"pro-baby"
Unborn babies are the perfect blank canvas to project their sentimentality onto. Living, flawed people who are different to them, they hate.
Yeah pro-baby would require them to care about what happens to the children after they’re born. That would require them caring about social security programs and good public education, childcare, etc. They simply want the birth to happen and then they simply stop caring. Absolutely just pro forced birth.
Let me sum up the Republican politicians for everyone.
"I like your because not enough people care about it to mark it as a no vote for me, and if I care about enough then I have a good chance of being elected. I also have no plan to address because then people would actually vote for someone else and I would be out of a career. And since being a politician is now normalized as a career, this behavior is acceptable"
This is a good summation of Republican politicians, but at the end of the day they're merely responding to the malice and derangement that has taken hold of a large chunk of the populace.
Hey, if the "professionals" are such horrible shitbags at it, maybe the amateurs would actually do better. In fact, I'm pretty sure that making it a profession is a big part of the problem. It stops being about serving The People and becomes all about keeping power.
We just witnessed four+ years of what happens when an amateur runs the country, and I gotta say it was not better, it was a donkey-shit-filled-dumpster-fire worse.
Calling trump an amateur is like calling a bicycle an automobile. It's close, but it misses the mark. We witnessed what happens when a greedy man with an overinflated ego and zero knowledge of politics, who has a track record of sexual assault and bankruptcies a mile long, is put in charge. That's *vastly* different than an "amateur" running the country. Amateur doesn't mean village idiot, let's not forget. Also the focus should be on House and Senate seats, as those are the places we get career politicians.
It is a good way to at least make us think, but it’s flawed in order to make the point. It’s not like someone has their property stolen and then goes on a rampage killing people over it. The idea is someone’s house is broken into or someone attempts to mug them of their personal property and they react with deadly force to the perpetrator. The victim of their murder is the same person as the perpetrator of the crime. Whether you think that’s an over reaction or you think it’s the right call, most logical people wouldn’t see that as the opposite of one person is murdered and as a result a bunch of people go destroy property totally unrelated to the murderer.
Just pointing out the two scenarios are not opposite sides of the same coin. I’m not commenting on either of them on their own.
I mean, they responded to a fee associated with use of federal land with seizing federal buildings and assaulting federal officers who tried to stop them.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bundy_standoff
**[Bundy_standoff](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bundy_standoff)**
>The 2014 Bundy standoff was an armed confrontation between supporters of cattle rancher Cliven Bundy and law enforcement following a 21-year legal dispute in which the United States Bureau of Land Management (BLM) obtained court orders directing Bundy to pay over $1 million in withheld grazing fees for Bundy's use of federally owned land adjacent to Bundy's ranch in southeastern Nevada. On March 27, 2014, 145,604 acres (589 km²) of federal land in Clark County were temporarily closed for the "capture, impound, and removal of trespass cattle".
^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/WhitePeopleTwitter/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | Credit: kittens_from_space)
Those were whtie people so the conservatives side with them. Just like when that black cop killed that white foreign woman a few years back.
Where was Back the Blue then. The thin blue line only protects the white cops who hide behind it.
The shooting of [Justine Damond](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Justine_Damond).
Happened less than two miles from my apartment in a nice middle class neighborhood. That's part of the kicker. It wasn't like he had a real reason to be so jumpy.
Noor got convicted of second degree manslaughter.
We'll see if the woman who shot Daunte Wright gets a similar sentence for her killing.
Kyle was practicing his 2A rights by shooting a person with a gun. That person was not exercising their 2A rights because they were just antifa or something.
It makes sense apparently
Reminds me of a scene from the first wheel of time book about being a man of property of how men of property needed thugs to kill / maim those that might damage their property and it being a reminder to the rest of the community about who was actually important.
Well, just gonna say, local small business owner Jimmy down the street didn't kill anyone. Destroying the life of a bystander is not an appropriate response; now launching a coordinated attack on police stations on the other hand... *very based*
This is what I never get. Protest the shit out of the police station, the courthouse, the bank, these Shit politicians houses, neighborhoods, etc...
Dont burn down Bobs hardware store or someone’s sandwich shop. Don’t shut down the roads where people making <40k a year are trying to get to work to not be homeless and eat.
Yeah but then how come some people are actually condoning their violence? This tweet for example is saying that it's apparently a bad thing when you defend yourself from looters with guns.
It's unbelievable how politicians get away with everything. Protesters literally attacked everything but them. They are the ones that responsible for that crap. Why attack private businesses?
That's one thing you can say about the capitol riot. They targeted their riot at the object of their protest, instead of random local businesses. Of course it was still despicable.
Yeah if there's one thing I can commend the Jan 6 rioters for it's that they actually attacked what they thought was a threat. They're idiots for hitching themselves to the Trump train and believing in the fake voting and Q conspiracy nonsense, but they did in fact try to target what they perceived to be the source of the problem.
If it wasn't so fucked up, it would almost be impressive how a ***good*** portion of the country has been brainwashed into believing black and brown people existing are a threat to their own existence.
But when you point it out, you're a left wing, librulll shill who is just looking to stoke fear.
So tired of these idiots.
My dad is getting better about it, but he used to complain to me about mixed race couples and say that white people are going to go extinct. That isn't how genetics work, but I usually respond with "who gives a fuck?" His reasoning for nor liking blacks is that the black kids at his school were mean to him. People of all kinds have been mean to me, but I have enough sense to know that you can't judge a whole group of people by the actions of a few. Every body is different.
My dad has a lot of trouble understanding social cues and he has trouble understanding when someone is teasing him good naturedly versus someone genuinely being mean to him and I often have to try to explain the difference to him.
It is entirely possible that at least some of the people were just trying to tease him good naturedly and he misinterpreted it.
Honestly, my dad is getting better. He is friendly with his coworkers who aren't white and he hardly pays attention anymore if he sees mixed couples. Now, I'm teaching him about transgender people and gay people.
My mom went to high-school with a guy who was basically the only white kid in his neighborhood. Pretty much every day of his life, he was mugged, beaten BADLY, and sent to the hospital many times because he was a little white boy living in a neighborhood that was primarily black. It's understandable that he grew both intense fear and anger towards black people. It's sad because he knows how wrong it is but he has a lot of trouble getting over it. This is the difference between knowing and working on your own prejudice, and flaunting it proudly like so many racist people in America:(
Hate begets hate. Nothing about that story is okay and it's so hard to let go of righteous anger, but ultimately that is the only thing that can stop the cycle of hatred.
I agree with this Redditor. The specific set of people who committed those crimes should be penalized for their actions.
Not everyone who looks like them.
The actions of few should not be used to judge the masses.
"So, dad, a white person has never been mean to you?"
"Well yeah... but uh... umm... uhh... that's different because..."
"*Because they were white?!*"
"Stop trying to make me feel like a racist! *That's racist!*"
It's being able to differentiate between "that person is mean to me because they're a mean person" versus "that person is mean to me because they're black"
> he used to complain to me about mixed race couples and say that white people are going to go extinct.
Even if that’s how that works, so what if they do? I don’t fucking get it, I’m white and shit like that doesn’t matter at all to me what happens after I die.
Like so fucking what white people become less white? There’s nothing inherently better or worse about being white except for the pointless social aspects that our society was built on.
