1mo ago

British photojournalist hit by non lethal rounds during Los Angeles protests

www.theguardian.com

“People came over to help and got me on the curb. A medic was called, who cut off my clothes. In my leg was what felt like a five centimeter hole with muscle hanging out of it and blood all down my leg. The medic put a tourniquet on it, and a journalist I was with took me to ER.”

This is America.

World News @lemmy.world

Stamets @lemmy.world

1mo ago

British photojournalist hit by non lethal rounds during Los Angeles protests

www.theguardian.com /us-news/2025/jun/08/la-protests-photographer-hit-by-non-lethal-rounds

11 comments

“Deputies will be defending themselves. I don’t think anybody expects our deputy sheriffs to take rocks and bottles without defending themselves.”
Raising a shield would be defending.
Retaliation is not defending.
Hurting random people because someone threw a rock is not defending.
Shooting a peaceful journalist is not defending.
"LESS than lethal" if hit in a soft spot, they still kill
OK, so...
I've seen article headlines noting both a British journalist and Australian journalist. My question is, are these discrepancies just examples of bad reporting, or are they targeting foreign journalists and both headlines are accurate??
- Two different people. Both headlines are accurate.
- That's what I meant in the description by two journalists in a single day.
  This article is about Nick Stern, a british photojournalist, who was shot with a non-lethal round and had to have emergency surgery.
  There is another article, with live video footage, of a cop in riot gear, completely unprovoked, shooting an Australian reporter in the back with a rubber bullet. Luckily for her, she was fine. Just sore. But make no mistake, that round at that distance could have caused considerably worse injuries or even killed her.
  
  Less lethal. That terminology is important.
  
  Especially shooting her in the back. Great way to get a wheelchair for life.
- First line says this guy's name is Nick. Not the lady in that other video. And he was apparently injured, where she seemed to luck out with just a nasty bruise.
Less than lethal or Less lethal. It's not non lethal because they can still kill you
- It's not "less than lethal." It's "less lethal." Less-than implies they're not lethal, when they are. Even a taser or tear gas is lethal. See: the numerous people who've been shocked into cardiac episodes, or people getting burned / caught in fires.
  "Less lethal". Still lethal.
  
  Well, I did say "less than lethal or less lethal"

11 comments