On October 10th in Denver, Colorado a fatal shooting occurred during a clash of individuals belonging to two different protests with each belonging to a side while the police tried to separate the groups in the middle from direct contact. One was labeled as a “patriot rally” or “muster” due to different wording in sources, and another was more solidly named as a “BLM-Antifa Soup Drive.” The events leading up to the shooting involved the victim, Lee Keltner, a 49-year-old U.S. Navy veteran, appearing to spray Mace, seen in the picture below, at a protester who then drew a gun and shot him. The suspect detained was a third party hired security guard for local news station 9NEWS which was covering the protests. The other problem besides shooting someone in broad daylight was apparently the suspect didn’t even hold a license for their job which then has additional requirements to allow carrying a firearm in plain clothing like they were wearing.
 |
| Lee Keltner spraying Mace at the suspect |
It isn’t controversial to think that there is intense division in America but, I find it sad how ridiculous the situation is while still being unsurprising and or expected to a degree. The end of the NPR article also rebrings into light other recent cases of fatal violence during protests which appear to be a trend at this point. Whenever these crazy, sudden or planned acts of violence erupt, I always wonder what the perpetrator seeks to gain every time because I see nothing here. A common question I have with these scenarios revolves around prevention in the future, and again every time I can’t form a well put answer beyond "better education". There are a lot of humans and that guarantees a fraction of them to be intensely irrational at some point or another resulting in these cases. I’d love to hear any answers in regards to prevention. Overall depressing but I do wonder if anything new or ongoing will be sparked by this or if it’ll be overshadowed by next week’s news which feels guaranteed to be just as heated.
Source 1: NYT
Source 2: AP
Source 3: NPR
4 comments:
Even after reading the linked NYTimes article about this shooting, I am still left with a lot of uncertainty about how Matthew Dolloff, the suspect, should be charged with this murder.
On one hand, Dolloff was hired to be a private security guard for a Denver television station, therefore, one would assume that Dolloff would be qualified to effectively evaluate the threat of the situation to make a correct decision about whether or not shooting the victim, Keltner, is the only possible way to ensure the safety of himself and the station he was working for.
However, city and county licensing department Eric Escudero revelation that Dolloff required license with Denver to work as a security guard makes Dolloff's actions harder to understand. Why was he illegally working for the television channel? Did Dolloff have some underlining motive that encouraged him to shoot Keltner besides his own protection. Furthermore, the fact private security guards are almost always unarmed makes me wonder why Dolloff was even armed in the first place.
Furthermore, the fact that Dolloff had to be approved by some many different groups/people before he was hired to work this job brings into the question who else should face consequences for making a decision, whether accidentally or on purpose, that ended up with a man dead.
Judging from the video recorded at the scene, under no circumstance was it okay for Dolloff to shoot the man. Any regular person would not see an aggressive man with a spray as a life threat. It is very unlikely that the company and the steps to get the job didn't require a gun-license check. 9news is owned by Tegna, an influential incorporation, so even if this was done through a third party, something as important as the legitimacy of a gun-license check wouldn't be missed. In the world be live today, it's just as likely dolloff was in need of a job during the early months of the new virus. All into consideration, this seems like a case of unnecessary self-protection resulting in a dead man.
Due to the violence that has unfortunately been present at many protests and counter protests, I think it makes sense for news stations to hire security when covering them. However, this is obviously an example of the worst case scenario that could result from this practice. I agree that there needs to be more education and preparation regarding physical confrontations like these for security guards, but I don't know if that would have helped in this situation since the suspect wasn't even listed in the city's database of licensed security professionals. Talking more generally about the wave of protests that has swept through the country this year, it's alarming how quickly they seem to have shifted from mostly peaceful protests to violent protests and counter protests. Though it seems naive, I still hope that they can somehow keep it peaceful and avoid incidents such as these going forward.
It's ironic that protests which on both sides claim to support peace and fairness devolve into irrational violence. You mentioned "perpetrator" while questioning motives of violence, and I assume you are referring to the security guard. However, did the man attempt to use pepper spray first? Of course, pepper spray might not justify lethal force, but there might be additional circumstances that mad the gunman worried and determined to use self-defense. As we read in "The Things They Carried" by Tim O'Brien (about his experience in the Vietnam War), morality is confusing in war. There is often no right/wrong. And this scene honestly looks like a war zone. But why are we fighting each other as if in a war? Dialogue and understanding between both sides (excluding racist people on both sides, who won't understand each other) seems to be a good preventative measure. So does harsh persecution of lethal force.
Post a Comment