Two incidents of domestic terrorism in two weeks...
- Thread starter lbodel
- Start date
You claimed I endorsed rioting but the only examples I referenced were the attacks in Portland and Kansas.
As I said, I'm not southern, so I don't get into these arguments here, but my wife is half southern. Her mother was a NOLA deb, a Mardi Gras "queen" honored a few years ago by Rex on her 50th anniversary, but Rex had to do it because her father, my wife's grandfather, had been a part of dissolving their krewe rather than inegrate. Race in the south is troubling, difficult, but one of her NOLA relatives sent her this when it happened, the south changes, and the points made in this video are why these monuments are troubling. And understand war memorials are different than the "lost cause" monuments.I heard an argument this evening on a podcast that I had never thought of before...asking black people to pay taxes for the upkeep of a statue of Jefferson Davis on public property. Not a statue like Cory Booker is trying to have removed from Capitol Hill Statuary Hall...but the JD statue put up on the corner of 5th and Main in 1929 for seemingly no reason. There are some good arguments on both sides of this one.
What does have to stop is the vigilante destruction. I mean...they tried to burn a statue of Abe Lincoln. I feel that the left is over virtual signaling here and it is resulting in lawlessness.
I have no ties to the south as well.
Just don't come after my soldiers' and sailors' monument.
I was talking about what would happen if the government we're to take away guns from law abiding citizens.
So there are things, even if they became/were illegal, that you would see confrontation as acceptable?
I don't know if you have me confused with the other guy who said he would fight to keep his guns. I never suggested that.
If they were to pass a law confiscating guns from law abiding people like myself, I would surrender whatever I had to by law. My position is that the law would be reversed in about 4-6 years and everyone that had voted for it would be voted out of office once the general public becomes aware of how unsafe it is for only criminals to have guns.
About the only time I would justify violence is to defend yourself or someone else from a physical attack and I think there are provisions in the law for that.
Confrontation doesn't equal violence. Standing your ground can be confrontational, like saying "no" I have a second amendment right to my gun, or "no" evil won't be tolerated here. Now those you're standing up to may get physical, then you may confronted with a problem of how you respond, but confrontation can be just shouting louder and standing your ground, no violence.
If you are going to quote Lincoln, please use his best:
Also @Purdue97 can you answer my question about charging people with civil rights violations?
Sure. The driver of the vehicle that mowed down ANTIFA/BLM is being investigated for Civil Rights violations/hate crimes. Basically one cannot prevent through use of force an individual(s) from exercising civil right. Also being investigated in the incident is the 'closure' of roads by KKK/WNP, that reportedly/supposedly the vehicle used in the ramming of protestors used. If it can be shown that people helped him reach objective, helped him plan route, 'closed' roads for him to use unhindered they would be accomplices.
Basically the way it was explained to me was that there needs to be a tie between that driver's views and his actions to get it to be a hate crime and/or civil rights charge. Just because one is racist and kills/hurts someone does not make it a hate crime or civil rights case. What is making the case a bit tricky is that more than one police officer has said they thought he was just really scared
DOJ, and not from or specifically from this incident is looking at ANTIFA as well. It would also be illegal and a civil right violation to stop a group from gathering, rallying, giving a speech by use of violence(tear gas/molotav cocktail) etc.
Have a relative that is a former prosecutor and now a federal attorney assisting with this investigation. Specifically the car incident.
The ironic part in this is that if there are no counter protestors and the violence does not erupt, guess what, this crap is never heard. Now it dominates the news.
There is a difference between equivalence and do the people have a right. Equivalence would be one's opinion, and I have not heard anyone say t is the case they agree with the KKK. As for rights, the constitution applies to all.
As for you attack comment-care to expand on that? Attacking another's civil rights is huge wrong answer if you meant violence.
Now we're confusing the two things. Yes you have whatever is within your legal rights to act on. If you want to confront someone within the law you certainly can do that. Doesn't necessarily make it the smart thing to do in every circumstance and it rarely makes the situation less dangerous like it was suggested earlier. Two people can be standing nose to nose screaming in each other's face at the top of their lungs and both be within their rights to do so. I can tell you that I would feel less safe around that than I would standing next to someone who was expressing something I disagree with in a non confrontational manner.
Attacking takes on different forms doesn't it, doesnt always need to be violent, you can attack ideas, but not going to lie, I wish someone would have violently attacked that car before it hit anyone, before it killed Ms. Heyer at least. But keep on trying to be clever, I mean, if she wasn't protesting, violating others civil rights according to you, she would still be alive, right?
Actually yes if she werent protesting it seems like there would be a great chance she'd still be alive. Kind of unbelievable because with all the confrontation going on there it should've been the safest place on the planet according to micksta because that's what confrontation does, makes things safer.
I give you credit, others have danced around it but you are at least honest enough to come out and blame the victim.
I didn't blame the victim. I answered the question you asked. Nobody deserves to be murdered but if you're going to ask if someone had a better chance of living by staying away from a bunch of violence then the answer is quite obvious.
Nice attempt to reframe your question though.
