Protester shot and killed at ‘No Kings’ rally in Utah, police say
Protester shot and killed at ‘No Kings’ rally in Utah, police say
Salt Lake City police say a demonstrator who was shot at the city's “No Kings” protest has died and that the bullet that killed him appears to have been fired by one of the demonstration's peacekeepers.
A man who was believed to be part of a peacekeeping team for the “No Kings” protest in Salt Lake City shot at a person who was brandishing a rifle at demonstrators, striking both the rifleman and a bystander who later died at the hospital, authorities said Sunday.
Police took the alleged rifleman, Arturo Gamboa, 24, into custody Saturday evening on a murder charge, Salt Lake City Police Chief Brian Redd said at a Sunday news conference. The bystander was Arthur Folasa Ah Loo, 39, a fashion designer from Samoa.
Detectives don’t yet know why Gamboa pulled out a rifle or ran from the peacekeepers, but they accused him of creating the dangerous situation that led to Ah Loo’s death. The Associated Press did not immediately find an attorney listed for Gamboa or contact information for his family in public records.
You're viewing a single thread.
What I'm reading is that the guy with a rifle, Gamboa, has attended protests armed before. It looks like the peacekeeper thought he was a shooter, but there's no evidence so far Gamboa did anything illegal.
Yeah in another thread there's an interview of the rifleman from his time in a punk band talking about the system. This is likely going to be a shit show when the partisan pundits pick it up
Yea what I read was that he was "pointing a rifle at protesters".
Don't aim a gun at a person if you are not ready to fight and die.
I would argue this is not only self defence, but public defence.
Edit: looks like its not completely clear if he was brandishing the rifle or just open carying, obviously my argument doesn't technically hold water if he was just open carrying.
I would also argue that open carying a weapon well know for use in mass shootings right next to a large crowd is probably a dumb idea even if it's legal to do.
It looks like the peacekeeper thought he was a shooter
As he should.
Brandish a firearm in public, you are attempting to intimidate others, so you'll get treated like the terrorist you are.
Brandish a firearm in public
Be real careful applying the term "brandish".
Utah is a constitutional carry state, meaning anyone 21+ who can legally own a firearm can carry it concealed or openly without a permit.
In my state, Minnesota, you have to take a class and qualify to carry a firearm and during the state approved training your told to follow these steps:
- No force - avoidance, retreat or de-escalating
- No force - Telephone for help, Verbal warning
- Unarmed self defense
- Less than lethal - exposing firearm
- Deadly force - pointing the firearm at another person, shooting at someone, shooting and killing someone
Thank you. I didn't wanna have to type anything even as close to good as this.
That's not the law, or reality in America. It's a regular occurrence at certain protests for people to open carry weapons. Not saying I would do it, but it's not sufficient cause to shoot someone.
Brandishing a weapon is not the same as carrying it. Brandishing is what you do when moving the firearm in a way that indicates you are threatening to shoot. In the worst case, it involves pointing the firearm at someone.
If someone purposely points a firearm at you, you have every right to fire in self defence. At least those were the rules of engagement we were taught regarding interactions with civilians at home when I was in the army.
The only people brandishing in the video are the self-described "peacekeepers" who are aiming their pistols into the crowd. The open-carrier isn't even looking their way and appears just as surprised as everyone else when one of these peacekeepers starts blasting (with minimal awareness or concern for whomever else was downrange).
I wasn't commenting on whether or not anyone was brandishing, but on the fact that it is reasonable to treat someone brandishing a firearm as a lethal threat.
In short: You are justified in shooting someone who is armed and clearly indicates they are about to open fire on you. You don't need to wait for them to get off a shot before firing back.
In the whole, I'm very glad my country isn't as heavily armed as the US, and this is one of the reasons. When a bunch of people are walking around with guns, the potential for situations getting out of hand and people getting killed is much larger. It's enough that someone misunderstands someone else's intentions, and you can suddenly have people shooting. I would honestly be terrified if everywhere I went there were people that could potentially kill me at a moments notice without even getting close to me.
This gif isn't loading on my phone, but supposedly it's the same as a video I had seen earlier - it shows Gamboa walking towards the street but his rifle is pointed down. It also shows the yellow vested people pointing their guns toward him. If the gif also doesn't work for you, scroll further up in the thread to at least see screenshots. The op of that thread, Chad Loder, has been commenting on this shooting a fair amount. https://bsky.app/profile/nope-notnow.bsky.social/post/3lrp7xsx3vs22
I was commenting on the general situation of "are you justified in treating someone brandishing a weapon as a lethal threat?", not the specifics of this situation. I haven't seen the video, so won't comment on whether this person specifically was brandishing or not.
Open carry and brandish have distinct legal definitions.
