The "okay" symbol is always contextual, which is not the case with the swastika in contemporary culture.

If the high-five eventually sails into oblivion, and then some racist group adopts it later, then the high-five would be a unique signature of the racist group.

That's called a "low-five".

The bolded is just stupid. I am firmly against all forms of racism. Another stupid "soul read" by you. You might want to get out of the soul-reading business, since you're really terrible at it.

Only an idiot would have to assume that.

Lotta coincidences. I guess having Wood as his attorney originally was another coincidence? Who me? Don't know what you're talking about--I know nothing about all of this stuff On my way to hang with trump lol

A quick google shows over 250 arrests.

Law enforcement doesn't mete out punishment, the judicial system does.

You guys are kind of scary.

Racist appropriation of the OK symbol and Pepe The Frog has been a story for several years now, it’s odd that you’re this confused about it in 2021.

Business owners standing guard and shooting looters is vigilantism.

I thought that's what you were saying was a reasonable solution to a riot. Sorry if I'm missing your point.

I was saying I thought Dueces had a valid point when he said you shouldn't take a life for property damage.

I see your point, but I think the OK symbol is far too ubiquitous to be successfully appropriated. I didn't even know what Pepe the Frog even was until it was appropriated by racist groups.

My man over here is afraid of anarchists.

How many anarchists exist in our world in late 2021? A few hundred? Somebody protesting, even if they are committing crimes while doing so, is not necessarily, and very unlikely to be, an anarchist. Wait, I guess there are "anarcho-capitalists", forgot about that brilliant ideology, ok, there are a few thousand.

No, you just want business owners and other related ghouls to have the ability to legally shoot protestors, to which RFlushDiamonds has alluded.

Well, the function making the charging decision is typically the prosecutor, who routinely cooperates with the police. Prosecutors are often political and are subject to political pressure, although many of us wish they would make charging decisions based on an unbiased analysis of the evidence.

And yet you are avoiding at all cost addressing the ACTUAL issue while stuffing this strawman.


Will you answer if you think it is fine for someone in the context of communication exchange with known white supremacist, such as the 'jews will not replace us march' to be flipping each other the OK sign???


You will never address THAT question, and instead flip it to suggest a kid and his uncle should be free to use it to give shade to people like Kyle blatantly using it with known white supremacists.



It begs the question, whether you like it or not, of why you are so vested in throwing shade for Kyle and others in this situation in the exact way OAN and Fox news does??

The fact of an arrest means almost nothing with respect to a charging decision.

LOL

If there's no arrest there's no charge so that logic doesn't seem very bullet proof.

And the prosecutor works for which branch of government ?

I honestly can't say for sure with regard to local governments but I know at the state and county level police are part of the executive branch and the DA s are part of the judicial branch.

I understand they work together but I'd expect a lawyer to know that law enforcement has nothing to do with meting out punishments and that's by design. And by 'lawyer' I mean any middle school kid who paid attention in the civics portion of his social studies course.

As I said before, I don't think everyone should spend all their free time researching the latest white power hand gestures so that they can be sure never to hold their fingers in a certain way.

But I am curious how far you would extend this logic. Suppose that this OK gesture becomes universally understood. Everyone knows that it signals support for white supremacy. It may be your preferred way to signal OK, but in any normal social context, it is going to be interpreted as a white power gesture. In other words, it becomes like the middle finger in the U.S. It may be your preferred way to point at the sky, but if you make the gesture in any normal social context, it is going to be interpreted as "**** you."

Your position, I assume, is that you would continue to use the gesture?

Yes, obviously. But an arrest in no way implies a prosecution.

Ok symbol means you're a lib socialist. Problem solved

Which is exactly what happened with the swastika.




It's adaption by Nazi's lead others to drop it.

But even that misses the point as Laggy and Chez are referencing 'direct communications between Kyle and the WS and defending that in that instance Kyle should be free and fine to use it because the symbol has other interpretations'.

That is the context of this discussion which is Kyle using it in conjunction with known WS.

It is a big bridge further to defend that than normal usage by others not associated with WS.

If implies that the prosecutor will examine evidence and consider charging you, which is pretty far along in the process if you've actually done anything illegal.

I mean, if you think the Kenosha Da's are refusing to charge possible felons that's pretty serious. I'm still not going to be convinced that vigilantism is the best solution.

They have the right to defend their business using the threat of force! Deal with it.

could you elaborate on that? specifically, rosenbaum. With what weapon did he use against Rittenhouse? No weapon, you say? Rittenhouse testified that he knew Rosenbaum was not armed. Ok, so, surely Rosenbaum launched some sort of projectile at Rittenhouse? No, not that either? Clearly he choked him, or punched him, or kicked him, or shoved him. Wait, you're telling me that Rittenhouse killed an unarmed man who never laid a finger on him?

So if Kylie was defending herself from Rosenbaum, from what, specifically, was she defending herself? What was the threat?

Keep saying that. But I'm not convinced.

In other words you have no idea what the convictions were and what sentences resulted. Pretty much what I figured.

So to clarify, if a mob of rioters comes through a residential street and you step out onto your lawn with an AR15 (not pointed at anyone), this is being a vigilante?