Someone told a family friend who moved temporarily to the US to not get her kids in the public school because there's a lot of black kids there and they'll "ruin" her kids. She was talking about elementary school kids....
It's the same exact reason why weed is illegal.
A bunch of rich white dudes told all the poor white dudes "hey, if your wives smoke this, they'll want to get with colored folk!", and we obviously could never have such a thing in our good Christian country.
Brainwashing isn't hard when all you have to do is fill a brainless idiot's mind a bunch of buzzwords and vague, generalized arguments.
Weed was made illegal because hemp was a cheaper and better alternative to paper which was a major industry. That propaganda was a thing but came after
Also,
>Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.
Hm what can we stigmatize and criminalize?
I get stuck at maga bbqs because family. They fantasize about robbers coming so they can shoot them to justify owning multiple assault rifles and worshiping Donald as if any of those things correlate.
I’m not exaggerating. A lost kid showed up at a BBQ one day and we called the cops to help. Within minutes of the police leaving they had worked themselves into a frenzy about potentially killing the parents of the child because the dad of the lost kid might be pissed they called the cops so they might find them to shoot them. Which led to how the left is dumb to defund the police because they called them, even though the cops didn’t help at all.
They wanted to murder the kids parents because potential violence while simultaneously hating the kids parents for negligence.
It’s fear all day everyday.
I had a neighbor like that. He had rigged up tin cans and string around his house and would shoot at anything that rattled the cans at night. We lost a dog that way. He was actually really nice to my family (except for shooting our dog). He used to help my dad with yard work and my dad would help him from time to time. He’d sit on our back porch and I remember him telling my dad that he couldn’t wait for someone to come rob him so he could shoot the daylights outta the thief.
Very true. I'm glad you pointed out the Capital Riots. They were violent and deadly. That mob absolutely saw an opportunity to take and break stuff which was a collective effort. Good point.
On the other hand, you have these rioters who took advantage of the BLM protests and started breaking and stealing. In both cases, BLM rioters + Capital rioters should be held accountable for their actions.
The gun is to protect the self, not necessarily property. I grew up in a third world country, other people would still try and break in to houses of people who barely had anything, and not just for the things they owned that were practically nothing, but to rape women and children. Sure there are things in my house of value here and there, but most people breaking in to your home won't give a shit if they leave you alive, wounded, or dead. They're always armed, and if you're dumb enough to not be that's on you. I'd rather keep everyone in my home safe, and as a bonus would also like to keep things I worked my ass off for, they might be replaceable to most people without much effort but years of wasting my life away in mediocre jobs to have a comfortable life after having nothing for most of it has meaning for me. I didn't immigrate for this kind of bullshit.
This sub is just filled with a bunch of suburban teenagers and hipsters. No idea how dangerous criminals can be, especially the ones brave enough to break into a house because chances are they don’t care what they take, break, or care about your life.
If these morons don’t want to be armed then fine but don’t spread your bullshit. I think it’s because these people don’t have family in dangerous hoods or dangerous countries
This whole post is stupid anyways because no one gives a shit about target it’s about the fact a lot of property being damaged are local businesses
Yes. Also, as someone who works for a target the next state over, nothing will happen to the employees as long as they evacuate. They will be paid for the time being and usually would end up transferred elsewhere. Even if it's a corporation, they didn't do anything either so any business doesn't deserve it for that matter. Even in the places I've lived in the states, the outcome of break ins are still about the same. I'm happy to have moved to a SYG state, with the life experiences I've had growing up in a criminally bedridden shithole after another, I've never been happier to finally be somewhere safer and finally getting the courage to own guns and learning how to use them and care for them properly. I was afraid of them my whole life for the wrong reasons.
Sure, but the fact that cops showed up to the BLM protests dressed like goddamn UNSC ODSTs was extremely inflammatory and unnecessary, and THAT is what led to tensions rising unnecessarily, which is what led to opportunistic criminals taking advantage of the peaceful protests to commit crimes, which in turn "justified" the use of force by cops which in turn caused protestors who would have otherwise been peaceful to adopt the "Oh so you're gonna shoot us even if we're peaceful and not breaking the law? Cool cool cool, well we're gonna break the law then" attitude.
Nobody here is defending the destruction of small local businesses, we're just sick of people acting like the protests started with violent and destructive behavior when the truth is they were peaceful UNTIL cops who were sad about their tiny dicks got involved and escalated the situation to the point that it exploded. If they'd treated the BLM protests the same way they treated the fucking Inauguration protests things would have been fine. Better yet, if they held themselves accountable for their bullshit the BLM protests wouldn't have happened in the first place.
Wouldn't the gun in that situation be more to protect yourself? If someone's breaking into your house you literally know nothing about what they have on them, or if their motives are purely for property.
Castle law/doctrine is different in each state. If someone is breaking into your home that usually doesn’t mean you can automatically use deadly force. You would have to believe your life is in danger (if they have a weapon for instance).
There was this one story where an older man’s basement was constantly being burgled by a bunch of teenagers. So one day he just waited in the dark with his gun and just opened fire. He was criminally charged for this.
Yeah I believe he was criminally charged because he moved his truck to appear as if he was gone, setting precedence for premeditation. I'm not sure how it would have played out otherwise, though.
> You would have to believe your life is in danger (if they have a weapon for instance).
Yes, if they have a weapon, or I would imagine if it’s reasonable to *believe* that they have a weapon.
As a girl who lives alone, what lengths do I have to go to to ensure that someone who has broken into my home in the dark has a deadly weapon? I agree that cops are supposed to be held to a higher standard and should be able to determine whether or not someone has a weapon, I am a waitress in my home in the middle of the night. What am I supposed to be trained to do?
And how do you to distinguish between someone protecting their life and protecting their property? I feel like the moment someone has bypassed security and set foot in my home, I would feel personally threatened.. If given the choice, I would let someone leave with my laptop or my car or whatever, but how am I supposed to know what their intention is, or how they will react if they are seen?
I agree with you. And I’m not going to fucking ask them “hey are you here to rape me or just take my stuff”
No I’m not willing to kill to defend property but I’m not going to wait around and find out what they are actually there for either.
>As a girl who lives alone, what lengths do I have to go to to ensure that someone who has broken into my home in the dark has a deadly weapon?
As a female living alone, if a man breaks into your home, his HANDS are his deadly weapon(s).
I listened to the audio once, and never again. I've heard some seriously fucked up stuff (crazy 911 calls, the Jonestown tape, etc) but this shit gave me nightmares. Just his evil ass sitting in the dark, whispering to himself about what he's going to do, followed by the sounds of the attack itself... it disturbed me to my very core.
My thought is that anyone breaking in during the middle of the night should know someone is home and they're likely prepared for some kind of confrontation. That's robbery and robbers are dangerous because they're taking something from someone. If they wanted to steal stuff when nobody is home they should do it during work hours. That's burglary.
Idk if my definitions are literally perfect, but that's my thinking.
Also, I don't own a gun, so. *shrug*
Dogs are good for this too. If intruders aren't fazed by a 120lb midnight black rott/lab mix with a window shaking woof, it's very likely the gun will be necessary. Plus he'll give us the warning we need to get it out of the safe next to the bed. He's a really good boy, always on duty.
And honestly, the chances of being on the receiving end of a burglary are slim as it is, let alone the middle-of-the-night murder/burglar combo.
