It's property damage. And no, vigilantism is not justified. God what's with some of you guys ? We live in an age where everyone is on video all the time and we have facial recognition software. People won't even get away with the property damage and yet you want a license to shoot them at will.

As the man said above 'lighten up Francis'.

Ah, I see... "anarchy, fine; defending person/property from anarchists, not fine."

That's all you had to say.

Honestly, it's ideologies like yours that push me the other way, just saying...

It was all a big mistake. I wonder who I could talk to that's unbiased to set things straight. How about TuckerCarlson?

The moral issue for me is mostly with taking the law into my own hands rather than out of anything resembling empathy or compassion for the villain's wellbeing. As far as the latter goes, I think he sacrificed any moral protection from me by attacking me. I mean, if we were in the wild, I'd probably shoot him if he kept slapping me around, spitting on me, taking my stuff, etc.

This!!!!!

I'm not going to allow a Mob of Pea Brains to dictate how and when I can use a kewl gesture like the "OK" gesture.

Absoluely.

I dont use the ok thing but if we're two fingers or thumbs up or anything else I do then they can just **** off.

totally ridicuulous idea that we're supposed to rollover whenever a few twats on the right do somethign.

Quite so! It's a clear case of letting the tail wag the dog.

Biden is a conservative. He co-authored the crime bill ffs.



Yes I own property. No I don't fetishize it or think it's some core defining aspect of myself. We all have to play this game called capitalism even if we would prefer strongly to play something else. I don't take my position because I have no stake in society. I was just raised by parents who were very much involved with the civil rights struggle of the 60s and later with the anti-apartheid movement. In that case it took economic strangulation, the pain, in order to end apartheid. I think you are still missing the pattern. There is no process possible of insufferable treatment -> appeals to rationality and reason -> alleviation through social change. I don't blame you for holding some kind of model like that. Many progressives do too. It just doesn't relate well at all to anything happening in the real world. No one cares unless there is some form of pain dished out. That was true in the 60s. That was true in Ghandi's India. That is true today. So maintain you insurance.

Who knows.

Here is his explanation.




Ah, so in progressive world, Biden is a conservative because criminal laws n stuff?


So not wanting to be firebomed out of your home = fetishizing over personal property?

Sounds like you're saying that violence and property destruction is fine by you so long as whichever group is perpetrating it feels justified in doing so, and you're fine if your home is used for their causes (whether you agree with those causes or not) because you have insurance and don't have a "I like having a roof over my head" fetish. Sounds like you've never filed an insurance claim before.

That's okay. I also know at least one person that says the same type of stuff but toward liberals. I guess us pacifists are caught in the middle of an impending civil war.

Also, since it seems to get misconstrued, I don't condone taking a life to protect property. I also don't agree with taking a life to destroy property either.

Vigilantism is not the solution to anarchy. In fact it's just more anarchy.

Could you elaborate on the punishments meted out by law enforcement in the Kenosha riots? You’re essentially claiming that the mayhem and destruction in Kenosha was punished sufficiently. Can you back up this claim?

Rittenhouse Picture With Proud Boys Was a Setup

Quote:

Kyle Rittenhouse says he never meant to pose for photos with the Proud Boys, and blamed his former attorneys for introducing them into his case.

The meetings “were set up by my former attorney, who was fired because of that, for putting me in situations like that with people I don’t agree with,” Rittenhouse said.

As part of his exclusive interview with NewsNation’s Ashleigh Banfield, which airs tonight at 10 p.m. ET, Rittenhouse said he didn’t know making the “OK” sign with his hand had become a white supremacist signal, and he didn’t know he was in a bar full of Proud Boys members Jan. 5.

…

The photos of Rittenhouse at a bar with Proud Boys were circulated as proof that he was aligned with them, but he blames his previous attorneys, John Pierce and Lin Wood.

Rittenhouse said Pierce “arranged” the meeting at the Wisconsin bar, but was not there himself.

