香港昨天发生的抢枪事件，相信大家都看到了。四个暴徒从四个方向依次冲向警察，有抱腰的有夺枪的，要不是阿sir训练有素，估计早被他们抢走了。
但是西方媒体又是怎么报道的呢？
美联社第一时间出了消息，原文及翻译如下：
“一段网络传播的视频显示，一名警官抓住一名抗议者的衣领，然后朝另一名接近的(抗议者)开枪。当第三名抗议者接近时，这名警官再度开枪。”
“警方称一名抗议者中枪，正在接受治疗。”
Online video showed a police officer collaring one protester and then shooting another who approaches. The officer fired again as a third protester approached. Police said only one protester was hit and is undergoing surgery.
美联社不愧百年大社，细节描写很到位，连“抓衣领”都没有放过。只可惜抓了芝麻丢了西瓜，视频里显示的不止一位暴徒抢枪，这么明显的动作，美联社咋就没看到呢？
What the AP did not tell you and will never tell you, as the video below shows, is the "protester" was attacking the police officer before the latter "collared" him. And the second one who was hit did more than approach — He tried to take the pistol by wrenching it away.
同样的细节，路透社也报了。
“一名穿白色卫衣、戴面具的抗议者走向一名警察，好像要挑战他。警察拔枪对准这个人，并勒住他脖子。”
A protester wearing a white hoodie and mask walks towards a policeman, as if to challenge him. The officer draws his gun and points it at him at close range and grabs him round the neck.
“警察用左手抓住这个人的同时，向另外一名靠近的戴面具的抗议者开枪。三枪过后，此人倒地。”
As the officer holds the man with his left hand, he shoots another approaching masked protester at close range with his right hand. Three shots ring out and the man falls to the ground.
细节来细节去，就是不提暴徒抢枪的事情。视频里显示的清清楚楚，那几个人是这么“靠近”的：


在美国，谁要敢这么“靠近”警察，早被打成筛子了……
而且西方媒体用词都是“抗议者”。对抢警察枪的人，用这个词，实在有点不合适。有啥不满可以通过合法渠道反映，抢枪打人的就只能叫“暴徒”，用“抗议者”都有点侮辱这个词。
It is doubtful whether a person trying to rob a pistol should be called a "protester". If he means to show his discontent with something, he can say so in public instead of robbing a pistol and attacking the police officer holding it. "Rioter" is a more suitable word for these hooligans.
美联社报道里还特意提到一处细节，工作做得比检察官都扎实：
“在一处警戒线里边，有一滩看似干涸的血迹样的东西，而围观者正在咒骂警察。”
"A patch of what looked like dried blood could be seen in a cordoned-off area after the shooting, as angry onlookers shouted insults at the police."
这摊所谓的“血迹”视频里也有，而且旁边还有俩大活人呢。一位警察正在扶着那位中枪的暴徒，明显想救助他。


但这一切细节，西方媒体都没有报，就报了“警察开枪”。想想看，如果是西方国家的普通民众读到了，会怎样想？脑子里缺根弦的可能已经跑到社交媒体上骂开了……
当然，也不能说西方媒体逢警必反，那对这些同行们也不够公正。西方国家遇到麻烦、满大街都是靓丽的风景线的时候，西方媒体就倾向于力挺警方。
It would be unfair to say Western media always stands against the police in riots.
法国“黄背心”运动是，路透社是这么报道的：
“数十名戴黑色遮挡的示威者向警方投掷石头，有一些还对着摩托车和垃圾箱放火——这些都发生在法国首都中心地带。警方用催泪瓦斯和震爆弹予以回敬。”
"Dozens of black-hooded demonstrators threw rocks at police and some set fire to scooters and trash cans in the center of the French capital" and "Police responded by firing tear gas and stun grenades".
巴塞罗那大示威中，路透社是这么描述的：
“随着夜幕降临，戴面具的年轻人在离警方指挥部不远处堵了一条宽阔大大道，对垃圾箱放火，并对着防暴安全人员阵列投掷了大量石头、废弃馆子以及瓶子。”
"As night fell, masked youths blocked a broad boulevard close to the city's police headquarters, setting fire to large garbage bins and throwing a hail of stones, cans and bottles toward massed lines of security forces in full riot gear".
CNN是这么报道的：
“周五的现场视频显示防暴警察直面抗议者，后者有人向警方投掷物品。垃圾箱也被点燃，这在过去的一周里是很常见的场面。”
Video from the scenes on Friday showed riot police facing off against protestors, some of whom threw objects at the police. Garbage containers were set on fire, a common sight in the past week.
从这些案例中，不难总结出西方媒体的一条规律：问题发生在西方，挺警队、挺国家。问题发生在中国香港，挺暴徒。
When things happen in Paris or Barcelona, Western media outlets side with those who defend order. When similar things happen in Hong Kong, Western media outlets side with those who demolish it.
事实上，按照香港《警察通例》关于枪械使用的规定，警务人员可在下列情况下使用枪支：
1. 为了保护包括自己在内的任何人，以免生命受到危害或身体受到损伤；
2. 有理由相信某人犯严重暴力罪行应当加以拘捕或犯严重暴力犯罪的疑犯企图拒捕；
3. 平息骚动或暴动。
而且香港警察拔枪、拿枪指人、开枪事后都要写报告的，被几个人一起夺枪的情况下，拔枪开枪是完全符合程序的。
据《北京日报》报道，在警员开枪并制服暴徒后，有在场公众鼓掌撑警员。无论是法律还是民意上，警方都做的没问题。但西方媒体就是看不见，就报道“警察开枪了”。
还能说什么呢？ 6park.com