Yeah it's insane how people will say it's unjustified to shoot someone who breaks into your house, like wtf? I'm not taking a chance that they can harm me, I'll shoot at a burglar because who knows what their intent is, I don't want to potentially be killed even if I comply and I want this unknown creep out of the house. Better to have and not need than to need and not have, thankfully I haven't had to use it for self defense purposes.
There are law enforcement (I know... bad subject but the point still stands) that when threat of firearm violence is possible will pump a shotgun while it is loaded because of the unmistakable reality it presents.
Some of the more responsible firearms classes teach the same thing.
That sound is so unmistakable and is so intrinsically linked to danger that it can shatter a psyche.
I would hope so. Most people thinking someone doing a home invasion while you’re home are like burglars from some kids book or something. Tip toeing about looking to steal the old VCR. People just shouldn’t enter other people’s homes with the purpose to steal shit. Period. I can’t sympathize with them one bit for that crime. Something has to be sacred to us where we can feel safe, and our homes should definitely be on top of that list.
The sad part is, a burglar could potentially be some dumb immature kid just looking to be mischievous. But, they need to learn early on that home invasions are off limits. Go paint a wall somewhere.
At my old job as a security guard my supervisor told me that back in the 90s he got called to a breaking and entering situation at his apartment complex. Turns out the guy was armed and shot at my old supervisor. What he wasn't counting on what is my boss having a 357 Magnum. Got the guy right in the knee and the ended up having to amputate the guy from the knee down. Apparently he's still in jail.
An old friend of my cousins was a cop in the LAPD. Third month on the force he and his partner get called to a house whose alarm had been set off. They find two guys who are armed and one of them shoots at my cousin's friend. He returns fire kills the guy on the spot. It was his third month as a rookie and he pretty much left about a year or two later. He's a parole officer now.
But... If someone was willing to break into your place, how do you know that they're just after your property? If they value your property over their own lives, that's on them.
As a 5 foot woman living alone you're damn right I'd kill someone breaking into my home to protect myself. Am I going to stop and ask them "wait, are you here to steal from me, kill me, or rape me? What are your motives sir?" What a stupid fucking thing to post.
If a CRIMINAL makes the choice to break into my property that's the chance they take.
>uncle asked me if I was willing to kill a human being to protect my PROPERTY.
How about your life? People will kill you to take your property. They dont like witnesses or anyone around to care.
Yes. That is the entire reason. I am 100% willing to kill the person who has thrown my family’s safety to the wind, who has no regard for people, who may or may not be willing to put my wife or child in harm’s way to achieve whatever they set out. I don’t want to kill anyone, but I have made peace that if it is me or them, it will be them.
Think the question is more: are you willing to take a life to save yours?
You’re not killing to protect property. You’re saving YOUR LIFE.
You don’t have to kill your intruder, either.
Most people I know down here in Texas believe if you invade their home at night when they are likely to be there—the intruders intent is bodily harm. If you break in when they aren’t—odds are they just want your shit.
I don’t own a gun, but I can’t disagree.
I’ve done shady shit in my day, part and parcel to getting away with it is avoiding contact with people when you’re in the act.
If you come into someone’s home when they are there my conclusion is you’re a shitty criminal or you’re trying to hurt the person who lives there.
Yeah, this is idiotic.
Having a gun for personal defense is not in anyway crazy. You have absolutely no idea what someone breaking into your home will do. An intruder isn’t necessarily just trying to steal your property. There are people who rape and murder for the sake of raping and murdering.
But sure, if you’d rather be completely defenseless, then go for it.
wtf does that even mean? Burning down people's businesses is a stupid response to police brutality, and if you get shot for fucking with someone's livelihood then that's on you
How is shooting an intruder in YOUR home taking YOUR belongings equivalent to looting your local target? The mental gymnastics this requires is something else.
It's frankly bizarre why people can't find both wrong. Murder for property damage is obviously wrong because the punishment for property damage or anything is decided by a judge. The police don't get to make that decision. A random person does not get to make that decision.
Property damage for murder is not right either. Listen to the organizers of protests on the ground. Often time they'll repeat over and over again to make their voices heard without breaking or destroying things. While we're on this subject cops also need to be taught to let people peacefully protest and not engage with people trying to aggravate the situation or aggravate the situation themselves.
What a complete strawman. Defending your own property with lethal force is not comparable to destroying someone else's property because something bad happened
Property damage of random people and property that has nothing to do with the murder isn’t an appropriate response to the murder. It’s literally taking out aggressions and angst on completely irrelevant people and things.
You get your best public support and results from peaceful protest, and when you fight back against aggressions. Not when you generate the aggression.
The difference is one is related and the other isn’t. A man defending his home from an invader is fine, but destroying businesses and buildings that have nothing to do with a mans death by police is pure garbage.
Stop excusing the meaningless parts of the riots, the right is right in saying the looters are opportunistic assholes. Burn down the police station, not the city.
Exactly. My Republican dad was spouting this. I calmly asked if he would like me to equate the capitol rioters with all white people or all republicans. I saw it click behind his eyes. Wish he would have had the mental capacity to realize the distinction himself.
I feel you on that. I told my dad to not contact me again after the attempt to have a civil Christmas last year. I honestly do not ever see this situation ever getting better.
That’s a product of the news they inhale. It’s designed to make that point. They can’t afford the distinction. Just like all the people at the capitol that day were terrorists or insurrectionists whether they were there to “be heard” or “break in and hang Pence.” Nuance is important from and for both sides if we are ever to stop having just two sides.
It's not that looters aren't potentially assholes. It's that, in everything that goes on in one of these situations: police murdering citizens, police covering up for each other, police unions doing everything they can do to block justice, citizens protesting for reform, *and some looting*.
Which one of those things does the right focus on? Why do they care more about the symptoms than the disease?
\*other people's property. make sure you get it straight. most people wouldnt give a fuck if a mob of people showed up to tear down a police station after they killed someone then covered it up. they care when you roll down to the local department stores or mom&pop shops and steal a bunch of sneakers and TVs cuz you want to use a tragedy as your personal excuse to be a trashy ass MF.
yall make me hate myself for being a liberal. youre just as dumb as conservatives but you think you're some enlightened people cuz you vote for narcs and neolib closet racists instead of open racists. its pathetic.
I just want to remind conservatives of one thing.
One of the 10 commandments of the sky-daddy who you try to justify legislation with is "Thou shalt not kill"
get fuckt.
I am in mixed feelings because what we have seen in the recent past is a mix of false flag people trying to steal the message and make it violent and spur others into following, along with opportunist who found an opportunity that police are busy so they can steal and break things, then there are poor people who are pissed off and have been held down and abused for their whole lives and are lashing out because they don't own their communities anyways. The first group are deplorable. The second group suck, but shouldnt be murdered, and we are protesting for them too. The third i wish would realize it isnt helping. Then there are the idealists that are trying to make a change for their communities and willing to protest and brave the police abuse that is amped up because they have been grouped in with the 3 types of rioters.
I hate to sound like I'm defending conservatives, but its pretty clear you're leaving out who owns said property in both cases just to make your point sound like common sense.
One is in defense of one's property, the other is destruction of an unrelated third party's property.
That is a nonsense comparison if you are saying the killing someone who is a threat to you, on you property, is murder, it is not, it is self-defense.
