Poll of the Day > Has anyone rioted yet?

(+) Yeah! (+)

adjl posted...

Quite the contrary: It's the only solution. Protesting? The Supreme Court already knows that most Americans disapprove of this decision; there's nothing more that a protest can make them consider or realize. Voting/campaigning? The Supreme Court consists of unelected individuals that will be in there until they either resign or die. Given that they're unlikely to resign (see the previous point for why protesting will do nothing), that leaves death as the only possible avenue for effecting meaningful change.

The second amendment exists to protect citizens' right to violently remove a government than has failed the people and cannot be removed any other way. The Supreme Court has failed the people and cannot be removed any other way.

Who would you even direct violence towards though? If it's towards government officials, how is that any different than inciting an insurrection? If it's towards innocent people then your cause has already failed.

MabinogiFan posted...

Who would you even direct violence towards though? If it's towards government officials, how is that any different than inciting an insurrection? If it's towards innocent people then your cause has already failed.

Who cares?

idk why everyone wants to paint violence against the government as always bad and never should be done

Jen0125 posted...

idk why everyone wants to paint violence against the government as always bad and never should be done

Because they're tankies

People in power love the kinds of protests they can completely ignore. It's very telling, which types of protests they're cool with and which they aren't. If your protest doesn't disrupt the lives of the powerful, you won't accomplish anything.

MabinogiFan posted...

If it's towards government officials, how is that any different than inciting an insurrection?

Technically, it would be committing an insurrection, not inciting one. Other than that, it isn't. That's not inherently a bad thing. Some governments need to be overthrown. Here, we have five unelected officials who just gave up on their duty to protect the american citizenry from tyrannical laws. They seem like an obvious starting point, to allow them to be replaced with people that would actually do their job (death being the only real means by which to effect a replacement). From there, those passing the tyrannical laws would be the most likely next option. And then those enforcing them, along with any that seek to replace them. And so on, and so on, until this disgusting ideology lies gasping in the dust, bleeding out more life than it ever deserved to have.

Really, what other option is there?

adjl posted...

Technically, it would be committing an insurrection, not inciting one. Other than that, it isn't. That's not inherently a bad thing. Some governments need to be overthrown. Here, we have five unelected officials who just gave up on their duty to protect the american citizenry from tyrannical laws. They seem like an obvious starting point, to allow them to be replaced with people that would actually do their job (death being the only real means by which to effect a replacement). From there, those passing the tyrannical laws would be the most likely next option. And then those enforcing them, along with any that seek to replace them. And so on, and so on, until this disgusting ideology lies gasping in the dust, bleeding out more life than it ever deserved to have.

Really, what other option is there?

When you take away peoples right to self determination you don't leave a whole lot of options. 4 justices appointed by presidents the people did not choose are writing law that will only cause chaos. This isn't ok.

Jen0125 posted...

idk why everyone wants to paint violence against the government as always bad and never should be done

You're joking right?

FinalFight posted...

You're joking right?

no? do you think a government should literally never be overthrown?

Violence is only okay when the government does it to its own people. For people to the exact same thing back to the government that brutalizes them would be terrible for some reason. At least, that's what the government's propaganda tells me.

Jen0125 posted...

no? do you think a government should literally never be overthrown?

Its hilarious how hypocritical you people are. I distinctly remember you all calling out the January 6 rioters as traitors and terrorists, and now youre vaguely alluding to the same thing when your side is down.

And the best part is you dont even realize it.

Im gonna pull a dennis Reynolds at a pro life rally

FinalFight posted...

You're joking right?

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/0/2/5/AAfSRzAADYjx.jpg

FinalFight posted...

Its hilarious how hypocritical you people are. I distinctly remember you all calling out the January 6 rioters as traitors and terrorists, and now youre vaguely alluding to the same thing when your side is down.

And the best part is you dont even realize it.

no i think you just are trying to compare two things that aren't comparable. one was an act of violence against the government to try to instill a president against the will of the people. if we use this abortion example it'd be an act of violence against the government to protect medical privacy and bodily autonomy for female reproductive rights.

surely you can see how one could be construed as justified (abortion) while one could never be construed as justified (fraudulent allegations of election fraud). surely you can. right?