“I found out they were Proud Boys when I saw the headlines,” Rittenhouse told NewsNation. “I thought they were just a bunch of, like, construction dudes based on how they looked”

Rittenhouse said his former lawyers discussed having the Proud Boys provide security, and said he didn’t hire them because he didn’t “want anything to do with them.”

Given Lin Wood’s bizarre behaviors (ask Nick Sandman) this recount by Rittenhouse is quite plausible.

Where did I say I approve of vigilantism?

Yeah, the implication that everyone who destroyed property has been brought to justice and the property owners have been made whole is some serious attempt at gaslighting.

I'm not going to allow a Mob of Pea Brains to dictate how and when I can use a kewl gesture like the "OK" gesture.[/QUOTE]




Again though this is all a strawman chez that you are reacting to here, so you should understand that is not the point.

i have to assume others like Laggy purposely stuffing the strawman are doing so to deflect from the real point they want to shade..


If tomorrow any one ends up in a conflict that ends up blowing up into a racially sensitive issue and it draws Proud Boys and other WS groups out of the shadows and in to support of your position all WE ACTUALLY SAYING (strawman aside) is that if you are going to hang out with the Proud Boys and other avowed racists and flash their signs, we have a right to point out the dog whistle racism.

.Laggy is arguing below that such dog whistle racism is all fine and good society but trying to shade it with the strawman suggesting this about kids and their uncle who flash ok. No one here is suggesting that bad and trying to take away that power.


[QUOTE=lagtight;57425771]This!!!!!

rosenbaum, huber, grosskruetz, and jump kick man were all assailants. Their behavior that night was consistent with their violent criminal history and the general foreboding atmosphere of the terrorism inflicted on kenosha.

@cupee. It is not entirely a strawman as some are saying we should kowtow to a few twats on the right and modify our behavior if we previously used the gesture.

Mostly though, it's not an area we are going to find common ground on. While I agree you all have a right to point out such judgements about other people, I think it's an awful political method and I oppose it.

I Would say most charges were dropped. Did not the Vice President donate to a bail fund to release rioters?

Lets be honest the Dems have set the GOP with an easy messaging campaign on crime and the economy

Yes or No Question: If White Supremacist groups start using the "high-five" as their "salute", should all persons of good will stop publicly using the high-five ?

Yeah, probably.

No, cause it's a high five while they're doing a heil five.

I would have thought you would be someone who wouldn't cave in to the Racist Mob of Pea Brains.

OK then give me something as i went back to the beginnings of this talk over the hand gesture and you can see a pretty clear context here that the context being discussed here is one of people having some association with known white supremacists and yet flashing that symbol.

The strawman being stuffed is a pretense that the discussion is including such gestures that might happen between a dad and son playing soccer and flashing 'ok' and that 'should be allowed'.


Over and over and the people discussing this (the ones Lagtight and others are disagreeing with) have made it clear this is about 'people who associate with known supremacists flashing the signal being wrong and NOT otherwise common usage', so how is that not a strawman to counter a point not being made over common usage?

Or did I miss people somehow that you see who are making the arguments Lagtight is replying to?

Can we still do down low?

Again Laggy the context here, as per all the discussions in the thread prior is not that.

It is 'if White Supremacist adopt any secret hand shake, gesture, etc. as their acknowledgement of one another being either in the group or simpatico to the group, and for whatever reason you find yourself in a racially charged conflict and White supremacists show up to give you support and enflame the matter should you flash them that symbol that FOR THEM is a gesture of support'?


You are bending over backwards hear to rationalize your veiled support for racists by pretending it is something else and avoiding this question while replacing it with another.

I agree you and your nephew are fine flashing OK at one another.

If you, however show up to the 'jews will not replace us March' and you are standing at the March's edge as everyone walks by and you hold your hand up in THIS gesture to the marchers who flash it back...





The context matters and your attempt to white wash away the context and provide cover to obvious racist dog whistles would make OAN proud.