Armed militia member arrested, identified after man is shot at Albuquerque protest

What he is carrying is a garrotte. Used for strangulation. You can see the wire in the photo coming from his left hand. So these are not knives. Hopefully the cops recovered this in the aftermath, but I'm sure one of the commies probably picked it up.

This is what he was attacking the blue shirt dude with:

View attachment 366003
I would say worse as it has zero defensive value
 
I have, as a matter of fact.

Did he not spread disease? I hardly think mentioning that is ahistorical. It was fairly important, though unintended. Should we only teach the "good parts?"
Many people spread disease - And this happened long before modern germ theory so to include bringing old world germs in the curriculum in any terms other than it was done without knowledge or intent is rewriting history.
Was CC a good guy - probably not ,but that isn't reasons to invent evil intent with regards to disease.
 
Just thought I would update this with a little bit of truth instead of speculation....

1. The idiot shooter has not been charged with the actual shooting, because so far the investigation shows that it was
in self defense, because his attacker was threatening him with a knife (not a garrot.) He was charged with illegal carrying
a concealed weapon, and also with assault from his previous actions, i.e. throwing a female to the ground (Although a good
defense attorney could argue that her prior actions could also be deemed as physical assault.)

2. The idiot that got shot will most likely be charged with Assault with a deadly weapon before he is discharged
from the hospital. And he was not shot while running away. He got shot, then proceeded to run away and collapsed!

3. There were more than a few undercover police officers there, and they are still searching for other suspects to charge.

4. The shooter, was not a member of the so called "militia" group. (They also had a TV interview with one of militia members, and he seemed
like an Airsoft, wannabee loser....but this is my opinion.) And the only thing any militia members did was secure the weapon after
the shooting until police arrived.

5. The Governor has called in the State Police, because she and the Mayor are upset that the APD investigation is not
backing up their previous narrative/bullshit about this being the result of "right wing militia members."

6. Although the shooter is an idiot in my opinion, if the Antifa idiot tries to sue him, I will contribute money to the
shooters defense fund.

And the OP really should change the title of this post, because this whole mess had nothing to do with "Militia!"


Seems like APD has their shit in order here. The charges all seem appropriate to what we saw in the videos. I disagree with the charge of illegal carrying of a concealed weapon on moral grounds that all such charges are bullshit, but other than that, I think this looks right.

The governor and mayor both can eat a giant bag of dicks for trying to spin this against law abiding citizens. I hope everyone in Albuquerque and New Mexico in general remember this bullshit when it's time to vote.
 
A permit for a constitutional right...
That's all those tyrants could fake up to illegally kidnap and detain him..

Good thing the police have guns and where were they when this all went down?

To protect themselves and serve you with a prison sentence!

We allow our politicians to tell the police to arrest those that they don't approve of.

Kind of like what those Germans did so many years ago..

We need more restrictions on the rights of the police and not of our citizens.

The police would have said it was a good shoot without a doubt in their minds, if this was one of their own.

I love how everyone is saying this guy had no right to be there and what his motive was.
He has just as much right as those demonstrators have and he wasn't the one destroying public property!

So we should allow all burning and looting all across America no matter who's property it is, huh.
All the military bases and equipment burned to the ground because our government owns them too.
How about all our Navy ships? Them too?

At where do you draw the line?

They are building a power keg and it's only a matter of time if they don't stop their actions.

If they stopped those from destroying property from the get go.
I don't think we would be in the mess we are today.
 
Last edited:
So the police and DA are going to charge him..Hmmm...

But at that Atlanta GA., Wendy's shooting where it was only one guy vs two officers and everyone thinks that shooting was justified.
In Atlanta, I call it what it is, murder.
The officer shot a man holding a non-lethal device. Remember those same devices are deemed non-lethal and safe to use on the civilian population.
The perp was running away and posed no immediate lethal threat.

Here we have a man, who has a right as they do, to peacefully assemble and multiple men advancing towards him with one loudly stating he is going to kill him.
He did fear for his life as officers have when they were faced with the same circumstances.
Except it's ok to threaten to kill this man, simply because he was at the same place as they were?
What the hell is wrong with anyone that agree's with him being prosecuted for his actions when they justify the police for doing the same thing?

Look at how a police officer can draw his weapon anytime he feels like his life is in danger.
Yet for the lowly serfs, we would be charged with assault with a deadly weapon and brandishing.

When was the last time a police officer was charged for discharging his firearm within city limits or 500 feet of a dwelling.
Those charges are likely to be added to this mans long list of things that the police and DA are going to pursue for the same actions a police officer would not!

Police patrol rifle/civilian assault rifle.

How many times has an officer pulled out his firearm and threatened to kill a perp and they still carry a badge.
Then see how easy our 2A rights can be stripped away forever, while so many in law enforcement have done way worse and are immune from those consequences.

This is yet another wtf moment, in what is wrong with the inequality of police policy and actions vs those of the people.