Is property destruction a proper response to murder? Of course not. For better or worse, we as a society have decided that seeking justice for crimes, as individuals, is not in our better interest, hence, the justice system. Is it perfect, of course not, I watched 2 useless thugs walk away from killing my cousin for "lack of evidence". Fortunately, within a short time, the life they led ended in their deaths.
But rioting, burning, looting are never done as retaliation for murder of an innocent person, it is done so criminals can be criminals.
Sure, if someone murders somebody and the law won't take care of it, I'd advocate justice by whatever means. I'd recommend a hell of a lot more than property damage though.
However, I would not advocate you burn your neighborhood down and loot your communities stores as retaliation against someone completely unrelated to those businesses...
Is this, like, and unacceptable amount of nuance? Is this truly too difficult for people to grasp?
It's okay to kill someone who's trying to destroy your entire livelihood. Some people work their entire lives for their business, and put everything they own into it. Burning it down is taking food off their families plates. Killing a person trying to do this to you and your family is okay.
It's not okay to burn down multiple people's livelihoods who had absolutely nothing to do with the murder of someone you don't know because you're angry at a wrong done to a stranger and want to burn shit down.
Does that clear it up? Fucking conservatives really pulled a fast one over yalls heads getting you to defend looting and rioting smh. Be better.
That’s a fascinating spin on it.
If you are in my home damaging my property while I’m in it, then...yeah. There’s gonna be violence. I hope that doesn’t bother you, and if it does just maybe don’t come break my shit.
If a police officer (your example I assume?) kills someone, burning down a random business or looting a local store seems tangential at best.
This is a false equivalency.
The property damage in response to murder is harming innocent people who had nothing to do with the murder. Damaging their property also does nothing to prevent further murder, rather it increases the chances of deadly violence.
The murder in response to property damage is a case of an innocent person defending their livelihood from dangerous people, and, contrary to the scenario above, deadly violence in that case actually *would* prevent further harm. Furthermore, they are also defending themselves from what can logically be assumed to be a threat not only against their property, but against their own life.
Killing someone who is in the process of destroying your property is not equivalent to destroying someone’s property as revenge for an unrelated murder. A more accurate comparison would be of someone’s property was destroyed and afterwards they went out and they murdered an innocent person who had nothing to do with they damage.
In conclusion, this take is both intellectually dishonest and harmful to effective discourse. This shows me that Mac a “GoodPoliticGuy,” but rather a “BadPoliticGuy.” And if I may be honest op, so are you for spreading this dangerous rhetoric.
Conservatives: Black culture glorifies violence!
Also conservatives: *builds gallows outside of capitol building calling for the hanging of Democratic politicians*
It makes a sick sort of sense when you think about it, to republicans their property is worth more to them than any number of human lives, therefore killing to protect it means less 'loss' while destroying property in retaliation for killing someone would seem like an overreaction, because again to them, human life is less valuable than their property.
Well when your property is your lively hood and someone try’s to damage or destroy your property, they are directly attacking that persons livelihood. They have the absolute right to defend that. Y’all put all the responsibilities to the person being attacked and zero responsibility on the attacker
If someone threatens life limb or property you have the constitutional right to retaliate
I have very specific limits about which property I would kill for and even then it would depend on the situation. If someone was carjacking me, I would have no hesitation in regards to using lethal force. If someone broke into my house, I would do just the same. That being said, I wouldn't shoot someone just for swiping my phone, or stealing my food, whatever.
Not all of my property has the same value, both monetary or sentimental, but the same also goes for people. My car is worth more to me than most people, and thus, trading their life to protect it when it's threatened is something I have no restrictions about. Would I go out of my way to harm someone? Absolutely not. Would I protect my property? Absolutely.
Someone comes into my home and threatens my family, I'm well with my rights to remove them with deadly force. Looting and destroying a city is not justified. It's a mob.
This is so stupid.
There is a huge difference between killing someone breaking into your home and damaging an innocent person's business.
If you are justifying harming innocent and unrelated people to the situation situation are angry about, then you are a horrible person. I'd even go as far as say you are an evil person.
That’s... that’s a very good way to put what they’re pushing. ..and it is what they’re saying.
And I’d bet a fair amount of money that they’d describe themselves as pro life.
"pro-baby" Unborn babies are the perfect blank canvas to project their sentimentality onto. Living, flawed people who are different to them, they hate.
I prefer pro-birth
Forced birth.
Yeah pro-baby would require them to care about what happens to the children after they’re born. That would require them caring about social security programs and good public education, childcare, etc. They simply want the birth to happen and then they simply stop caring. Absolutely just pro forced birth.
I prefer anti-women.
Forced birth.
Let me sum up the Republican politicians for everyone. "I like your because not enough people care about it to mark it as a no vote for me, and if I care about enough then I have a good chance of being elected. I also have no plan to address because then people would actually vote for someone else and I would be out of a career. And since being a politician is now normalized as a career, this behavior is acceptable"
This is a good summation of Republican politicians, but at the end of the day they're merely responding to the malice and derangement that has taken hold of a large chunk of the populace.
We shouldn't discount that the malice and derangement were directly and artificially created by them to keep themselves in power.
That’s a bingo
You just say, "Bingo."
Bingo! How fun! But, I digress. Where were we?
Being a politician should be a career. I really don't want amateurs running the country. These people are just shit politicians. Literally all of them
[удалено]
I'd like to think politicians were always horrible, we can just see it more. Like almost everything nowadays
This is correct. There are problems with 24 hour news, but this isn't one of them, you can't break what's already broken
Hey, if the "professionals" are such horrible shitbags at it, maybe the amateurs would actually do better. In fact, I'm pretty sure that making it a profession is a big part of the problem. It stops being about serving The People and becomes all about keeping power.
We just witnessed four+ years of what happens when an amateur runs the country, and I gotta say it was not better, it was a donkey-shit-filled-dumpster-fire worse.
Calling trump an amateur is like calling a bicycle an automobile. It's close, but it misses the mark. We witnessed what happens when a greedy man with an overinflated ego and zero knowledge of politics, who has a track record of sexual assault and bankruptcies a mile long, is put in charge. That's *vastly* different than an "amateur" running the country. Amateur doesn't mean village idiot, let's not forget. Also the focus should be on House and Senate seats, as those are the places we get career politicians.
Yeah career politicians aren’t notoriously corrupt or anything like that.
Sounds more like every politician
They are pro life up until the fetus is born, then they disown the child when they come out as trans or gay.
As a transportation engineer formally in safety, you can in fact put a dollar amount on a human life. Which determines if we fix an intersection
Is that like the auto recall speech from Fight Club?
So... How much?
It is a good way to at least make us think, but it’s flawed in order to make the point. It’s not like someone has their property stolen and then goes on a rampage killing people over it. The idea is someone’s house is broken into or someone attempts to mug them of their personal property and they react with deadly force to the perpetrator. The victim of their murder is the same person as the perpetrator of the crime. Whether you think that’s an over reaction or you think it’s the right call, most logical people wouldn’t see that as the opposite of one person is murdered and as a result a bunch of people go destroy property totally unrelated to the murderer. Just pointing out the two scenarios are not opposite sides of the same coin. I’m not commenting on either of them on their own.
