Waukesha, WI, Parade Vehicle Attack - Suspect is Darrell Edward Brooks, currently in custody.

Who's responsible?

  • Glowies

    Votes: 196 9.4%

  • Incel

    Votes: 57 2.7%

  • Truck of Peace

    Votes: 222 10.6%

  • BLM

    Votes: 708 34.0%

  • Retaliation for Kyle's Acquittal

    Votes: 539 25.9%

  • Minceraft

    Votes: 128 6.1%

  • Alt-Right Nazi Gamergater Chud

    Votes: 108 5.2%

  • Other (please specify)

    Votes: 127 6.1%
  • Total voters
    2,085
I’m sure the guy with a storied history of running people down with his car meant to escape, he just wanted to incorporate his favorite activity to pass the time.

That must be the case, why else would he carefully drive around floats and vehicles within the parade and step on the gas as soon as he saw a crowd? Passing through multiple blockades, concrete or cardboard, surely couldn’t have got the message through his thick negroid skull that maybe he wasn’t following an ideal escape route from his frantic pursuit (by one cop, on foot).
 
  • Agree
  • Like
Reactions: Foreverial, Gender of peace, Mooner and 5 others
The Last Stand said:
What does the popular consensus say?

He just hates Joan Crawford. May or may not hate women, Hollywood or the Jews. Internet did not exist back then, so have fun with it.
Click to expand...
Or maybe he LOVED Joan Crawford and wants to kill her so that he can commit suicide and reunite with her in the afterlife as master and slave.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nazi Catboi
The Last Stand said:
What does the popular consensus say?

He just hates Joan Crawford. May or may not hate women, Hollywood or the Jews. Internet did not exist back then, so have fun with it.
Click to expand...
Then no, especially if we're going on the definitions of back then - there were plenty of would-be assassins of celebrity women throughout the '80's-90's, mainly by crazed fucksticks who primarily professed a hatred and/or violent obsession with the individual they were attempting to kill; even the fucker who tried to kill Reagan did so without an ideological aim, he just wanted to impress a woman, Jodie Foster.

No point during those periods were these individuals classified as 'terrorists', they were classified as criminally psychotic individuals with an emotional obsession and/or an affinity for fits of homicidal rage; at the same time, we have plenty of examples of things that were classified as terrorist attacks during these years as these years and those before them saw the development of things like the Weather Underground (active 'till '77 officially) and all that funny shit. Popular consensus back then was..pretty dictated by the legal consensus - quite frankly, it still is...it's just that the Internet gives far more of a platform and channel for those that disagree with a given legal consensus to voice their disagreements - justified or not - far more loudly and to larger audiences than before.
 
  • Informative
  • Like
Reactions: Justa Grata Honoria and The Last Stand
The Last Stand said:
That would require planning and thought. This guy clearly has no thought process whatsoever. Hell, sticking up a corner store would be a better case of terrorism than this because THAT would require premedication and thought.

Do not lose sight that A) this guy is a repeat offender, B) a rapist, C) the media is covering it up.
Click to expand...
I think you're setting an artificially high standard for what constitutes premeditation. I'm not even sure what the applicable statute is but the model jury instruction for malice murder provided by the US Supreme Court is

(18 U.S.C. § 1111)
To kill with malice aforethought means to kill either deliberately and intentionally or recklessly with extreme disregard for human life. Premeditation means with planning or deliberation. The amount of time needed for premeditation of a killing depends on the person and the circumstances.
Click to expand...

8.107 Murder—First Degree | Model Jury Instructions

www.ce9.uscourts.gov www.ce9.uscourts.gov

Deliberation is simply a moment of thought prior to the act. Plowing through several successive rows of people, with the vehicle coming to a near or complete stop at points, almost certainly requires deliberation or recklessness with extreme disregard for human life. That's just in the moment, not to mention whatever thought process was underway prior to the incident.

If the police are saying conclusively not terrorism, then I'm going to give them the benefit of the doubt that they are being thorough in their investigation of that angle.
 
  • Agree
  • Informative
Reactions: Foreverial, ColtWalker1847 and Techpriest
Feline Supremacist said:
He ran over his baby mama with his vehicle, which baby mama I have no idea.
Click to expand...
I think his prior instance of running an ex over was from a few years ago, not recent.

