I have to say that the video of that last guy trying to claim that you can see a gun on the ground that is obscured by the officer-in-red's foot was less than compelling. As far as I can tell, it looks a lot more like the extension of a shadow that we see leading right up to his feet. He's arguing that people are experiencing "confirmation bias", but it feels like he's experiencing it too (in reverse to their viewpoint, of course).
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
I thought the same thing too, about him being "confirmation bias". Though if the officer in red was marking a gun he would act like he did. However, to me the gun is a mute point. He wasn't a criminal, innocent, so he had a right to a gun. Thanks!