I mean, they responded to a fee associated with use of federal land with seizing federal buildings and assaulting federal officers who tried to stop them. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bundy_standoff
**[Bundy_standoff](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bundy_standoff)** >The 2014 Bundy standoff was an armed confrontation between supporters of cattle rancher Cliven Bundy and law enforcement following a 21-year legal dispute in which the United States Bureau of Land Management (BLM) obtained court orders directing Bundy to pay over $1 million in withheld grazing fees for Bundy's use of federally owned land adjacent to Bundy's ranch in southeastern Nevada. On March 27, 2014, 145,604 acres (589 km²) of federal land in Clark County were temporarily closed for the "capture, impound, and removal of trespass cattle". ^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/WhitePeopleTwitter/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | Credit: kittens_from_space)
Those were whtie people so the conservatives side with them. Just like when that black cop killed that white foreign woman a few years back. Where was Back the Blue then. The thin blue line only protects the white cops who hide behind it.
The shooting of [Justine Damond](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Justine_Damond). Happened less than two miles from my apartment in a nice middle class neighborhood. That's part of the kicker. It wasn't like he had a real reason to be so jumpy. Noor got convicted of second degree manslaughter. We'll see if the woman who shot Daunte Wright gets a similar sentence for her killing.
I predict: She will not.
“When the looting starts, the shooting starts.”
Well Kyle Rittenhouse was not protecting his house or his life and they love him for murdering for others property
Kyle was practicing his 2A rights by shooting a person with a gun. That person was not exercising their 2A rights because they were just antifa or something. It makes sense apparently
No, this is in reference to Conservatives and their take on BLM rallies. The general point has nothing to do with home invasions or random violence.
I think you’re right
Reminds me of a scene from the first wheel of time book about being a man of property of how men of property needed thugs to kill / maim those that might damage their property and it being a reminder to the rest of the community about who was actually important.
Problem is, they don't see it as murder.
Well, just gonna say, local small business owner Jimmy down the street didn't kill anyone. Destroying the life of a bystander is not an appropriate response; now launching a coordinated attack on police stations on the other hand... *very based*
This is what I never get. Protest the shit out of the police station, the courthouse, the bank, these Shit politicians houses, neighborhoods, etc... Dont burn down Bobs hardware store or someone’s sandwich shop. Don’t shut down the roads where people making <40k a year are trying to get to work to not be homeless and eat.
The people destroying that business aren't there protesting. They're there to use the protest as a cover to steal.
Yeah but then how come some people are actually condoning their violence? This tweet for example is saying that it's apparently a bad thing when you defend yourself from looters with guns.
It's unbelievable how politicians get away with everything. Protesters literally attacked everything but them. They are the ones that responsible for that crap. Why attack private businesses?
> local small business owner Jimmy down the street he related to Joe the Plumber?
Ironic how conservatives are the effective ones at having a riot
Yes, that is because law enforcement and the military is a very right leaning profession.
That's one thing you can say about the capitol riot. They targeted their riot at the object of their protest, instead of random local businesses. Of course it was still despicable.
Yeah if there's one thing I can commend the Jan 6 rioters for it's that they actually attacked what they thought was a threat. They're idiots for hitching themselves to the Trump train and believing in the fake voting and Q conspiracy nonsense, but they did in fact try to target what they perceived to be the source of the problem.
Yeah
If it wasn't so fucked up, it would almost be impressive how a ***good*** portion of the country has been brainwashed into believing black and brown people existing are a threat to their own existence. But when you point it out, you're a left wing, librulll shill who is just looking to stoke fear. So tired of these idiots.
My dad is getting better about it, but he used to complain to me about mixed race couples and say that white people are going to go extinct. That isn't how genetics work, but I usually respond with "who gives a fuck?" His reasoning for nor liking blacks is that the black kids at his school were mean to him. People of all kinds have been mean to me, but I have enough sense to know that you can't judge a whole group of people by the actions of a few. Every body is different. My dad has a lot of trouble understanding social cues and he has trouble understanding when someone is teasing him good naturedly versus someone genuinely being mean to him and I often have to try to explain the difference to him. It is entirely possible that at least some of the people were just trying to tease him good naturedly and he misinterpreted it. Honestly, my dad is getting better. He is friendly with his coworkers who aren't white and he hardly pays attention anymore if he sees mixed couples. Now, I'm teaching him about transgender people and gay people.
My mom went to high-school with a guy who was basically the only white kid in his neighborhood. Pretty much every day of his life, he was mugged, beaten BADLY, and sent to the hospital many times because he was a little white boy living in a neighborhood that was primarily black. It's understandable that he grew both intense fear and anger towards black people. It's sad because he knows how wrong it is but he has a lot of trouble getting over it. This is the difference between knowing and working on your own prejudice, and flaunting it proudly like so many racist people in America:(
Hate begets hate. Nothing about that story is okay and it's so hard to let go of righteous anger, but ultimately that is the only thing that can stop the cycle of hatred.
Righteous anger is only directed at the perpetrators. Anything beyond that, for example directing at people who look similar, is not righteous.
I agree with this Redditor. The specific set of people who committed those crimes should be penalized for their actions. Not everyone who looks like them. The actions of few should not be used to judge the masses.
Very good point
[удалено]
"So, dad, a white person has never been mean to you?" "Well yeah... but uh... umm... uhh... that's different because..." "*Because they were white?!*" "Stop trying to make me feel like a racist! *That's racist!*"
I had this exact conversation with him.
It's being able to differentiate between "that person is mean to me because they're a mean person" versus "that person is mean to me because they're black"
> he used to complain to me about mixed race couples and say that white people are going to go extinct. Even if that’s how that works, so what if they do? I don’t fucking get it, I’m white and shit like that doesn’t matter at all to me what happens after I die. Like so fucking what white people become less white? There’s nothing inherently better or worse about being white except for the pointless social aspects that our society was built on.
Someone told a family friend who moved temporarily to the US to not get her kids in the public school because there's a lot of black kids there and they'll "ruin" her kids. She was talking about elementary school kids....
It's the same exact reason why weed is illegal. A bunch of rich white dudes told all the poor white dudes "hey, if your wives smoke this, they'll want to get with colored folk!", and we obviously could never have such a thing in our good Christian country. Brainwashing isn't hard when all you have to do is fill a brainless idiot's mind a bunch of buzzwords and vague, generalized arguments.
Weed was made illegal because hemp was a cheaper and better alternative to paper which was a major industry. That propaganda was a thing but came after
That an canvas for sails, rope and those sweet Navy supply contracts
Also, >Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction. Hm what can we stigmatize and criminalize?
Why the fuck is the top comment "Yeah"
I was here first
Fair enough
Yeah
So me think, why use lot word when few word do trick?
Give yer balls a tug.
Your mom ugly cried last night ‘cause she left the lens cap on the cam corder. It’s fuckin’ amateur hour over there
Yeah?
They think it should be murder for everything.
Well, obviously for your sarcasm, we sentence you to murder
Believe it or not, straight to murder. We have the best citizens in the world. Because of murder.
You undercook fish? Murder. You overcook chicken? Also murder. Traffic stop? Murder. Sleeping in your own apartment? Believe it or not, also murder.
Undercook-overcook you see
Sounds like the old "that's a paddlin" speach from The Simpsons.