Can't wait till they have the same rights as us lowly serfs...

The deck is stacked against our civilian population in regards to our right of personal protection.
When the police, DA, and the judges act/rule with a bias against a civilian for doing the exact same thing that they did in a self defense situation.

Someone more educated than I am, please explain were our rights ended and were we gave those to the law enforcement?
Non-lethal devices are meant to incapacitate. The officer has every right to fully defend himself using lethal force once the stun gun was taken from him. Follow this through...Bad guy takes taser, officer gets tased, bad guy gets real gun, shoots incapacitated officer and engages the other in a firefight with innocent civilians present. Fully justified shooting as per their training.
 
I get that the officer followed what his training called for and that he actions were fully justified by his departments protocol to do so.
If Georgia classifies a stun gun a lethal weapon, then the officer was justified in shooting the perp to protect the lives of the other officer and himself.

If Georgia does not classify a stun gun as a lethal device then by their own standards that officer's actions are subject to scrutiny.

Saying he was shot just because the officer thinks he will take away the other officers pistol.
Is not enough to justify, what he is doing at the exact moment in time when he was shot!
No one knows what his next actions were. That is why there is so much talk about this incident.



If any civilian in America shot a perp aiming a stun gun at him.
I can guarantee he would be charged with murder.

That is why this is such a hot topic in today's climate.
 
Last edited:


Bernalillo County District Attorney Raúl Torrez said, “There have been rumors on social media about what transpired in the final seconds before this and we are actively looking into those and whether or not this was justified. The reason he is not facing that charge right now is because this investigation is not complete.”

Is the DA talking about charging Williams the guy with the knife who was shot? Because if not this sure sounds like the DA is reserving the option of come back at Baca if the mob cries too loudly about the dismissal.

🐯
 
I get that the officer followed what his training called for and that he is fully justified by his department to do.
If Georgia classifies a stun gun a lethal weapon, then the officer was justified in shooting the perp to protect the lives of the other officer and himself.

If Georgia does classify a stun gun as a lethal device then by their own standards that officer's actions are subject to scrutiny.

If any civilian in America shot a perp aiming a stun gun at him.
I can guarantee he would be charged with murder.

That is why this is such a hot topic in today's climate.

I disagree. If I shot someone in NH pointing a stun gun at me (who had already assaulted me), I doubt I would be charged.
 
Xtry51, the doubt is the problem.
No one can really say until someone is not charged or they are charged and they are cleared of said charges.

We have seen time and time again were the police arrest, DA prosecutes and courts find someone guilty.
Because of a double standard of wording, when it comes to a civilian act of self defense vs one of a federal or state LEO involved incident taking place.
The above institutional bias is what is so troubling in any of these officer involved shooting/perceived excessive use of force incidents.

We are told to flee and asked could you have let the perp run away, instead of chasing after him?
Did you have to physically assault him to get him to comply?
He was x amount of feet away, were you really at risk at the exact moment you defended yourself and any number of things they would use against you to get a conviction.
We are not allowed to shoot someone simply because they stole a firearm from our person.
The perp's criminal record would be totally inadmissible in our defense case.
What is considered a justified a deadly encounter for the police, is considered a minor assault for the common man and that individual will be incarcerated for those same actions.

We as civilians have to exhaust every avenue of de-escalation and distance in any type of self defense encounter.
We are still charged, sent to jail to get bail, stand before a judge.
When an officer usually has the charges dropped without any of those occurring.
They truly do hate and extremely discourage any act of self defense by civilians in this country.

The Trevor Martin case is a perfect example of the above bias.
In that case the defendant was found innocent. But still had the full weight of the law over his shoulders until he was cleared of wrongdoing.

People should be upset over a bias system and leave the officers out of the issue.
If they are following what they have been trained and their department and state guidelines are.
 
Last edited:
Would you be happier with, and support the removal of police exemptions? Would you consider that a step in the right direction?

How about removing exemptions the Massachusetts legislature and governor enjoy?
 
I think they would sure like to charge the guy, but now with the picture of the ANTIFA turd swinging knife all over the internet it's going to be hard to pass it off as anything but liberal crap siding with ANTIFA.
Damn good thing for that picture or the shooter would be toast.
 
Seems like APD has their shit in order here. The charges all seem appropriate to what we saw in the videos. I disagree with the charge of illegal carrying of a concealed weapon on moral grounds that all such charges are bullshit, but other than that, I think this looks right.

The governor and mayor both can eat a giant bag of dicks for trying to spin this against law abiding citizens. I hope everyone in Albuquerque and New Mexico in general remember this bullshit when it's time to vote.

Not the Police. they rushed charges. The prosecutor dropped the top charge.

"The New Mexico man who allegedly shot a protester in Albuquerque on Monday is no longer charged with the most serious count of aggravated battery after prosecutors expressed concerns about the police department's "rushed" handling of the investigation.
"Frankly, we have been put in a situation too many times in this community where investigations are rushed, investigations are incomplete, and there is an expectation that quick decisions are made," Bernalillo County District Attorney Raul Torrez told a news conference Wednesday."


