There are a number of key words that you have used and would require clarification to its meaning :
(i) Obviously - that means evidence would have to be beyond reasonable doubt
(ii) Aiding - what exactly does that mean?
(iii) Abetting - similar question to (ii)
(iv) Refusing to disassociate from one to the other. In order for that to happen, four things need to happen
1) Able to identify the main group, (2) able to identify the fringe group; (3) demonstrate association between the two groups; and (4) explain what is meant by refusing to disassociate
(v) Has your definition of weapons changed from modified air guns to something much wider?
Remember all these are in the context of intended insurgency and not unruly behaviour.
It's your freedom to side with the insurgents, then. It's not my fault that you failed to see through their smokes and mirrors.
For now I know at this time I can answer the 4th question:
Never did I made the case out of modified air guns, their numbers are too insignificant, and pretty expensive in the first place, but those "shields" that's usage is more than purely defensive.
As for the 1st to 3rd, I don't know if that'd constitute as good answers but here goes:
For one thing, during the insurgency at first the insurgents behaved with arrogance but still tried to tame themselves to look good in front of cameras; but ever since the failed assault on the LegCo Building, the organizers of the insurgency, who keep reiterating their so-called "not-violent movement", failed to outright disassociate themselves with those anarchist thugs, even calling them "friends" and "understood their intent", and pretty much the public support (or sympathy) take a nose dive since then.
And if you lot don't like the term "insurgents", how about "anarchist"? Even before the insurgency, the radicals amongst the anti-government camp have been packaging and promoting anarchy as embodiment to democracy; during the insurgency such group mingled, and even providing the muscles for the insurgents in the occupied zones, if not actively recruiting youths into their ranks with their brand of anti-social messages that tingles the rebellious tendency in any teenagers. Now, they've been vandalizing all over the city, spraying graffiti with messages advocating separatism and armed insurrection.
I know in the West, folks takes a more lax attitude against graffiti, but despite however westernised HK is, it's still an Eastern society, and we've a stricter, more negative outlook against such acts. Pity we ain't like Singapore, that we've abolished judicial caning decades ago.
And in all that, the student activists and the consummate politicians in the anti-government faction still failed to disassociate themselves from such characters and activities, even providing moral support both on social media platforms and out in the streets. So, tell me, if they not come from the same cut of cloth, what else could it be? A Hydra may have many heads and not all thinks on the same frequency, but in the end they're still of the same monster.
