On Monday night, as I noted yesterday, someone (or more than one someone) shot five Black Lives Matter protesters in Minneapolis. Witnesses to the shooting and others who have been following the protest say that the shots came from a small group of white supremacists who had been hanging around the protest for days. .
We still don’t know who pulled the trigger, but it is growing increasingly clear that most if not all of the small squad of racists at the protest were 4channers associated with the /pol/ and /k/ boards, the first a politics board overrun with racists and conspiracy theories and the second a hangout for weapons enthusiasts.
But a lot has happened since my last post, so here’s a roundup of some of the more significant developments.
The police are holding four men — all white, and all in their twenties — allegedly involved in the shooting.
According to local newspaper, police have arrested 23-year-old Lawrence “Lance” Scarsella III, who is one of the two masked men shown driving to the protests in this video last week. (Here’s what appears to be a video of the arrest.)
Ironically, Black Powder Ranger, as Scarsella is apparently known online, was not the one brandishing the gun. BLM activists say that SaigaMarine, the gun-toting racist driving the car and spouting racist epithets, was the somewhat older Hispanic man arrested and released yesterday because he evidently had an alibi for the night of the shooting.
Two other men — identified as Daniel Thomas Macey and Nathan Gustavsson — turned themselves in to police yesterday. Newsweek reports that the police are also questioning a fourth man, Joseph Backman.
While we still don’t know the details of the shooting, someone — apparently one of the 4chan gang — sent a video to a local radio station that appears to show what happened in the minutes immediately before the shooting, in which a group of BLM protesters confronted the 4channers filming their protest. Unfortunately, the video has no sound
Videos of the racist gang at the protest — there are several making the rounds on YouTube — make it abundantly clear that they are either 4channers or others intimately familiar with 4chan lingo. One of the gang even sports a /k/ patch on his jacket.
Much of their conversation consists of little more than repitition of 4chan memes and coded language (e.g. “cultural enrichment”) that they apparently thought would conceal their racism from the Black Lives Matter crowd. No such luck for them: BLM activists figured out relatively quickly that the small group of masked men talking amongst themselves as they not-so-secretly filmed the crowd were up to no good.
Here’s one of the videos of them at the demonstration:
While the racist gang at the protests is clearly connected to 4chan, it’s not clear if any of its members are connected to broader hate movements or subcultures, from GamerGate to the militia movement.
But they are certainly steeped in racism and in America’s gun culture. Digging through the limited information on the internet about the 4chan contingent at the protests, Raw Story notes that they seem to share “a fascination with guns, video games, the Confederacy and right-wing militia groups.”
The cover photo on Scarcella’s Facebook page, for example, shows what’s known as the Bonnie Blue Confederate flag. One of his Facebook likes is OAF Nation, a veterans’ group so right-wing that it has attacked other veterans’ groups for distributing what it called ” f*ggoty ass yard signs” asking those lighting fireworks to not do so near the homes of veterans with PTSD.
Gustavsson, one of the men who turned himself in, brandishes a rifle in his Facebook profile picture as well.
SaigaMarine — apparently the man arrested and released — also posed for his Facebook profile “armed and donning full military gear, the StarTribune reports. “He describes his occupation simply as ‘Saving the Constitution.'”
I will post more when I know more.
Please email me, or post in the comments below, if you see something.
Tell that to all the people killed by members of online hate groups.
Online and offline harassment, racism, bigotry, etc, are really no different from each other, except that it’s easier to get away with it online.
NYSE Laxative
As someone currently browsing /tg/ (Traditional Games which is basically TTRPGs, wargames, and MtG) and arguing with a ban evading rightwing anti-social-justice shitposter, ironic racism is just plain racism. 4chan is blatantly and unrepentantly racist, on all boards. Its literally built on racism and shitposting from the beginning. Trying to pretend that the shit posted there does not come from sincerely held beliefs just because some people pretend to be ironically racist is utterly disingenuous. The disclaimer saying it’s all fiction is a gross lie only designed to give cover for the worst people there.
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again — if you’re comfortable saying it “to troll”, or “ironically”, you don’t find it beyond the pale to say; you know people will agree and you’re fine with that.