Well now you back track, you say protesting is wrong, then where do you go logically from there? Honestly, I don't agree with you, but at least you had the balls these others don't to say if she hadn't been protesting she would probably still be alive. But since that is where your logic takes you then, sorry, but yeah, your blaming her for being there.
I'm not saying it's wrong. I'm saying it's less safe than staying at home and knitting or watching Jeopardy with friends. She could have been well within her right to be there. I don't know if she was behaving lawfully or not but let's assume she was. Assuming that, she had right to be there. That's not being debated by anyone. Whether or not it was a smart decision for her, or any counter protestors for that matter, to be there is the point being debated.
Okay, I can't go back through this whole thread, do you believe nazis, kkk, white supremacist/nationalist should be confronted or ignored?
I generally think it's better to not give lunatics a bigger platform by acknowledging them at all. When the message is so reprehensible I'm not especially worried about it being heard because decent people will be disgusted by it anyway. In short, I think there is almost no positive outcome from confronting them with a couple of big drawbacks ( giving them attention and potentially escalating a volatile situation towards violence).
Haha, okay, so generally, kinda, maybe, you think possibly she would be alive if she hadn't protested evil. Is that fair enough?
FFS, no I didn't say that. Do you have any real interest in an honest discussion?
I said people of color would feel less disheartened to see people standing up to marchers who literally want to kill them.
They've been in my neighborhood. The KKK had a rally in my hometown, Madison, IN, several months ago. In answer to your question, yes, everyone should sit back and respect their right to free speech and ignore it.
What is the mentality of someone who feels they need to show up to protest or counter-protest? It's counterproductive. During the presidential campaign, the disgust with these Trump protesters did much to get him elected.
Neither protester nor counter-protester be. This foolish woman in VA died for nothing. And did you notice that the news media waited to confirm which side she was on before they started wailing about her death?
yep. Maybe not when I was 20 and an idiot, but now. MS13 has a protest permit? Yep I'm letting them. Just like I let the jerk racists and the idiots who march on DC every day. Someone is protesting here probably 360 out of 365 days a year. I'm all for fighting this rotten ideology but...
There's no generally, kinda, maybe about it. I absolutely think she would likely be alive right now if she had stayed home. And yes I'll say that even though I can see your objective 3 steps ahead and how you're going to try to twist it.
I must have imagined that you suggested they would "feel safe and have peace of mind" if people would confront those at the rally in post 229 of this thread.
No. Wait. I just went back and checked and it's there.
If you're a person of color and you see nazis and the KKK marching unchallenged in your streets, you're not going to feel safe or have peace of mind. Seeing your neighbors confront these guys, however, gets you a bit closer to that. Why is that so hard for you to understand?
Nowhere, in anything I've posted, could one logically infer that I'm saying Charlottesville "should've been the safest place on the planet." That's a dumb strawman and you should do better.
That was hyperbole but the point remains that confrontation did not make anyone feel safer in this instance which was what you implied.
The alt-left is clueless about non-violent protest strategy with which Gandhi and MLK changed the world. Today these meatballs go to protests with baseball bats.
That airhead woman who offed herself in Cville is a victim only in the sense that she is the victim of her own stupidity. She should have stayed home and protested on Facebook.
That is why I asked question of what you meant bu attacking. Pretty simple.
As for this whole mess I am not so sure what is hard to get. I agree that kkl/white/nazi nationalist party is repugnant and historically a worse group than blm/antifa.
That said, like it or not they both have a right to demonstrate.
That said, what I do not comprehend is how people just choose to look the other way when it comes
to violence or violence encoraged by other groups involved.
And it is magnified when violence is used to attack a civil right. Not
to mention a bit hypocritical by some due to them being anti military due to anti violent stance then pull the stunts seen around country.
And if there was no protest in the first place, there would be no need for a counter protest. Again, I'm sure you don't mean to put the blame here on the counter protestors instead of white supremacists, but you just did.
Of course you didn't explicitly say it, but the only pictures you chose to post were of white nats getting punched. The closest you cam to blaming both sides was saying there was a picture of a mutual punch from both sides. Even your excerpt was skewed toward the white nats. Saw no praise of the impartiality of the Star article.
It actually depends on who initiates the violence. Like it or not, both groups had the right to lawfully demonstrate. My guess is that individuals on both sides crossed that line from lawful to illegal that day and if that means there is some fault on both sides and that makes people mad that's too bad. Like I've said elsewhere, just because someone expressed a view that is universally reprehensible doesn't give their opposition carte blanche to react however they want. That's the objective view of this situation if you set aside all personal feelings aside.
The ACLU is laying a lot of blame at local and state police, the mayor, and the governor.
State Police came right out and said Mcauliffe lied about them being outnumbered and that they seized weapons caches hidden around the city by the nazi trash.
Violence? Who cares? White nationalist and supremacists shouldn't exist in this country, period, let alone assemble.
And no, I am not saying the government should legislate against their rights. I am saying every American should be denouncing, ridiculing, shouting down, and doing everything within their own legal rights to eradicate this loser ideology. That's why I think comparing Antifa and this whole deflection you guys and Trump are doing is morally reprehensible.
You really need to read up on antifa if you think criticism is deflection.
These guys are on par with the nazis you saw this weekend. If not, worse.
Last edited:
