Nazi-esque Black Lives Matter Protesters

toomuchbaloney · Aug 29, 2020

7 minutes ago, DannyBoy8 said:

I care about he laws he breaks. I simply argue that any whiff of a comparison between either side of this particular topic to Nazi regime is the inaccurate, incendiary, and divisive rhetoric that is going to hand Trump the election this time around.

Sadly, as per usual with our electoral college, moderately minded white voters in the states that "matter" will get to call the ball. And those voters could honestly give a rats behind about whatever academically generated social justice philosophy is being taken to the streets because they are more worried about their pensions, healthcare, and mortgages - and rightfully so. They are also particularly fragile and only have so much patience for all things social justice. The more riots and protests, the better for Trump. The more Nazi name calling, the better for Trump. The more hell that is raised, the better for Trump.

Maybe we should take a moment to recognize that CNN, MSNBC, Fox News, CNBC, NYT, WAPO, The Atlantic....they all stand to gain billions of dollars if he is re-elected.

OK

I disagree that comparisons are off limits. Having said that, I don't often use that language personally (Hitler and Nazis) but will make a reference. It is actually concerning that so many Americans seemingly don't understand these words or ideologies or the history of the rise and fall of such regimes.

You are quite correct that an authoritarian will use, even escalate or precipitate civil unrest to benefit himself.

If Trump is reelected, some of those media could be too troubled with government harassment to see much profit. Barr's DOJ isn't exactly ethical or honest even now.

toomuchbaloney · Aug 29, 2020

10 hours ago, rzyzzy said:

If that’s the mindset of BLM, see how long it takes before we get some “mow them down” laws for people intentionally blocking public roads.

I think that GOP lawmakers have already tried to make it legal to just drove into protesters with your vehicle. It sounds like you think that would be good governance. It seems an odd that a health professional would feel that way, knowing that peaceful protest (blocking a road) is a cornerstone of our freedoms.

macawake, MSN · Aug 29, 2020

10 hours ago, rzyzzy said:

If that’s the mindset of BLM, see how long it takes before we get some “mow them down” laws for people intentionally blocking public roads.

Mow them down LAWS ??

This is quite frankly one of the most disturbing things I’ve read on this site.

I visit London on a regular basis and in mid-March of 2017 I spent a week there, visiting friends and shopping. Since the Westminster bridge was near my hotel, I walked on it on several occasions. Two days after I returned home from my trip, a terrorist drove a vehicle at high speed into pedestrians on that same bridge, killing four and injuring more than 50 people.

Do you actually believe that lawmakers in your country will respond to civil disobedience or law-breaking by legalizing the act of ramming a heavy vehicle into the flesh and bones of multiple human beings? And do you personally feel that would be a proportional and justifiable response?

I’m sure that terrorists feel that their grievances are of far greater importance than the nuisance of being held up in traffic by a group of protesters. Yet, as an evolved society we rightfully condemn the murderous actions of terrorists. Adopting homicidal terrorist tactics to solve a law enforcement problem is beyond primitive.

rzyzzy · Aug 29, 2020

1 hour ago, toomuchbaloney said:

I think that GOP lawmakers have already tried to make it legal to just drove into protesters with your vehicle. It sounds like you think that would be good governance. It seems an odd that a health professional would feel that way, knowing that peaceful protest (blocking a road) is a cornerstone of our freedoms.

Yeah, the keyword here being “peaceful” ..

The people who got shot in Kenosha weren’t peaceful, and they all had criminal records. Even calling them “protestors” is quite a stretch- was any of them carrying a sign?

BLM’s tactics to date have been to hold unpermitted protests on open streets, and they’ve been caught on tape not just passively blocking the roads, but also running ahead to block cars, and attacking motorists who try to leave. If BLM collectively thinks “in your face” tactics like that won’t have repercussions, they’re sorely mistaken.

rzyzzy · Aug 29, 2020

58 minutes ago, macawake said:

Mow them down LAWS ??

This is quite frankly one of the most disturbing things I’ve read on this site.

I visit London on a regular basis and in mid-March of 2017 I spent a week there, visiting friends and shopping. Since the Westminster bridge was near my hotel, I walked on it on several occasions. Two days after I returned home from my trip, a terrorist drove a vehicle at high speed into pedestrians on that same bridge, killing four and injuring more than 50 people.

Do you actually believe that lawmakers in your country will respond to civil disobedience or law-breaking by legalizing the act of ramming a heavy vehicle into the flesh and bones of multiple human beings? And do you personally feel that would be a proportional and justifiable response?