Which makes you a fucker just as bad as the “sincere” fuckers. Maybe worse, they’re at least openly assholes and thus easier to avoid.
@kfreed
Nice summary. The media only scratched the surface of racist connections to Ron Paul’s political machine. The racist newsletters are just the tip of the iceberg:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ron_Paul_newsletters
http://ronpaulnewsletters.blogspot.com/
@ Jimmly Rus sla
Lolwut? GG is already a hate movement, something you’re not objecting to. Why would you be worried if someone is saying GG has a connection to other hate movements? Not that, with the plethora of anti Semitic cartoons mocking Anita, that isn’t already obvious.
I could say you’re dangerously close to sounding like a complete pillock.
(Apologies if this is duplicate. I don’t see it after several refreshes)
Okay, so I’m baffled why one comment appears to not be showing. Is it modded? Or something else wrong with comments? Are we not supposed to direct anything at the [troll who shall not be named]?
^Only reason I can imagine it being moderated….
If that troll is a certain MRA…L then I think he’s still modded
I also thought replies to him might be modded. There’s nothing else in my comment that is objectionable. Well, the troll might not be happy…
*shrugs*
The only ironic/sarcastic racism I can think of that’s not indistinguishable from real racism is the really ludicrous stuff. Something like “Latinos are taking over my community! They’re everywhere with their rough, woody bark, deep roots, and ability to photosynthesize! There’s one in my backyard right now! No, wait… Wait… I’m receiving word that those are, in fact, trees.”
And even then, there’s Poe’s Law to consider. So really it’s best to not be a racist shithead, ironic or not.
@Argenti Aertheri
Thank you.
The “ironic racism”, “ironic sexism” and “ironic fucking nazism” thing pisses me off so much because it’s just so cowardly.
It’s, to borrow a cliché, like wanting your cake and eating it too. You want to express your true, ignorant and hateful beliefs about say, racial relations, but don’t want to deal with the consequences. You want both to appeal to racists and cover your ass when it comes to non-racists. I can’t tell how often I’ve met someone like this outside of the internet, just casually pushing the buttons of people and when called out on their shit, insist it was “ironic”, and the other person should “lighten up”. It’s bullying, pure and simple.
It’s a sort of Family Guy “satire” attitude that we keep seeing in interactions with MRAs and other reactionaries: Say something offensive and add “just kidding” at the end. It’s all good, they may have said the most disgusting thing in the history of ever, but they were just kidding! It shines through in the whole trolling subculture, the desire to act like the most revolting asshole and not lose your social standing in the eyes of any halfway decent people. It makes sense in light of what the one game developer (Brianna Wu, IIRC?) said about GGrs: Many of them live life in a sort of video game illusion, where you can restart and try again if you fuck up, without having to deal with the pesky consequences.
Phew, rant over.
@NYSE Laxative:
This is simply untrue, in three different ways.
Firstly, there has been research done on the online/offline thing and it’s simply not the case. Human beings can’t compartmentalise themselves like that: a person who behaves like an asshole in one part of their life will slowly become an asshole in other parts, and likewise a person who acts kind and thoughtful in one part will become kinder and more thoughtful elsewhere. A person is, though they may choose to deny it, not a collection of personae, but rather a collection of ways they choose to express a single persona.
Secondly, online and offline can’t possibly be different worlds because everyone you interact with online is a real person who also exists in offline space. If you make a person laugh or cry over the web, then while you may not be able to see that react, it exists. Most sensible people will concede that the morality of actions is principally judged by their effect on others, meaning that any act carried out online has a moral dimension just as though it was carried out offline.
Thirdly, online doesn’t evolve? What on earth sort of claim is that? Internet memes (putting aside my dislike of the term used like that) do nothing but evolve. They change constantly by interacting with one another and taking in elements from their environment in order to stay relevant. I am sure that right now there is at least one Doge image on the web somewhere which references the Paris attacks, and at least one Downfall Hitler Rant video which references the Canadian elections. Web culture is possibly the best example of how evolution works.
