKK and Nazi are true. How else can we explain this media and authority kid glove treatment. This guy is a fucking plant!

      • I’m surprised Cantwell is only being charged with three felonies. The guy blew it. Like every egomaniacal jackass, he couldn’t shut up when it counted. He made it abundantly clear that his intention was to start a war. He could be strung up on domestic terrorism charges.

        I guess that’s what happens when you have a blond reporter with sexy nerd glasses in your hotel room watching you strip off your guns. You can’t help but try and prove what a big, tough man you are.

        • I an not defending Cantwell’s actions and he really displays awful judgment, but he turned himself in promptly and peacefully. It is completely nuts that he was denied bail.

      • There have been several high-profile cases, books, Nightline specials, etc. about the amount of federal infiltration into white supremacist groups.
        After so much publicity of federal informants, all the way to the tops of these organizations, if someone is a member of one of these groups, they’ve proven that they deserve to be played by the feds.

  15. Have they arrested the hairspray torch guy? Both were idiots, both should get the same charge.

    I know idiot, as a teenager we used to have flamethrower wars, and bb gun wars (rule was it had to bounce off the driveway first), with no better reason that we were bored. That was until we accidentally burned down a barn, the subsequent beating was epic.

  16. That was the quietest handgun shot ever. No one jumped, hit the ground, ran screaming away? Not buying it. Someone can discharge a handgun in a packed club with music pounding and people immediately react to it by fleeing or hitting the ground.
    Very fishy Video.

    • “That was the quietest handgun shot ever. No one jumped, hit the ground, ran screaming away? Not buying it.”

      Yep, and no muzzle flash on a short-barrel pistol.

      As far as the law is concerned, a plastic replica / Airsoft / BB-gun is the same as an actual gun when it comes to being arrested, charged, the trial, convicted, and sentenced…

    • That may be a quirk of whatever camera is being used. Loud noises often sound weird on camera. Supposedly another video being shot elsewhere in the area also picked up the sound confirming it was plenty loud enough to be heard over the fervor of the protesters and counter-protesters.

      • Indeed it can, the recorder’s automatic level control can make the original sound sound weird.

        *However*, if the sound was loud enough, the *echo* would be audible.

        It was a downtown area with lots of brick buildings to reflect the sound. The echo should have been audible, but isn’t…

    • “…stupid people,stupid places. Avoid…”

      Well, as Manfred Mann once said in the 70’s :

      “But, mamma, that’s where the fun is!”

      *snicker* 😉

  17. I’ll wait for the court case to begin. I want to see if this guy brought a gun to a flamethrower fight!!! That’s what a aerosol can is with 6 or 7 feet of flame coming out of it.

    If there is ANYONE who wants to justify using a flamethrower, at a protest, please step forward.

    • The entire Left and some Republican politicians just stepped forward. Didn’t you get the memo? Violence is OK as long as it’s “anti-hate” violence.

  18. Nothing about the interaction suggests to me that he actually thought he was in imminent harm given he relatively calmly walks away afterwards.

    That said, a lawman who shot the guy with the “flame thrower” probably would have got an extended paid vacation (aka paid administrative leave) and then returned to the force.

    If I was in his shoes, I would have just turned and left before doing anything rash, but then again, I would never have been in his shoes. I don’t go hang-out in those sorts of crowds.

      • You must have watched a different video than I did, because it is clear he didn’t shoot at anyone. He intentionally pointed at the ground.

  19. Before finding the man guilty, evidence is required.

    Was a bullet recovered? Was the alleged firearm recovered? Was it a real firearm (not an air gun)?

    If it was an air gun or blanks, did his use of it break any laws?

  20. Don’t be too sure all is as it appears. Lots and lots conflicting information coming out of the Charlottesville, VA event ! Not least of which is this entire event may be a staged “happening” ( of which this shooter could be a part ) as there’s a growing body of video evidence and first-person accounts recounting the eruption of a “flashmob'” appearing on a quiet street from multiple busses parked together nearby in full screaming chat armed with clubs, bottles and various sorts ( its alleged ) condoms and balloons filled with liquid, feces and the pungent substances. .

  21. “New Video Shows Man Shooting Towards Counter-Protesters During Charlottesville Protest”?

    Not quite!

    What I see is a patriotic, law-abiding American, exercising HIS 2nd Amendment Right and a Virginian’s “right” to defend not only himself but another/others who were under attack by violent homemade flamethrower wielding/deadly weapon possessing Anarchists/Marxists/Leninists/Trotskyites.

    Despite the state attorney’s grandstanding in order to curry favor with the Leftist-dominated “news” media the individual pictured WILL be acquitted at trial if it ever gets that far as I suspect charges will quietly be dropped.

    Deo Vindice

  22. Shooting in the ground near a guy wielding a flamethrower to possibly assault or kill people seems reasonable. Might as well shoot to hit in such a situation, given how some places don’t allow brandishing but only self defense where the bad guy drops dead. And using a flamethrower on protesters kinda makes you the bad guy.
    Probably not the best thing the gunowner did here legally or for the public image of gunowners, but hey, he showed a flamethrower-guy what not to do and nobody got hurt.

  23. He said “Hey Nigger” before he tried to shoot the Black man in the head, realized he didn’t have a round chambered (or he had a misfire), then successfully fired a shot. Unless he’s just generally threatened by Black men (no excuse), like so many here are, then there’s really no more you need to know about his fear.

  24. He’s also known KKK named Richard Preston and has a rap sheet that includes assault and rape, but ya’ll keep on defending him. Actually, him being KKK might get him more defenders here.

Comments are closed.