FinalFight posted...

You're joking right?

Yes. Because protests and demonstrations and voting have worked so far.

Jen0125 posted...

no i think you just are trying to compare two things that aren't comparable. one was an act of violence against the government to try to instill a president against the will of the people. if we use this abortion example it'd be an act of violence against the government to protect medical privacy and bodily autonomy for female reproductive rights.

surely you can see how one could be construed as justified (abortion) while one could never be construed as justified (election fraud). surely you can. right?

No. I dont think violence is justified in either case. Whats more, I think dressing violence up as justice is a slippery slope. The same slope the Nazis went down to rationalize their activities.

The Right is so pro life, theyre willing to kill for it, and the Left is so pro choice theyre willing to kill for it, and the reality is that neither of you care at all about life or women. If you did, you wouldnt be willing to harm others to get your way.

if the right is so pro life then why does america have the highest maternal/infant death rate of the developed world? why arent they passing laws and screeching about that?

DirtBasedSoap posted...

if the right is so pro life then why does america have the highest maternal/infant death rate of the developed world? why arent they passing laws and screeching about that?

For that matter why do they support the death penalty too?

Nothing seems to have changed in my town. We're pretty rural, and don't' react too much to that kind of news.

FinalFight posted...

No. I dont think violence is justified in either case. Whats more, I think dressing violence up as justice is a slippery slope. The same slope the Nazis went down to rationalize their activities.

it's not similar to Nazism at all

it would be similar to the war for independence that ultimately made America into its own nation.

especially when you consider that all the founding fathers expected regular revolutions to prevent conservatism from rotting the county

Yellow posted...

Well when leftists protest the riot police and snipers show up, we don't exactly have the privilege of walking into the state capitol like some people.

Considering how many buildings are burned during leftist riots, the response is basically nothing. During the recent race riots, it took multiple days to subdue violent rioters -- including instances where police stations were set ablaze with cops still inside, who the rioters tried to block from leaving. In any other nation, the military might've been called.

Zareth posted...

When it's all that's left it is

lolwut? There are many non-violent leftists. Although there were a considerable number of leftists -- including on PotD -- who cheered on assassination attempts, I'm sure the vast majority of leftists -- just like the vast majority of rightists -- aren't so extreme.

Bligh_with_no_T posted...

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/4/9/5/AAZcvsAADYbf.jpg

They've periodically embraced it, right from the start of the nation when Federalists locked up newspaper men they disagreed with and it's continued all this time, such as when Obama justified spying on the entire nation, tapped journalists' phones, raided news offices, locked up more whistleblowers than any presidency, and his administration tortured whistleblower Chelsea Manning, who leaked the US's war crimes.

We just gotta be realistic and wait til dems have 60 senate votes

Trump said he would use the military to quell the 2020 riots, and the Pentagon told him were not the police, were not going to shoot black people for you.

FinalFight posted...

No. I dont think violence is justified in either case.

Weird

FinalFight posted...

Its hilarious how hypocritical you people are. I distinctly remember you all calling out the January 6 rioters as traitors and terrorists, and now youre vaguely alluding to the same thing when your side is down.

The situations are not comparable at all. The January 6th insurrection was an attempt to overthrow a democratically elected president over imaginary allegations that the election was not legitimate. This is a matter of overthrowing a court that was not democratically elected over a very real erosion of critical health care rights. Advocating for violence in the latter case (a real problem that genuinely can't otherwise be solved because death is literally the only way to force out an SC justice) does not in any way preclude advocating against violence in the former case (an imaginary problem that can be solved democratically).

Violence is not inherently unacceptable. Violence for stupid, pointless reasons is. For more meaningful causes, trying something other than violence first is generally preferable, but if that fails or isn't an option, resorting to violence to solve the problem is not always going to be bad.

Count_Drachma posted...

Considering how many buildings are burned during leftist riots,

Hey remember when empirical reality was all like "93% of BLM protests have been completely peaceful" and you were all like "that's a misleading statistic because they include the protests where nothing violent happened" because that was the only way you could reconcile empirical reality with your belief in the narrative that the entire BLM movement is nothing more than a bunch of violent thugs vandalizing everything in sight? Good times...