@Catalpa:
I agree with your thesis statement entirely, but am I a bad person because I found that example really pretty funny?
@Hipsterminator,
Spike Leesystrata?
“I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again — if you’re comfortable saying it “to troll”, or “ironically”, you don’t find it beyond the pale to say; you know people will agree and you’re fine with that.”
That is my opinion, and it usually proves itself true, sooner or later.
I have the sudden urge to invent a time machine just so I can see Monty Python do this sketch.
So lemme get this straight: 4ch really believes you can shoot people for the lulz, MRAssholes are egging on violence, and the threat is refugees from Syria?
Man, I always knew the US had misplaced priorities but that just takes the cake.
Re: the legal aspects of this incident
First a general point. This crops up a lot so it would be helpful if people bear in mind that when lawyers predict a particular outcome it doesn’t mean they are endorsing that outcome.
This ties in with my second point. It’s really common in legal discussions for people to comment based on what they think the law is, or what they’d like the law to be, rather than what the law actually is. That often confuses things.
As to this specific topic, the law regarding use of force is a particularly misunderstood area. It’s not necessarily something that can be addressed in a few blog posts, it’s a highly specialised area requiring not just a knowledge of the law itself but also and understanding of violence generally (again, a subject that’s often misunderstood)
If people want a bit more detail then I can put a link to some lecture notes.
But to summarise, assuming that transcript reflects what happened, then the chances of these men being convicted are, as a matter of law, negligible.
As usual, everyone else already has the ironic racism thing well covered.
Alan,
I think you’re looking at this through the laws where you are. In Minnesota, there is a duty to retreat. It’s not a stand your ground state, and being afraid your life might be in danger is not enough.
You’re also making big assumptions here. You’re assuming that some racist troll posted an unedited and truthful interview. You’re assuming that the people shot were threatening or chasing the shooters.
@ WWTH
Oh yeah, there are subject differences in various jurisdictions. The basic principles are universal to all common law jurisdictions though.
Duty to retreat and SYG are areas that are particularly misunderstood. The retreat thing is not an absolute by any means, it’s more an evidential thing (an attempt at retreating is admissible evidence that your response was necessary and reasonable). SYG didn’t change the substantive law as such. It did affect some evidential presumptions but mainly it’s a procedural thing. It created a specific ground for a submission of no case to answer.
Like I say, if you want a bit more in depth thing about this (or you’re having trouble sleeping) I can post a link to some lecture notes of mine.
And you’re right about the weight of that transcript, hence my “if” qualification. I always follow the wise words of Abraham Lincoln “Never trust anything you read on the Internet”
They shot five fucking people. I’m sorry, there is no way shooting that many people was self defense. And like I said, you have absolutely no evidence any of those five people shot were doing anything threatening.
I don’t need more details about the law. I need you to stop playing devil’s advocate all the time.
You keep claiming not to be on the side of the bad guys here, but when you’re doing this shit in multiple threads simultaneously, it sure doesn’t feel that day.
Nobody asked for you to a mount a legal defense of these assholes. So why do you feel the need to do it?
Also, like I said given the racist history of Minneapolis police, that they arrested anyone at all shows that there is very likely some information that would lead them to believe that it was not legally self defense.
And more domestic terrorism that will likely never be called terrorism
http://gawker.com/active-shooter-reported-at-colorado-springs-planned-par-1744900903
Where is everyone? It’s so dead around here!
Alan –
As promised, here’s my most massive fucki???? eyeroll in your direction for your claim that it’s going to be defensible to shoot 5 random people because your buddy got punched by one while TRYING to get punched. Please.
“You keep claiming not to be on the side of the bad guys here, but when you’re doing this shit in multiple threads simultaneously, it sure doesn’t feel that day.”
I’ve noticed that it’s fairly common for male feminists (and “feminists”) in feminist spaces to spend an inordinate amount of time playing crappy devil’s advocate. I think it’s their way of trying to get attention because they’re uncomfortable with not getting noticed for just being there as much as they think they should.
I just put up a post on the Planned Parenthood situation. What a fucking mess.
Thanks, David.