I’m sure that terrorists feel that their grievances are of far greater importance than the nuisance of being held up in traffic by a group of protesters. Yet, as an evolved society we rightfully condemn the murderous actions of terrorists. Adopting homicidal terrorist tactics to solve a law enforcement problem is beyond primitive.

Yes, unfortunately I believe they will pass laws that will indemnify drivers for mowing down “protesters” who block public roads without a permit - this is no different than the laws passed in California banning to “open carry” of long guns after the black panthers started carrying guns there.

actions have consequences.

All it’ll take is a couple viral videos of suburban housewives getting their windows smashed with their kids in the car and Bob’s your uncle. Done.

My opinion of it is irrelevant, however I find it amazing that there isn’t any effort being made to distance BLM from violent protests and looting.

macawake, MSN · Aug 29, 2020

49 minutes ago, rzyzzy said:

Yes, unfortunately I believe they will pass laws that will indemnify drivers for mowing down “protesters” who block public roads without a permit - this is no different than the laws passed in California banning to “open carry” of long guns after the black panthers started carrying guns there.

actions have consequences.

All it’ll take is a couple viral videos of suburban housewives getting their windows smashed with their kids in the car and Bob’s your uncle. Done.

My opinion of it is irrelevant, however I find it amazing that there isn’t any effort being made to distance BLM from violent protests and looting.

Just a side note, but I am curious if this means that you also think that Wisconsin will or should outlaw open carry of long guns after out-of-state wannabe cops travel there and patrol the streets armed, engaging in pretend-policing? If that teenager had stayed at home with his mother where he in my opinion belongs, there’s a good chance that two people wouldn’t be dead. Crowd and riot control is hard enough without having bumbling, dangerous amateurs injected in the mix.

Returning to the main question. Using force, including lethal force, as a last resort as self-defense in a legitimate serious harm or life-threatening situation, is a completely different scenario than having a blanket rule/law that allows anyone to take one or multiple human lives simply because the road you want to drive on is blocked. In my book, plowing into a crowd with your car should be considered murder and only under very limited and specific circumstances should it be deemed as justifiable self-defense.

allnurses Guide · Aug 29, 2020

States have passed laws with possible arrest and/or fine for blocking emergency vehicles,and for walking or protesting on a highway.

Aug 15, 2017: Backlash over GOP bills to shield drivers who hit protesters

Republican lawmakers in six states have pushed this year for legal protections for motorists who hit protesters blocking traffic. Fairly or not, they're facing an intense backlash now that violent images of a car ramming into a crowd protesting a white supremacist rally have been seen around the world. The lawmakers say their goal has never been to incite violence, but to shield drivers from costly lawsuits for accidents they blame on illegal street protests. Bills in Texas and North Carolina to protect drivers from civil liability if they unintentionally injure or kill protesters remain pending, but their chances of passage appear dim after Saturday's attack in Charlottesville, Virginia, which killed a woman and injured at least 19 people. The four other bills were voted down or failed without advancing...

... The bills are part of a backlash to large, disruptive protests over the last year... ... Some shut down major freeways, angering motorists and drawing concern from public safety officials...

... The driver immunity proposals have been particularly contentious. Critics, including the American Civil Liberties Union, labeled them "hit and kill" bills that undermine free assembly and embolden extremists by suggesting they have a free pass to drive through protesters...

https://www.businessinsider.com/ap-backlash-over-gop-bills-to-shield-drivers-who-hit-protesters-2017-8?op=1

rzyzzy · Aug 29, 2020

35 minutes ago, macawake said:

Just a side note, but I am curious if this means that you also think that Wisconsin will or should outlaw open carry of long guns after out-of-state wannabe cops travel there and patrol the streets armed, engaging in pretend-policing? If that teenager had stayed at home with his mother where he in my opinion belongs, there’s a good chance that two people wouldn’t be dead. Crowd and riot control is hard enough without having bumbling, dangerous amateurs injected in the mix.

this wasn’t a play riot, and the guys with long guns weren’t “play” policing. look at how the cops extracted “lefty” above - those are tactics that the armed forces use in foreign countries. The cops were in armored vehicles blocks away from where things were burning.

The cops weren’t going to do anything to protect anyone except themselves.

I guess I have to wonder about the mixology going on in someone’s head when they say that “only the cops should have guns”, and in the next breath they go into “the cops are murderous thugs” ?

“Lefty”, from the video above - had a concealed handgun (and apparently a prior conviction for being drunk with a concealed handgun). Odds are, that previous conviction meant he was carrying an illegal weapon as well..