 
I get that the officer followed what his training called for and that he actions were fully justified by his departments protocol to do so.
If Georgia classifies a stun gun a lethal weapon, then the officer was justified in shooting the perp to protect the lives of the other officer and himself.

If Georgia does not classify a stun gun as a lethal device then by their own standards that officer's actions are subject to scrutiny.

Saying he was shot just because the officer thinks he will take away the other officers pistol.
Is not enough to justify, what he is doing at the exact moment in time when he was shot!
No one knows what his next actions were. That is why there is so much talk about this incident.



If any civilian in America shot a perp aiming a stun gun at him.
I can guarantee he would be charged with murder.

That is why this is such a hot topic in today's climate.

Better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6. Sorry hoss, but someone pulls a stun gun on me I’m pulling my Glock and shooting. Risk to safety from the stun gun is no different. Less than lethal does not mean non-lethal and the reality is once you’re incapacitated, you can’t stop what happens next, to you or your family.
 
Last edited:
MAV, let's hope no citizen of MA is ever faced with that scenario.
Just remember that the police, liberal DA and liberal judge will say that you shot an unarmed man and that a tazer is not a lethal weapon.
They will apply the highest of standards and double standards of self defense in your situation vs those of a LEO officer.

Let's hope it's only a minor wound and that the case is somehow dropped as the deck is stacked against us here in relation to our right of self protection.

Even if you win your case in criminal court, the perp can still sue you in civil court for what ever your defense lawyer has left you with.

Maybe we'll get lucky and one of our resident lawyers will chime in with his view of this.
 
Last edited:
I get that the officer followed what his training called for and that he actions were fully justified by his departments protocol to do so.
If Georgia classifies a stun gun a lethal weapon, then the officer was justified in shooting the perp to protect the lives of the other officer and himself.

If Georgia does not classify a stun gun as a lethal device then by their own standards that officer's actions are subject to scrutiny.

Saying he was shot just because the officer thinks he will take away the other officers pistol.
Is not enough to justify, what he is doing at the exact moment in time when he was shot!
No one knows what his next actions were. That is why there is so much talk about this incident.



If any civilian in America shot a perp aiming a stun gun at him.
I can guarantee he would be charged with murder.

That is why this is such a hot topic in today's climate.
So, someone pulls a gun on you, we dont know what the next action will be, do you wait to find out.........
 
See, that second vid towards the beginning. The kid makes a slow motion sweep at him with the green skateboard. Looks fake af, unless its just a video glitch that makes it look that way. Its like its an act and he is just pretending to hit the guy
After seeing the video someone tell me how that's not a good shoot?
 
So, someone pulls a gun on you, we don't know what the next action will be, do you wait to find out.........
If I know it's a real firearm and I'm within a distance that I believe that I may be legal and justified and the person has the physical and mental capacity to cause me death or grave bodily.
Then yes, I would very well would defend myself using a firearm.
That doesn't necessarily mean I would intend to kill them.
There are many things you could do with a firearm that doesn't end up with someone being killed.

The problem is out in public, you may will be labeled and branded as a vigilante for such an incident.

In my home, without a doubt or a second thought, if again it wasn't some young kid with possibly a fake gun.

I have to live by my actions and there is no way right or wrong, I would rather pause that extra moment to ensure I'm making the right decision vs acting too quickly and killing someone against my own moral code.

Just because someone says I can use deadly force, doesn't mean I won't decide for myself .
I would rather choose to risk my life in the next couple of seconds, to ensure I can live with my actions.
https://www.azfamily.com/news/tempe...cle_1f5fccf6-19e6-11e9-b3d1-ebcb3ea2e52e.html

People are looking at these police shootings, and asking themselves.
Just because it may be justified, does it mean they have to every single time?
Shooting of Tamir Rice - Wikipedia

In the military during combat, the enemy is killed on sight and you need lightning fast reflexes or you may not survive the next few seconds.

Some of these Police shootings are poorly viewed by the public, as an officer that was too quick to escalate the situation to deadly force.
Shooting of Charles Kinsey - Wikipedia
 
Last edited:
That doesn't necessarily mean I would intend to kill them.
There are many things you could do with a firearm that doesn't end up with someone being killed.
-hall/2020/5/14/21258767/chicago-police-shooting-settlement-khalil-muhammad-richard-hayes[/URL]
Effing "shoot 'em in the leg" Joe Biden is a NES member? Explains the moniker a bit.....Maybe you should change it to Worm in brain.
 
In regards to Atlanta Taser. Anybody here been hit with a taser? I can tell you from personal experience, it is the lonnnnggest five seconds of your life where you are 100% DEFENSELESS.
Stopping a threat doesn't mean you have to kill them..

Where do you shoot them that has zero chance of being lethal ?
Now i'm intrigued .
 
Back
Top Bottom