and want to give a medal to the guy who murdered Ashli Babbitt, a short, unarmed woman who was no threat to anyone
I've always thought it wasn't completely unreasonable for him to shoot, but no way should he get a goddamn medal for it. Any call to give him one is politically motivated and is essentially saying 'it's virtuous to shoot right wingers'.
Which shouldn't be a big surprise from the 'Punch a nazi!/You're a nazi!' crowd.
It might not be 'completely unreasonable', maybe 1% reasonable or something, but when there is a barrier between you, the person you're killing is so unthreatening, and you neither warn nor fire warning shots, I do regard it as murder.
But murder in defense of the rich and powerful is always justified. I'm no John Brown supporter, but he said it exactly right.
Warning shots don't exist unless you're in the middle of nowhere. There is no such thing as firing a shot that isn't a threat to anybody unless you're at a firing range.
The point that stands out to me is that she was in the process of climbing over/through the barrier when she got shot, and there were a lot of people behind her who likely would have followed. I can understand feeling like you have to shoot in that circumstance.
But I still wouldn't put it past them to have planned murder in advance, in order send a message. Everything else about that day was staged after all.
But murder in defense of the rich and powerful is always justified. I'm no John Brown supporter, but he said it exactly right.
Agreed. There's far too big a divide here when there shouldn't be one at all. If a civilian had done the same thing, in the same circumstances, the response would be very different.
The point that stands out to me is that she was in the process of climbing over/through the barrier when she got shot, and there were a lot of people behind her who likely would have followed. I can understand feeling like you have to shoot in that circumstance.
Shooting based on piled-up contingencies? This actually makes it sound much less justified to me.
It's striking that the right attempts to justify the murder of people on the right, whereas the left just does a who-whom analysis.
But I still wouldn't put it past them to have planned murder in advance, in order send a message. Everything else about that day was staged after all.
Risky if true. Because in many such cases, murdering actually inflames the crowd. Maybe that is what they wanted.
Agreed. There's far too big a divide here when there shouldn't be one at all. If a civilian had done the same thing, in the same circumstances, the response would be very different.
I didn't mean a civilian. I meant if a cop had done it in defense not of the ruling class (or its puppets), but in defense of you and me.
It's striking that the right attempts to justify the murder of people on the right, whereas the left just does a who-whom analysis.
Yeah, trying to be fair against opponents who want you dead and will utilize every dirty trick to make it happen is a loser's game, I know.
But I value the truthfulness of our discussions here at .win, and I want to call it like I see it. When I try to put myself in the shoes of the guy with the gun I get 'Oh shit they're breaking through, I'm going to get mobbed and beaten to death and so are the people I'm protecting' because that's probably what my thought process would be if an angry group was breaking through a barricade. Maybe I'm being too generous. He is a professional after all.
I didn't mean a civilian. I meant if a cop had done it in defense not of the ruling class (or its puppets), but in defense of you and me.
I've always thought it wasn't completely unreasonable for him to shoot, but no way should he get a goddamn medal for it. Any call to give him one is politically motivated and is essentially saying 'it's virtuous to shoot right wingers'.
Which shouldn't be a big surprise from the 'Punch a nazi!/You're a nazi!' crowd.
It might not be 'completely unreasonable', maybe 1% reasonable or something, but when there is a barrier between you, the person you're killing is so unthreatening, and you neither warn nor fire warning shots, I do regard it as murder.
But murder in defense of the rich and powerful is always justified. I'm no John Brown supporter, but he said it exactly right.
Warning shots don't exist unless you're in the middle of nowhere. There is no such thing as firing a shot that isn't a threat to anybody unless you're at a firing range.
Don't bother explaining that to a eurotrash Turk who's never handled a gun. He spouts ignorant shit like that all the time.
You cant just fire at the ground? Genuine question, I dont know
That's dumb as fuck, and can ricochet and hurt someone anyway.
You always shoot to stop the threat.
The point that stands out to me is that she was in the process of climbing over/through the barrier when she got shot, and there were a lot of people behind her who likely would have followed. I can understand feeling like you have to shoot in that circumstance.
But I still wouldn't put it past them to have planned murder in advance, in order send a message. Everything else about that day was staged after all.
Agreed. There's far too big a divide here when there shouldn't be one at all. If a civilian had done the same thing, in the same circumstances, the response would be very different.
Shooting based on piled-up contingencies? This actually makes it sound much less justified to me.
It's striking that the right attempts to justify the murder of people on the right, whereas the left just does a who-whom analysis.
Risky if true. Because in many such cases, murdering actually inflames the crowd. Maybe that is what they wanted.
I didn't mean a civilian. I meant if a cop had done it in defense not of the ruling class (or its puppets), but in defense of you and me.
Yeah, trying to be fair against opponents who want you dead and will utilize every dirty trick to make it happen is a loser's game, I know.
But I value the truthfulness of our discussions here at .win, and I want to call it like I see it. When I try to put myself in the shoes of the guy with the gun I get 'Oh shit they're breaking through, I'm going to get mobbed and beaten to death and so are the people I'm protecting' because that's probably what my thought process would be if an angry group was breaking through a barricade. Maybe I'm being too generous. He is a professional after all.
That is also true.
He should at least go to trial. A jury (not in DC) can decide if he was being reasonable or not.