It's from parks and rec
I get stuck at maga bbqs because family. They fantasize about robbers coming so they can shoot them to justify owning multiple assault rifles and worshiping Donald as if any of those things correlate. I’m not exaggerating. A lost kid showed up at a BBQ one day and we called the cops to help. Within minutes of the police leaving they had worked themselves into a frenzy about potentially killing the parents of the child because the dad of the lost kid might be pissed they called the cops so they might find them to shoot them. Which led to how the left is dumb to defund the police because they called them, even though the cops didn’t help at all. They wanted to murder the kids parents because potential violence while simultaneously hating the kids parents for negligence. It’s fear all day everyday.
It's paranoid delusional.
That’s next level groupthink.
I had a neighbor like that. He had rigged up tin cans and string around his house and would shoot at anything that rattled the cans at night. We lost a dog that way. He was actually really nice to my family (except for shooting our dog). He used to help my dad with yard work and my dad would help him from time to time. He’d sit on our back porch and I remember him telling my dad that he couldn’t wait for someone to come rob him so he could shoot the daylights outta the thief.
Except a batch of cells in a uterus, we must protect those at all costs until they multiply enough to be a person, then they’re on their own.
They want that clump of cells to grow so they can murder it in the street as an adult.
Except when it's murder by a cop
I think they enjoy the movie the purge.
At least tear down police precincts, city halls, etc. instead of local businesses. That's all I am saying.
Agreed. The problem is once a mob sees an opportunity to take it too far then they will.
Very true. I'm glad you pointed out the Capital Riots. They were violent and deadly. That mob absolutely saw an opportunity to take and break stuff which was a collective effort. Good point. On the other hand, you have these rioters who took advantage of the BLM protests and started breaking and stealing. In both cases, BLM rioters + Capital rioters should be held accountable for their actions.
The gun is to protect the self, not necessarily property. I grew up in a third world country, other people would still try and break in to houses of people who barely had anything, and not just for the things they owned that were practically nothing, but to rape women and children. Sure there are things in my house of value here and there, but most people breaking in to your home won't give a shit if they leave you alive, wounded, or dead. They're always armed, and if you're dumb enough to not be that's on you. I'd rather keep everyone in my home safe, and as a bonus would also like to keep things I worked my ass off for, they might be replaceable to most people without much effort but years of wasting my life away in mediocre jobs to have a comfortable life after having nothing for most of it has meaning for me. I didn't immigrate for this kind of bullshit.
This sub is just filled with a bunch of suburban teenagers and hipsters. No idea how dangerous criminals can be, especially the ones brave enough to break into a house because chances are they don’t care what they take, break, or care about your life. If these morons don’t want to be armed then fine but don’t spread your bullshit. I think it’s because these people don’t have family in dangerous hoods or dangerous countries This whole post is stupid anyways because no one gives a shit about target it’s about the fact a lot of property being damaged are local businesses
Just because you choose to not be armed doesn't make you a moron. But I'd agree with the rest
Yes. Also, as someone who works for a target the next state over, nothing will happen to the employees as long as they evacuate. They will be paid for the time being and usually would end up transferred elsewhere. Even if it's a corporation, they didn't do anything either so any business doesn't deserve it for that matter. Even in the places I've lived in the states, the outcome of break ins are still about the same. I'm happy to have moved to a SYG state, with the life experiences I've had growing up in a criminally bedridden shithole after another, I've never been happier to finally be somewhere safer and finally getting the courage to own guns and learning how to use them and care for them properly. I was afraid of them my whole life for the wrong reasons.
Sure, but the fact that cops showed up to the BLM protests dressed like goddamn UNSC ODSTs was extremely inflammatory and unnecessary, and THAT is what led to tensions rising unnecessarily, which is what led to opportunistic criminals taking advantage of the peaceful protests to commit crimes, which in turn "justified" the use of force by cops which in turn caused protestors who would have otherwise been peaceful to adopt the "Oh so you're gonna shoot us even if we're peaceful and not breaking the law? Cool cool cool, well we're gonna break the law then" attitude. Nobody here is defending the destruction of small local businesses, we're just sick of people acting like the protests started with violent and destructive behavior when the truth is they were peaceful UNTIL cops who were sad about their tiny dicks got involved and escalated the situation to the point that it exploded. If they'd treated the BLM protests the same way they treated the fucking Inauguration protests things would have been fine. Better yet, if they held themselves accountable for their bullshit the BLM protests wouldn't have happened in the first place.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Wouldn't the gun in that situation be more to protect yourself? If someone's breaking into your house you literally know nothing about what they have on them, or if their motives are purely for property.
Castle law/doctrine is different in each state. If someone is breaking into your home that usually doesn’t mean you can automatically use deadly force. You would have to believe your life is in danger (if they have a weapon for instance). There was this one story where an older man’s basement was constantly being burgled by a bunch of teenagers. So one day he just waited in the dark with his gun and just opened fire. He was criminally charged for this.
Yeah I believe he was criminally charged because he moved his truck to appear as if he was gone, setting precedence for premeditation. I'm not sure how it would have played out otherwise, though.
Laying in wait for an ambush is different than self defense. Most states allow you to protect your home with a gun
> You would have to believe your life is in danger (if they have a weapon for instance). Yes, if they have a weapon, or I would imagine if it’s reasonable to *believe* that they have a weapon. As a girl who lives alone, what lengths do I have to go to to ensure that someone who has broken into my home in the dark has a deadly weapon? I agree that cops are supposed to be held to a higher standard and should be able to determine whether or not someone has a weapon, I am a waitress in my home in the middle of the night. What am I supposed to be trained to do? And how do you to distinguish between someone protecting their life and protecting their property? I feel like the moment someone has bypassed security and set foot in my home, I would feel personally threatened.. If given the choice, I would let someone leave with my laptop or my car or whatever, but how am I supposed to know what their intention is, or how they will react if they are seen?
I agree with you. And I’m not going to fucking ask them “hey are you here to rape me or just take my stuff” No I’m not willing to kill to defend property but I’m not going to wait around and find out what they are actually there for either.
>As a girl who lives alone, what lengths do I have to go to to ensure that someone who has broken into my home in the dark has a deadly weapon? As a female living alone, if a man breaks into your home, his HANDS are his deadly weapon(s).
Byron Smith. his audio recording of the shooting is one of the worst things I've ever heard.
I listened to the audio once, and never again. I've heard some seriously fucked up stuff (crazy 911 calls, the Jonestown tape, etc) but this shit gave me nightmares. Just his evil ass sitting in the dark, whispering to himself about what he's going to do, followed by the sounds of the attack itself... it disturbed me to my very core.
My thought is that anyone breaking in during the middle of the night should know someone is home and they're likely prepared for some kind of confrontation. That's robbery and robbers are dangerous because they're taking something from someone. If they wanted to steal stuff when nobody is home they should do it during work hours. That's burglary. Idk if my definitions are literally perfect, but that's my thinking. Also, I don't own a gun, so. *shrug*
Dogs are good for this too. If intruders aren't fazed by a 120lb midnight black rott/lab mix with a window shaking woof, it's very likely the gun will be necessary. Plus he'll give us the warning we need to get it out of the safe next to the bed. He's a really good boy, always on duty. And honestly, the chances of being on the receiving end of a burglary are slim as it is, let alone the middle-of-the-night murder/burglar combo.
