Other State Albequerque Shooting: Charges Dropped

[awshoot]

Shooting charge dropped against suspected New Mexico shooter

A New Mexico prosecutor on Wednesday dropped a shooting charge against an Albuquerque man suspected of shooting a protester and called for further investigations after allegations the protester was armed at the time he was shot.

www.reuters.com

Though not over:

Torrez dropped an initial aggravated battery with a deadly weapon charge against Steven Baca, 31, after images emerged online showing protester Scott Williams, 39, holding what was rumored to be a knife before he was allegedly shot by Baca. Torrez said he expected Baca to claim self defense in the case.

"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," Torrez told an online press briefing. "The reason he is not facing that charge right now is because this investigation is not complete."

Torrez filed four new charges against Baca for unlawful carrying of a firearm and battery for allegedly assaulting three women before the shooting.

Read More

 

[awshoot]

What would be fair here, is for charges to be filed against the dude who got shot.

That said, it was insanely stupid of Baca to go there in the first place and beyond stupid to go there armed illegally.

 

[Dungannon]

Not surprised he was defending the statue. There were huge Spanish land grants made to the Baca family back in the day, as they are descended from one of the conquistadors.

 

[awshoot]

Interview with parents of the man shot:

Mother Of Man Shot: 'We Want To Leverage This Situation For Change'

The parents of an Albuquerque man who was shot Monday near the statue of colonizer Juan de Oñate in Old Town say Scott Williams, now hospitalized in…

www.kunm.org

 

[Sawdust]

Interview with parents of the man shot:

Mother Of Man Shot: 'We Want To Leverage This Situation For Change'

The parents of an Albuquerque man who was shot Monday near the statue of colonizer Juan de Oñate in Old Town say Scott Williams, now hospitalized in…

www.kunm.org

So................
What do they have to say about their son beating the crap out of a man who was retreating?

 

[American123]

What about him carrying the gun was illegal?

 

[nwslopoke]

How do people of any background have the expectation to put hands on another man and receive no blowback? It happens. People do win lotteries but those are rare too. I have been told, prison is the most dangerous place as well as being the most polite place in America. There are rules, boundaries and severe consequences for not following them. What this shows is even criminals can learn. This man child who was shot has already been taught one lesson. Hopefully he will be brought up on assault charges and learn a few more.

 

[Stomper]

He can learn to toss a salad...

 

[Diamondback]

He can learn to toss a salad...

Probably already has that down pat... just not the kind in a restaurant.

 

[KalashnaKobold]

Everything I find has him violently throwing around a woman protesting and possibly pepperspraying people, if this is blue shirt guy. I have been trying to pay little attention to all this crap but if those videos are all true, in my opinion, he should be charged.

 

[awshoot]

What about him carrying the gun was illegal?

I'm going to guess that it has to do with concealing without a license. It appears NM is not a Constitutional Carry state: New Mexico Concealed Carry: Laws and Reciprocity - With Interactive Map

 

[awshoot]

Everything I find has him violently throwing around a woman protesting and possibly pepperspraying people, if this is blue shirt guy. I have been trying to pay little attention to all this crap but if those videos are all true, in my opinion, he should be charged.

Let's say it's true (and there are also reports that the woman was assaulting him before she got pushed) -- but let's just assume everything you said is absolute fact for the sake of argument.

Baca was in full retreat -- the first fight had ended -- and then some people started a new attack where THEY were the initial aggressors and Baca was the defender.

This means Baca could be prosecuted for the fight he started (note that the prosecutor has added a charge exactly for that). But Baca didn't start fight number two and so Baca is not the IG, he's a defender in Fight #2, and the person who started Fight #2 (the one who got shot) should also be charged. Let's also remember that the people starting Fight #2 weren't singing kumbaya -- they were rioters destroying public property for ideological reasons (using violence to achieve political goals is terrorism).

There is a separate issue of whether Baca lawfully carried a gun -- it appears to me that he had it concealed before the shooting. If he didn't have a license to carry concealed, that would explain the other new charge against him.

 

[American123]

I'm going to guess that it has to do with concealing without a license. It appears NM is not a Constitutional Carry state: New Mexico Concealed Carry: Laws and Reciprocity - With Interactive Map

Ok, under our current laws, that would be a problem (although anyone who understands the intentions of the 2nd Amendment knows that a citizen would have never needed a permit to keep arms in his possession that were not openly displayed)

 

[DustyCox]

Baca escalated the situation and became a violent counterprotestor. What stake does he have protecting a statue? Baca is an irresponsible gun owner who makes the rest of us look bad. Concealing a firearm without a permit, and initiating violence with a firearm in an already volatile situation. If any other protestor there had a gun, it had the possibility to turn into a massacre. Then imagine the calls for gun bans after the MSM got a hold of the story.