Adam_Savage posted...

or

roe was necessary because of conservative white men wanting to control women like they used to

Citations.

and have literally

said as much

Citations

if people stopped trying to tell women what they can or can't do with their bodies while putting no onus on them for the reverse, then there would not need to be any legislation

so no, it should not be there.

I wish people cared about just Hunters laptop password as much as they cared about this kind of thing.

Ill say now that Im pro-choice.

Jen is funny in #35.

zebatov posted...

wish people cared about just Hunters laptop password as much as they cared about this kind of thing.

You wish people cared just as much about an insane conspiracy theory as they do about human rights? That's.. Really fucking weird and telling on yourself.

Jen0125 posted...

You wish people cared just as much about an insane conspiracy theory as they do about human rights? That's.. Really fucking weird and telling on yourself.

Do you have citations that disprove the comp techs story? Outside of biased (paid) media?

Not to go too far off-topic (yet on topic of conspiracy theories) but have you heard of Yaara Saks and her left-wing conspiracy theory that the onomatopoeia for a vehicles horn relates somehow to saluting a long-dead NSDAP leader?

zebatov posted...

Do you have citations that disprove the comp techs story? Outside of biased (paid) media?

That's not how it works. You guys have to prove your allegations.

Jen0125 posted...

That's not how it works. You guys have to prove your allegations.

I didnt make allegations. I made a statement. I also edited my comment.

zebatov posted...

I didnt make allegations. I made a statement. I also edited my comment.

The whole conspiracy theory you believe in is an unproven allegation. No one has proven or provided evidence it should be taken seriously. I don't care if you edited your comment.

Jen0125 posted...

The whole conspiracy theory you believe in is an unproven allegation. No one has proven or provided evidence it should be taken seriously. I don't care if you edited your comment.

Of course they havent. Just like all that anti-Trump propaganda ceased after the last US presidential election. You need to watch The Great Hack.

Snowden gave up more for less.

zebatov posted...

Of course they havent. Just like all that anti-Trump propaganda ceased after the last US presidential election. You need to watch The Great Hack.

I don't watch conspiracy theory movies.

Jen0125 posted...

I don't watch conspiracy theory movies.

It isnt. Its actually a left-leaning documentary. But it applies to both sides. Its about an actual thing that happened. No theory. Just conspiracy.

Imagine thinking that anti-Trump messages mostly going away after Trump stopped being politically relevant is a sign of some sort of grand conspiracy.

zebatov posted...

It isnt. Its actually a left-leaning documentary. But it applies to both sides. Its about an actual thing that happened. No theory. Just conspiracy.

I don't watch conspiracy films no matter what their political affiliation.

Jen0125 posted...

You wish people cared just as much about an insane conspiracy theory as they do about human rights? That's.. Really fucking weird and telling on yourself.

He thinks vaccines cause autism.

zebatov posted...

I also used to hate learning.

No, I love to learn. Watching conspiracy films has nothing to do with learning.

Jen0125 posted...

I don't watch conspiracy films no matter what their political affiliation.

I used to hate learning. I didnt like the G. W. Bush-era; then I grew up.

zebatov posted...

I used to hate learning. I didnt like the G. W. Bush-era; then I grew up.

You really needed to delete your whole comment to do this?

Jen0125 posted...

You really needed to delete your whole comment to do this?

Did you want to respond to the subject of the message?

Here:

zebatov posted...

I used to hate learning. I didnt like the G. W. Bush-era; then I grew up.

No, I don't feel the need to argue about conspiracy.

Jen0125 posted...

No, I don't feel the need to argue about conspiracy.

Everything I choose to remain ignorant about is conspiracy. This aids me and my agenda.

Got it.

If that's how u feel

Revelation34 posted...

He thinks vaccines cause autism.

Can I see your degrees and findings from all your studies?

Im much more likely to believe someone who stands to gain nothing from a claim than someone who stands to lose everything from one.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

Jen and Zebatov.

dude youre one to talk because you constantly get into petty arguments over nothing