No that is pointing someone out, who is in public.
Making a choice to then campaign and boycott them and try to ruin them is cancel culture.
Which then begs the question, how bad does someone’s behavior/actions/beliefs need to be for boycotting someone to not be cancel culture? Fuck david duke, right? At this point in time, still being a loud, brash maga person signals to me you support what happened last week… In which case fuck you and I’ll boycott. That’s not about political differences anymore.
Let’s get down to business I don’t got no time to play around what is this? Must be a circus in town, let’s shut the shit down On these clowns, can I get a witness? Hell Yeah!
The ones who were violent and were arrested will have their day in court and possible lose their property.
The others, who didn’t commit a crime and aren’t facing charges, didnt commit a crime and aren’t facing charges.
What’s weird with the twitter/Facebook etc type thing is that these far right kooks are acting like it’s impossible to speak without being banned or something. Some of these people are openly talking about having politicians killed, raped, kidnapped.
As you pointed out it’s not like tons of outlets aren’t out there for these people to talk about that type of stuff online. What these people are really saying is the most popular sites should be forced to let me say Mike Pence should be murdered.
To clarify, are you saying that you do not support seizing a persons weapons who has been arrested (and likely released on bail) for criminal acts during the insurrection on Capitol Hill? You would want to wait until the court system convicted and sentenced the individual before seizing their weapons?
If so, are their instances in which you would support seizing a persons weapons prior to the court system running its full course?
For the folks in your second paragraph, i think its a really gray issue. If it was brought to LEOs attention that someone who attended the protest, but not arrested, was continuing to make inflammatory statements about planned violence (and there was hard evidence to that fact) i think id favor a temporary seizure of their weapons.
The irony of this is blindingly brilliant. The most conspiracy theory paranoid, tech paranoid bunch of Americans in our nation’s history just plunged themselves into a digital rape dungeon while proudlyy thumbing their noses at all of the brainwashed “sheeple” and sneering about a sense of entitlement.
Short answer, yes. Unless of course the gun happens to be evidence used in the alleged crime. If a person is that dangerous don’t set bail. Cant get to your guns while you’re sitting in a cell waiting for trial. Found guilty, lose property. Innocent, go home and your shit is where you left it. This is how it is supposed to work in theory however there’s alot of civil forfeiture garbage where the state is seizing (and selling) property before a person is convicted of a crime.
I think this is a great option. I don’t like civil forfeiture as currently applied one bit. If guilty, surrender firearms can be on the table (of course, at that point it probably won’t matter because felonies come with jail and a whole lot of fun bonuses like inability to own firearms). Besides which with an anklet you can monitor them and tie any insurrection or threatening shit talk online to their activity very easily.
I just feel if bail is an option and there is no immediate threat to others, constitutional rights are important enough to keep.
Was this because of Trump or to hurt Trump? I notice how some want to put a race spin on this but if there was an order given to minimize police then it wasn’t racism but something else.
I don’t think there is a racism angle on the lack of police presence. As the guy wrote, there were probably more white people at BLM protests than black people.
Also, we already know from past anti-racism protests that they do attract a violent element. There is looting and arson.This was something new, a march led by a sitting president which he encouraged to turn violent.
There may be a nefarious reason why police were understaffed or it might be a case of incompetence. I doubt it was a case of these are white people so they will behave. Maybe they thought that since they were, and I say were for a reason, supporters of the police and there were police among them, that they wouldn’t attack the police. There is a difference, on paper at least, between a protest in which the cops are the villains and a protest in which the protesters are supposedly pro police.
As with a lot of things recently, I do think racism played a part, but was a smaller contributing factor, not a major factor. The utter and complete failure to come close to properly staffing security, and then refusal from trump to send national guard was the number 1 and 2 issues.
Meanwhile, the UK basketball team (18-20 yr olds) took a knee to protest to assault on our capitol and now kentucky county officials want to pull funding from the UK system and boosters are threatening too as well.
Oh, also, a freshman rep from Colorado who is an avowed Qanon supporter, and who tweeted on the morning of that she was part of the revolution was live tweeting where she and pelosi were during the insurrection.
It seems like supporters and sympathizers are more widespread and numerous than many are willing to believe.