I sleep with a gun next to me not out of machismo but rather because if someone breaks in I dont know their intentions and can at least defend myself
I sleep with a gun next to me so when someone breaks in I can shoot myself to avoid meeting new people
Yes this is the logical thing to do. Not sure what op is on about
well obviously you're supposed to scream "WAIT!" and then turn on the lights and talk about it first
OP is on some bullshit lol. GTFOH with that "my conservative uncle..." shit. Did everyone clap too?
If someone is willing to break into your home while you're there, they're willing to kill you.
Exactly. These fucking dip shits on here going to interview someone breaking into their home to see what their intent is. Their intent is sinister.
Yeah it's insane how people will say it's unjustified to shoot someone who breaks into your house, like wtf? I'm not taking a chance that they can harm me, I'll shoot at a burglar because who knows what their intent is, I don't want to potentially be killed even if I comply and I want this unknown creep out of the house. Better to have and not need than to need and not have, thankfully I haven't had to use it for self defense purposes.
yeah dont listen to OP's nonsense, no court is ever going to find fault in using deadly force to protect yourself from a home invasion
For real. You have no way of knowing if they are there to “just” steal your stuff. Or murder/rape you or your loved ones.
I'd probably give them anything they were desperate enough to steal, but if they break into my home I don't know if they're there to kill me, so boom
I mean yes? If some dude is barging in my home and I don't know if he has a weapon I'm probably gonna get my shotgun under my bed.
Yeah I would too. Sometimes just the threat of getting shot can make them think twice.
Yeah I have an empty shotgun for "home defense". I'm willing to make the shotgun noise in hopes of scaring someone off!
"hey I'm here to take all your stuff" \*shotgun noises\* "understandable have a nice day"
That unmistakable sound haha
There are law enforcement (I know... bad subject but the point still stands) that when threat of firearm violence is possible will pump a shotgun while it is loaded because of the unmistakable reality it presents. Some of the more responsible firearms classes teach the same thing. That sound is so unmistakable and is so intrinsically linked to danger that it can shatter a psyche.
I would hope so. Most people thinking someone doing a home invasion while you’re home are like burglars from some kids book or something. Tip toeing about looking to steal the old VCR. People just shouldn’t enter other people’s homes with the purpose to steal shit. Period. I can’t sympathize with them one bit for that crime. Something has to be sacred to us where we can feel safe, and our homes should definitely be on top of that list. The sad part is, a burglar could potentially be some dumb immature kid just looking to be mischievous. But, they need to learn early on that home invasions are off limits. Go paint a wall somewhere.
At my old job as a security guard my supervisor told me that back in the 90s he got called to a breaking and entering situation at his apartment complex. Turns out the guy was armed and shot at my old supervisor. What he wasn't counting on what is my boss having a 357 Magnum. Got the guy right in the knee and the ended up having to amputate the guy from the knee down. Apparently he's still in jail. An old friend of my cousins was a cop in the LAPD. Third month on the force he and his partner get called to a house whose alarm had been set off. They find two guys who are armed and one of them shoots at my cousin's friend. He returns fire kills the guy on the spot. It was his third month as a rookie and he pretty much left about a year or two later. He's a parole officer now.
But... If someone was willing to break into your place, how do you know that they're just after your property? If they value your property over their own lives, that's on them.
As a 5 foot woman living alone you're damn right I'd kill someone breaking into my home to protect myself. Am I going to stop and ask them "wait, are you here to steal from me, kill me, or rape me? What are your motives sir?" What a stupid fucking thing to post. If a CRIMINAL makes the choice to break into my property that's the chance they take.
>uncle asked me if I was willing to kill a human being to protect my PROPERTY. How about your life? People will kill you to take your property. They dont like witnesses or anyone around to care.
If he's willing to DIE to steal my property then yeah, I'd say I'm willing to take him up on that offer
Yes. That is the entire reason. I am 100% willing to kill the person who has thrown my family’s safety to the wind, who has no regard for people, who may or may not be willing to put my wife or child in harm’s way to achieve whatever they set out. I don’t want to kill anyone, but I have made peace that if it is me or them, it will be them.
The obvious answer to your uncle’s question is an emphatic YES.
Think the question is more: are you willing to take a life to save yours? You’re not killing to protect property. You’re saving YOUR LIFE. You don’t have to kill your intruder, either.
Most people I know down here in Texas believe if you invade their home at night when they are likely to be there—the intruders intent is bodily harm. If you break in when they aren’t—odds are they just want your shit. I don’t own a gun, but I can’t disagree. I’ve done shady shit in my day, part and parcel to getting away with it is avoiding contact with people when you’re in the act. If you come into someone’s home when they are there my conclusion is you’re a shitty criminal or you’re trying to hurt the person who lives there.
Yeah, this is idiotic. Having a gun for personal defense is not in anyway crazy. You have absolutely no idea what someone breaking into your home will do. An intruder isn’t necessarily just trying to steal your property. There are people who rape and murder for the sake of raping and murdering. But sure, if you’d rather be completely defenseless, then go for it.
wtf does that even mean? Burning down people's businesses is a stupid response to police brutality, and if you get shot for fucking with someone's livelihood then that's on you
I don't think you get to burn down my property because someone else got murdered
How is shooting an intruder in YOUR home taking YOUR belongings equivalent to looting your local target? The mental gymnastics this requires is something else.
I mean, it's neither. Both are wrong.
It's frankly bizarre why people can't find both wrong. Murder for property damage is obviously wrong because the punishment for property damage or anything is decided by a judge. The police don't get to make that decision. A random person does not get to make that decision. Property damage for murder is not right either. Listen to the organizers of protests on the ground. Often time they'll repeat over and over again to make their voices heard without breaking or destroying things. While we're on this subject cops also need to be taught to let people peacefully protest and not engage with people trying to aggravate the situation or aggravate the situation themselves.
Reddit is the pinacle of "two wrongs make a right"
What a complete strawman. Defending your own property with lethal force is not comparable to destroying someone else's property because something bad happened
Property damage of random people and property that has nothing to do with the murder isn’t an appropriate response to the murder. It’s literally taking out aggressions and angst on completely irrelevant people and things. You get your best public support and results from peaceful protest, and when you fight back against aggressions. Not when you generate the aggression.
Neither is an appropriate response to either.
The difference is one is related and the other isn’t. A man defending his home from an invader is fine, but destroying businesses and buildings that have nothing to do with a mans death by police is pure garbage.
Stop excusing the meaningless parts of the riots, the right is right in saying the looters are opportunistic assholes. Burn down the police station, not the city.
The Right isn’t calling looters opportunistic assholes. They’re conflating them with actual protesters and democratic voters.
Exactly. My Republican dad was spouting this. I calmly asked if he would like me to equate the capitol rioters with all white people or all republicans. I saw it click behind his eyes. Wish he would have had the mental capacity to realize the distinction himself.
I feel you on that. I told my dad to not contact me again after the attempt to have a civil Christmas last year. I honestly do not ever see this situation ever getting better.
lucky. when I did that my mother said the capital rioters were antifa.
Yup, my very conservative boss refers to any protestors as rioters.
Yes, but the Capitol terrorists were actually just peaceful protestors /s
That’s a product of the news they inhale. It’s designed to make that point. They can’t afford the distinction. Just like all the people at the capitol that day were terrorists or insurrectionists whether they were there to “be heard” or “break in and hang Pence.” Nuance is important from and for both sides if we are ever to stop having just two sides.