I’m not happy that “lefty” or the “boy-wonder” were armed. I’m not happy that either one of them was there. I’m not happy that the cops were hiding while Kenosha was burning - the taxpayers in Kenosha paid for at least half-a-dozen armored trucks that weren’t actually being used to protect the public - lots of cops were available, lots of cops were drawing that sweeeeet overtime, but they weren’t “running into the danger” like they always tell the public they’re going to do.

as for further infringing on the rights of regular folks (who aren’t convicted felons) to have and carry arms of whatever their hearts desire (openly or concealed), this is certainly not a case that supports that ideal. If I lived in any of those affected neighborhoods, I’d want a gun exactly like what the cops (and the boy-wonder) were carrying, and a six-pack of “high capacity” mags as well.

toomuchbaloney · Aug 29, 2020

2 hours ago, rzyzzy said:

Yeah, the keyword here being “peaceful” ..

The people who got shot in Kenosha weren’t peaceful, and they all had criminal records. Even calling them “protestors” is quite a stretch- was any of them carrying a sign?

BLM’s tactics to date have been to hold unpermitted protests on open streets, and they’ve been caught on tape not just passively blocking the roads, but also running ahead to block cars, and attacking motorists who try to leave. If BLM collectively thinks “in your face” tactics like that won’t have repercussions, they’re sorely mistaken.

Nah.

The cherub cheeked white boy murdered a couple unarmed protesters and the police let him walk away. You can rant to make yourself feel justified but the kid is a criminal. But don't worry, he will be coddled by the racists in the local criminal justice system that encouraged his violent presence.

Oh the horrors of unpermitted protests in the streets. LOL

toomuchbaloney · Aug 29, 2020

1 hour ago, rzyzzy said:

Yes, unfortunately I believe they will pass laws that will indemnify drivers for mowing down “protesters” who block public roads without a permit - this is no different than the laws passed in California banning to “open carry” of long guns after the black panthers started carrying guns there.

actions have consequences.

All it’ll take is a couple viral videos of suburban housewives getting their windows smashed with their kids in the car and Bob’s your uncle. Done.

My opinion of it is irrelevant, however I find it amazing that there isn’t any effort being made to distance BLM from violent protests and looting.

It's more curious that police make so little effort to distance themselves from violent protesters and armed thugs.

rzyzzy · Aug 29, 2020

7 minutes ago, toomuchbaloney said:

Nah.

The cherub cheeked white boy murdered a couple unarmed protesters and the police let him walk away. You can't rant to make yourself feel justified but the kid is a criminal. But don't worry, he will be coddled by the racists in the local criminal justice system that encouraged his violent presence.

Oh the horrors of unpermitted protests in the streets. LOL

peace-loving fella. Right up there with ghandi. Roaming the streets after ten years in the joint.

toomuchbaloney · Aug 29, 2020

6 minutes ago, rzyzzy said:

this wasn’t a play riot, and the guys with long guns weren’t “play” policing. look at how the cops extracted “lefty” above - those are tactics that the armed forces use in foreign countries. The cops were in armored vehicles blocks away from where things were burning.

The cops weren’t going to do anything to protect anyone except themselves.

I guess I have to wonder about the mixology going on in someone’s head when they say that “only the cops should have guns”, and in the next breath they go into “the cops are murderous thugs” ?

“Lefty”, from the video above - had a concealed handgun (and apparently a prior conviction for being drunk with a concealed handgun). Odds are, that previous conviction meant he was carrying an illegal weapon as well..

I’m not happy that “lefty” or the “boy-wonder” were armed. I’m not happy that either one of them was there. I’m not happy that the cops were hiding while Kenosha was burning - the taxpayers in Kenosha paid for at least half-a-dozen armored trucks that weren’t actually being used to protect the public - lots of cops were available, lots of cops were drawing that sweeeeet overtime, but they weren’t “running into the danger” like they always tell the public they’re going to do.

as for further infringing on the rights of regular folks (who aren’t convicted felons) to have and carry arms of whatever their hearts desire (openly or concealed), this is certainly not a case that supports that ideal. If I lived in any of those affected neighborhoods, I’d want a gun exactly like what the cops (and the boy-wonder) were carrying, and a six-pack of “high capacity” mags as well.

Sounds like you are another of those who is in favor of a wild west type of law enforcement. We actually outlawed armed white people acting as vigilantes quite some time ago. It's no longer OK for white men to decide that someone looks like they don't belong there and then "fix" that problem. That retired LEO and his murderous son reminded you of that earlier this year...do you not remember?

Who cares if you're "happy" about the murders? As health a health professional I care that you believe the murders were justified.

6 minutes ago, rzyzzy said:

peace-loving fella. Right up there with ghandi. Roaming the streets after ten years in the joint.

Still trying to defend murder?