I suspect that "he was fleeing a domestic disturbance" isn't quite an outright lie but a twisting of the truth. He had some violent blowup with a girlfriend or somebody he was living with and knew that he was going to get in trouble and go back to jail. Or perhaps it was like Chloe Sagal, he was living with the last people he hadn't burned bridges with and they finally got sick of him, had a big fight and kicked him out, which may have also generated a call to police that would lead to him going back to jail.

Either way, he figured that his life was screwed and he might as well go out with a bang. We know he's fond of using vehicles as weapons, so he decided on a last hurrah doing as much damage as he could before going back to the big house for good.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Foreverial and Techpriest
Tablegoofer said:
I feel like everyone here is coping because they really wanted this guy to be some Black supremacist terrorist who intentionally murdered White people because of the Rittenhouse verdict, when in reality it seems like the guy is just your run of the mill exceptional individual criminal trying to escape the police after stabbing someone. Even his Facebook account doesn't seem that damning, just typical BLM shit. Don't get me wrong, fuck this guy and I hope he rots in prison forever, but I'm just not seeing the whole terrorist angle.
Click to expand...
This just seems like a shameful, cowardly "Incompetence, not Malice" excuse. If this guy will try to kill dozens of people just because he's so gosh darn fucking stupid, it means every system that should have had him in jail for life long before this has catastrophically failed and the cracks he slipped through must be closed, forcefully. If he tried to kill dozens of people for political reasons, then he is a terrorist.

Whatever the real reason it happened, don't try to diminish shit this bad.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Dr. God, Uranus Pink, BlazikenLover and 3 others
Back to my Joan Crawford analogy: murderer, absolutely. Stalker, yes. Deranged, sure. But terrorist? Not quite. That's not taking to account his hatred for Joan Crawford beyond any political or ideological reason.

Y'all probably thinking: what the FUCK is this nigga talking about in relation to this?

This guy has an extensive criminal record that the state allowed him to roam back into society being a menace to society. His coup de grace was stabbing somebody into driving into a parade killing and endangering several people in the process.

An argument can be made that it IS terrorism because of his Facebook activity. But beyond being a low life criminal with no redeeming qualifications, what possessed him to PLAN to drive through a parade and why?

That's why I'm saying it's up for interpretation with that particular label. But do not ignore that one would hate Joan Crawford enough to occur a domino effect of all this.
 
  • Feels
  • Like
Reactions: 💗Freddie Freaker💗, ClackAlAcka and ShoFuKan
whatever I feel like said:
@Not Really Here, I was using the academic definition, which that doesn't apply to. Unless they changed stuff over the past decade.
Click to expand...
non23.JPG

Source
 
  • Like
  • Informative
Reactions: Exterminatus, Foreverial, ColtWalker1847 and 2 others
The Last Stand said:
Back to my Joan Crawford analogy: murderer, absolutely. Stalker, yes. Deranged, sure. But terrorist? Not quite. That's not taking to account his hatred for Joan Crawford beyond any political or ideological reason.

Y'all probably thinking: what the FUCK is this nigga talking about in relation to this?

This guy has an extensive criminal record that the state allowed him to roam back into society being a menace to society. His coup de grace was stabbing somebody into driving into a parade killing and endangering several people in the process.

An argument can be made that it IS terrorism because of his Facebook activity. But beyond being a low life criminal with no redeeming qualifications, what possessed him to PLAN to drive through a parade and why?

That's why I'm saying it's up for interpretation with that particular label. But do not ignore that one would hate Joan Crawford enough to occur a domino effect of all this.
Click to expand...
you already know that a&h would be kissing his ass if he were white

no one's gonna be honest lol
 
  • Dislike
  • Agree
  • Like
Reactions: Grundlejungle, Uranus Pink, Allakazam223 and 26 others
Techpriest said:
Got his dick sucked by quite a few people. I’d argue it’s when the site really started to decline exponentially fast since it brought in a lot of new faggots who unironically thought he did the right thing.
Click to expand...
When I played with the dissenter browser, a ripoff of brave made by the one and only Andrew Torba, the universal comment page for kiwifarms was all people sucking off the site for hosting the NZ massacre video.

So know there's a chunk of Adolf and Hitler users that are literal Gab faggots.
 
  • Dislike
  • Agree
  • Like
Reactions: Uranus Pink, snoot booper, Baguette-chan and 2 others
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back