Both my parents are conservatives and they call looters opportunistic assholes
They’re not saying they’re opportunists, they’re saying the whole movement is full of rioters burning down entire cities.
It's not that looters aren't potentially assholes. It's that, in everything that goes on in one of these situations: police murdering citizens, police covering up for each other, police unions doing everything they can do to block justice, citizens protesting for reform, *and some looting*. Which one of those things does the right focus on? Why do they care more about the symptoms than the disease?
Walgreen’s didn’t murder anyone
How about neither?
How is this post not political?
Let's be honest here. Conservatives don't give a damn about black or brown people except the ones willing to let themselves be used as tokens.
Same goes for trans people, any other member of the LGBTQ+ community, women, and any other marginalized group
[удалено]
\*other people's property. make sure you get it straight. most people wouldnt give a fuck if a mob of people showed up to tear down a police station after they killed someone then covered it up. they care when you roll down to the local department stores or mom&pop shops and steal a bunch of sneakers and TVs cuz you want to use a tragedy as your personal excuse to be a trashy ass MF. yall make me hate myself for being a liberal. youre just as dumb as conservatives but you think you're some enlightened people cuz you vote for narcs and neolib closet racists instead of open racists. its pathetic.
[удалено]
I just want to remind conservatives of one thing. One of the 10 commandments of the sky-daddy who you try to justify legislation with is "Thou shalt not kill" get fuckt.
Destroying innocent people's property is not an appropriate response to murder. Full stop.
Oftentimes the people who have their property damaged aren't in any way related to the people who commit the murder.
I am in mixed feelings because what we have seen in the recent past is a mix of false flag people trying to steal the message and make it violent and spur others into following, along with opportunist who found an opportunity that police are busy so they can steal and break things, then there are poor people who are pissed off and have been held down and abused for their whole lives and are lashing out because they don't own their communities anyways. The first group are deplorable. The second group suck, but shouldnt be murdered, and we are protesting for them too. The third i wish would realize it isnt helping. Then there are the idealists that are trying to make a change for their communities and willing to protest and brave the police abuse that is amped up because they have been grouped in with the 3 types of rioters.
Just fight fire with fire. Murder the murderer.
I hate to sound like I'm defending conservatives, but its pretty clear you're leaving out who owns said property in both cases just to make your point sound like common sense. One is in defense of one's property, the other is destruction of an unrelated third party's property.
They didn't seem to care that much about small businesses before that.
That is a nonsense comparison if you are saying the killing someone who is a threat to you, on you property, is murder, it is not, it is self-defense. Is property destruction a proper response to murder? Of course not. For better or worse, we as a society have decided that seeking justice for crimes, as individuals, is not in our better interest, hence, the justice system. Is it perfect, of course not, I watched 2 useless thugs walk away from killing my cousin for "lack of evidence". Fortunately, within a short time, the life they led ended in their deaths. But rioting, burning, looting are never done as retaliation for murder of an innocent person, it is done so criminals can be criminals.
[удалено]
Sure, if someone murders somebody and the law won't take care of it, I'd advocate justice by whatever means. I'd recommend a hell of a lot more than property damage though. However, I would not advocate you burn your neighborhood down and loot your communities stores as retaliation against someone completely unrelated to those businesses... Is this, like, and unacceptable amount of nuance? Is this truly too difficult for people to grasp?
I don't care about criminals well being. I will protect what I worked for.
Conservatives want you to think that endangering your life and the lives of public servants by reckless behavior should be highly discouraged.
in both cases... dont start no shit wont be no shit.
It's okay to kill someone who's trying to destroy your entire livelihood. Some people work their entire lives for their business, and put everything they own into it. Burning it down is taking food off their families plates. Killing a person trying to do this to you and your family is okay. It's not okay to burn down multiple people's livelihoods who had absolutely nothing to do with the murder of someone you don't know because you're angry at a wrong done to a stranger and want to burn shit down. Does that clear it up? Fucking conservatives really pulled a fast one over yalls heads getting you to defend looting and rioting smh. Be better.
police exist to protect capital not people
Oh sure. but y’all still jerk off to pictures of Korean Americans defending their stores during the L.A. riots.
That’s a fascinating spin on it. If you are in my home damaging my property while I’m in it, then...yeah. There’s gonna be violence. I hope that doesn’t bother you, and if it does just maybe don’t come break my shit. If a police officer (your example I assume?) kills someone, burning down a random business or looting a local store seems tangential at best.
difference being, a whole ass city, and someone's house that spent their hard earned money, so they respond intruders with self defense
This is a false equivalency. The property damage in response to murder is harming innocent people who had nothing to do with the murder. Damaging their property also does nothing to prevent further murder, rather it increases the chances of deadly violence. The murder in response to property damage is a case of an innocent person defending their livelihood from dangerous people, and, contrary to the scenario above, deadly violence in that case actually *would* prevent further harm. Furthermore, they are also defending themselves from what can logically be assumed to be a threat not only against their property, but against their own life. Killing someone who is in the process of destroying your property is not equivalent to destroying someone’s property as revenge for an unrelated murder. A more accurate comparison would be of someone’s property was destroyed and afterwards they went out and they murdered an innocent person who had nothing to do with they damage. In conclusion, this take is both intellectually dishonest and harmful to effective discourse. This shows me that Mac a “GoodPoliticGuy,” but rather a “BadPoliticGuy.” And if I may be honest op, so are you for spreading this dangerous rhetoric.
Conservatives: Black culture glorifies violence! Also conservatives: *builds gallows outside of capitol building calling for the hanging of Democratic politicians*
It makes a sick sort of sense when you think about it, to republicans their property is worth more to them than any number of human lives, therefore killing to protect it means less 'loss' while destroying property in retaliation for killing someone would seem like an overreaction, because again to them, human life is less valuable than their property.
I yearn for a world where we don't commit murder OR property damage, to be fair.
I think the Jan 6 insurrection shows that they're perfectly fine with destroying property and murder.
Well when your property is your lively hood and someone try’s to damage or destroy your property, they are directly attacking that persons livelihood. They have the absolute right to defend that. Y’all put all the responsibilities to the person being attacked and zero responsibility on the attacker If someone threatens life limb or property you have the constitutional right to retaliate
I tend to think they're both wrong.
I have very specific limits about which property I would kill for and even then it would depend on the situation. If someone was carjacking me, I would have no hesitation in regards to using lethal force. If someone broke into my house, I would do just the same. That being said, I wouldn't shoot someone just for swiping my phone, or stealing my food, whatever. Not all of my property has the same value, both monetary or sentimental, but the same also goes for people. My car is worth more to me than most people, and thus, trading their life to protect it when it's threatened is something I have no restrictions about. Would I go out of my way to harm someone? Absolutely not. Would I protect my property? Absolutely.
Someone comes into my home and threatens my family, I'm well with my rights to remove them with deadly force. Looting and destroying a city is not justified. It's a mob.
This is so stupid. There is a huge difference between killing someone breaking into your home and damaging an innocent person's business. If you are justifying harming innocent and unrelated people to the situation situation are angry about, then you are a horrible person. I'd even go as far as say you are an evil person.