 

[American123]

Baca escalated the situation and became a violent counterprotestor. What stake does he have protecting a statue? Baca is an irresponsible gun owner who makes the rest of us look bad. Concealing a firearm without a permit, and initiating violence with a firearm in an already volatile situation. If any other protestor there had a gun, it had the possibility to turn into a massacre. Then imagine the calls for gun bans after the MSM got a hold of the story.

Yeah! It would have been morally superior to him having been beating to death....

He should have also self censored himself and have rethought going out in public because someone else might have had a different viewpoint than him.

He also should have let himself be physically bullied and never responded....

I watched the video where he "threw a woman to the ground" IDGAF - if a woman wants to physically impede a man and use her body as a barrier to bully/block/assault the rights of others to peacefully travel on public property - she can catch hands just as "equally" as a man can. We live in a modern society, equal rights come with equal lefts.

 

[DustyCox]

Yeah! It would have been morally superior to him having been beating to death....

He should have also self censored himself and have rethought going out in public because someone else might have had a different viewpoint than him.

He also should have let himself be physically bullied and never responded....

I watched the video where he "threw a woman to the ground" IDGAF - if a woman wants to physically impede a man and use her body as a barrier to bully/block/assault the rights of others to peacefully travel on public property - she can catch hands just as "equally" as a man can. We live in a modern society, equal rights come with equal lefts.

I'm just saying he was violent and escalated a situation needlessly. He could lead a peaceful protest and raise to put the statue back up at a later date.


It's cool you just said violence against a woman is cool if she's in the way of a man expressing his opinion. You're saying a man can be violent because he disagrees with someone's politics. Sounds like Antifa logic tbh.

 

[nwslopoke]

Antifas standard practices is to put women out front. Their male-ish members have zero problems attacking women. Even old women in wheelchairs. This is not to say it's ok to hit women. It's to say, there is a tactic out there. Fall for it and you can be famous as Reginald Denning. He took a brick to the face and lost half of his brain.

These may be kids. They may have great intentions. But they are violent and potentially dangerous.

 

[American123]

I'm just saying he was violent and escalated a situation needlessly. He could lead a peaceful protest and raise to put the statue back up at a later date.


It's cool you just said violence against a woman is cool if she's in the way of a man expressing his opinion. You're saying a man can be violent because he disagrees with someone's politics. Sounds like Antifa logic tbh.

If you are being physically impeded by someone choosing to use their body to stop you, and you have tried to go numerous directions and that person still is matching your movements to push against you with their body, whose the instigator? I was in downtown in Seattle, offering yo buy guns when they had a gun buyback, there was a policeman walking back and forth on the sidewalk saying me and everyone else had to leave a path for people to travel on the sidewalk, that we could not block the public right of way. Consider that members of the public have (in theory) equal rights to travel in public spaces, if one is using their body to block your movement, they are, by their actions, insinuating they have more right to use the space than you do. If you make effort to go around them and they still block you, now they have entered into the realm of aggressor.

Angifa logic would be this: the man had a different opinion than me, he wore a red hat, he was carrying an American flag, so I had to physically attack him! The giant difference between my point and Antifa is that they use violence to silence others, whereas, I am saying, "if someone is choosing to physically engage with you, they have given the invitation to be physically engaged back, regardless of what is between their legs."

 

[DustyCox]

If you are being physically impeded by someone choosing to use their body to stop you, and you have tried to go numerous directions and that person still is matching your movements to push against you with their body, whose the instigator? I was in downtown in Seattle, offering yo buy guns when they had a gun buyback, there was a policeman walking back and forth on the sidewalk saying me and everyone else had to leave a path for people to travel on the sidewalk, that we could not block the public right of way. Consider that members of the public have (in theory) equal rights to travel in public spaces, if one is using their body to block your movement, they are, by their actions, insinuating they have more right to use the space than you do. If you make effort to go around them and they still block you, now they have entered into the realm of aggressor.

Angifa logic would be this: the man had a different opinion than me, he wore a red hat, he was carrying an American flag, so I had to physically attack him! The giant difference between my point and Antifa is that they use violence to silence others, whereas, I am saying, "if someone is choosing to physically engage with you, they have given the invitation to be physically engaged back, regardless of what is between their legs."

Whatever you say boss. I just can't in good conscience assault a woman and then pull my gun out in a crowd of angry people while trying to defend an obscure statue whose name I don't even know.

 

[Camelfilter]

Could have, would have, should have are all interesting concepts.

Folks in this thread are discussing what actually occurred.

Not what might have, had no one been there, had one side only been there, had the other side only been there.

IMO, some "peaceful protestors" decided, for whatever reason, not to be peaceful.

One of whom decided, for whatever reason, to use a large skateboard type thing as a weapon. Bashing someone about the head with it, while the bashee was attempting to defend himself with hands/arms only after being taken to ground.

The basher was shot by the bashee. No one else was shot. Pretty straight forward defensive gun use.

The gunshot wounds, subsequent medical care & any other ramifications the shoot (rehab, missed work, court costs), are all on the basher.

IMO