Also it wasn't open carried to the protest, it was retrieved mid protest from a hidden location
This gif isn't loading on my phone, but supposedly it's the same as a video I had seen earlier - it shows Gamboa walking towards the street but his rifle is pointed down. It also shows the yellow vested people pointing their guns toward him. If the gif also doesn't work for you, scroll further up in the thread to at least see screenshots. The op of that thread, Chad Loder, has been commenting on this shooting a fair amount. https://bsky.app/profile/nope-notnow.bsky.social/post/3lrp7xsx3vs22
This gif isn't loading on my phone, but supposedly it's the same as a video I had seen earlier - it shows Gamboa walking towards the street but his rifle is pointed down. It also shows the yellow vested people pointing their guns toward him. If the gif also doesn't work for you, scroll further up in the thread to at least see screenshots. The op of that thread, Chad Loder, has been commenting on this shooting a fair amount. https://bsky.app/profile/nope-notnow.bsky.social/post/3lrp7xsx3vs22
Oh to be clear I wasn't arguing the reality, but brandishing is what he's accused of and that's legally very different from open carrying.
Isn't this what the NRA wants? Sounds like a good guy with a gun stopped a potential mass shooting.
I know Arturo, he was there to support the protests. He was NOT going to do a mass shooting, as he has taken his gun to at least one other protest with no incident.
How are people supposed to know his intentions?
I just posted elsewhere, but in short, there's no proof that Gamboa brandished a gun, and I've seen a video which looked like he was pointing the rifle downward. Not saying it can't go the other way once more info comes out, but just like when you shouldn't automatically take the police's word when they shoot someone, we shouldn't take the word of private security.
Pedantic arguments about the word brandish are pointless. He was walking through a crowd with a a rifle and wearing a mask. We don’t like it when the cops do it and shouldn’t tolerate it when anyone else does either. It’s too risky for us all and mass shootings are a real danger here.
words have meanings. open carrying and brandishing are very different, and one can get you, quite justifiably, killed. if this guy was brandishing his firearm, then it's no surprise that he got shot at. if he was open carrying, as i'm inclined to believe, then he should have not gotten shot at.
Is it pedantic when it means the difference between life and death?
I'm not saying I agree with someone open carrying at a protest. I'm saying if that's all they're doing it's not appropriate to charge them with murder, when if they were only open carrying it would be the security officer who overreacted and shot an innocent bystander to death.
A situation we could have avoided if there were stricter gun controls, but there aren't.
I agree with you, but if you look at the video he's not pointing it down holding it weakly, he's got it pointed slightly below waist level basically ready to fire. It seems like he's not ABOUT to fire, but he's in a combat stance with the rifle and his hand position being ready and shooting in less than a second. If you hadn't been looking at him the whole time I could easily see someone thinking he had just raised his weapon and was about to shoot.
That is what I'm thinking. At first I went along with the speculation that Gamboa was intending to shoot into the crowd. But after reviewing the video, it looks more like he was just walking and open carrying with the rifle pointed down. It might not have been the best move in hindsight, but he had the legal right to do so.
Also after listening to his Slugmag interview I'm just not seeing the motivation for a mass shooting. Unless maybe he intended to shoot cops or something. He just doesn't seem to fit the profile & ideology of a mass shooter.
Edit: the interview if anyone is curious https://www.slugmag.com/soundwaves/episode-364-rade/
Which video are you talking about? Please provide a link.
EDIT: I think this is it. The short snippet shows the barrel pointed down. Having a masked gunman in a crowd of people is terrifying af!
Dressed in all black with a mask and a gun walking briskly toward a crowd...
Helpful link, thank you
Exactly. The peacekeeper who shot into the crowd should be charged instead.
I dunno about that. The peacekeeper saw the dude go retrieve a rifle, confronted him, and he ran aiming the rifle at the crowd.
I suppose your argument is that the guy hadn't actually pulled the trigger when the peacekeeper acted? That seems insane to me.
The shooter and another person in a neon vest allegedly saw Gamboa separate from the crowd of marchers in downtown Salt Lake City, move behind a wall and withdraw a rifle around 8 p.m., Redd said.
When the two men in vests confronted Gamboa with their handguns drawn, witnesses said Gamboa raised his rifle into a firing position and ran toward the crowd, said Redd.
There's no confrontation in the video. The open-carrier was walking calmly and not even facing the "peacekeepers" while they were aiming their pistols at him and into the crowd. The open-carrier doesn't start running until shots ring out, and appears just as surprised as everyone else. This "peacekeeper" should definitely be charged for endangering the lives in that crowd, if not for manslaughter.
Can you please post a link to the video?
Sure, here's the same link posted elsewhere in the comments: https://imgur.com/a/z3J25EB
Thanks, everything I had seen before was just a video of people running after hearing gunshots.
No confrontation is in the article. If you have another source that says there was, please provide it.
Edited the order of events in my comment. Sounds like the confrontation didn't happen until after he grabbed his rifle.