Topic: Is it okay to assault people for disagreeing with you if you use non-lethal force?
brie !kGoudaMCFA started this discussion 9 years ago #59,399
Like, say, punching someone unconscious.
| Poll option | Votes | Percentage | Graph |
|---|---|---|---|
| It's okay, fists aren't guns. | 6 | 60% | |
| It's not okay, assault is assault. | 2 | 20% | |
| Boners and Sprite | 2 | 20% |
Meta joined in and replied with this 9 years ago, 2 minutes later[^] [v] #755,966
Yes, because someone thousands of miles away in a totally unrelated incident shot up a mosque.
The Witch Doctor !6W1Zpe4MCM joined in and replied with this 9 years ago, 43 seconds later, 3 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #755,967
By "disagreeing", do you mean holding a philosophical difference, or openly trying to incite genocide? Thanks.
brie !kGoudaMCFA (OP) replied with this 9 years ago, 2 minutes later, 5 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #755,968
The Witch Doctor !6W1Zpe4MCM replied with this 9 years ago, 2 minutes later, 8 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #755,969
kook !!OPZbEQMT1 joined in and replied with this 9 years ago, 7 minutes later, 16 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #755,971
Lol depends on who you ask
chili dog !!81dzJNNYL joined in and replied with this 9 years ago, 39 minutes later, 55 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #755,974
genocide isn't a valid opinion :)
Sheila LaBoof joined in and replied with this 9 years ago, 33 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #755,978
I saw indiana jones shoot a guy
brie !kGoudaMCFA (OP) replied with this 9 years ago, 5 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #755,979
@755,974 (chili dog !!81dzJNNYL)
i'm not talking about that douchebag, i'm talking about the guy in my city's airport who was knocked unconscious for no good reason.
i'm not talking about that douchebag, i'm talking about the guy in my city's airport who was knocked unconscious for no good reason.
Anonymous G joined in and replied with this 9 years ago, 1 hour later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #755,997
@755,978 (Sheila LaBoof)
If George Lucas taught us anything, it's that it is okay to assault people for disagreeing with you if you use the force.
If George Lucas taught us anything, it's that it is okay to assault people for disagreeing with you if you use the force.
ken griffey sr joined in and replied with this 9 years ago, 43 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #756,005
@755,979 (brie !kGoudaMCFA)
'counterprotestors' are usually pieces of shit so that's a good enough reason prolly
'counterprotestors' are usually pieces of shit so that's a good enough reason prolly
DasSheeple !pE87XcIVxw joined in and replied with this 9 years ago, 1 hour later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #756,016
@previous (ken griffey sr)
http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/731638/Sweden-Stockholm-neo-Nazi-far-right-protests-anti-fascist-violence
Be careful with who you call pieces of shit, you might put yourself in that bucket. Your precious snowflakes are violent counterprotestors more often then you'd like...
http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/731638/Sweden-Stockholm-neo-Nazi-far-right-protests-anti-fascist-violence
Be careful with who you call pieces of shit, you might put yourself in that bucket. Your precious snowflakes are violent counterprotestors more often then you'd like...
ken griffey sr replied with this 9 years ago, 36 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #756,017
ken griffey sr double-posted this 9 years ago, 1 minute later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #756,019
@756,016 (DasSheeple !pE87XcIVxw)
and i get it there is always shit on both sides but can't you cut out that played out snowflake stawman bs for like one post
and i get it there is always shit on both sides but can't you cut out that played out snowflake stawman bs for like one post
(Edited 9 seconds later.)
Meta replied with this 9 years ago, 1 minute later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #756,021
@756,005 (ken griffey sr)
> 'counterprotestors' are usually pieces of shit so that's a good enough reason prolly
What's wrong with protesting a protest?
> 'counterprotestors' are usually pieces of shit so that's a good enough reason prolly
What's wrong with protesting a protest?
ken griffey sr replied with this 9 years ago, 22 minutes later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #756,026
@previous (Meta)
didn't say anything was wrong. just generalizing about the kinds of people who do it. you know me
didn't say anything was wrong. just generalizing about the kinds of people who do it. you know me
ken griffey sr double-posted this 9 years ago, 45 seconds later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #756,028
chili dog !!81dzJNNYL replied with this 9 years ago, 2 hours later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #756,058
@755,979 (brie !kGoudaMCFA)
it takes a certain kind of person to protest a protest about people with green cards not being allowed to enter their own country
even those without green cards
there are students, researchers, people who were away from work
and now they're stranded
it takes a certain kind of person to protest a protest about people with green cards not being allowed to enter their own country
even those without green cards
there are students, researchers, people who were away from work
and now they're stranded
DasSheeple !pE87XcIVxw replied with this 9 years ago, 25 minutes later, 10 hours after the original post[^] [v] #756,064
@previous (chili dog !!81dzJNNYL)
Section 5.e) can be used to let those people in... ah right, no media reported on that part of the executive order, so I guess it doesn't exist.
Section 5.e) can be used to let those people in... ah right, no media reported on that part of the executive order, so I guess it doesn't exist.
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU joined in and replied with this 9 years ago, 21 minutes later, 10 hours after the original post[^] [v] #756,067
@previous (DasSheeple !pE87XcIVxw)
It can, but only with the joint determination of the SOS and the Secretary of the DHS. It's hard to get that when you don't inform people of the order before you sign it . And lest you think that only whiny liberals take issue with this, as is your deflection of choice, here are many Republican members of Congress who disagree with it. So the takeaway from this is twofold. First it is a bad policy, second it was badly implemented. Why bother defending it?
It can, but only with the joint determination of the SOS and the Secretary of the DHS. It's hard to get that when you don't inform people of the order before you sign it . And lest you think that only whiny liberals take issue with this, as is your deflection of choice, here are many Republican members of Congress who disagree with it. So the takeaway from this is twofold. First it is a bad policy, second it was badly implemented. Why bother defending it?
(Edited 19 seconds later.)
chili dog !!81dzJNNYL replied with this 9 years ago, 6 minutes later, 10 hours after the original post[^] [v] #756,068
@previous (Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU)
airport officials continued to detain people after part of the executive order was declared invalid by a judge. i hope the courts fuck shit up with this.
airport officials continued to detain people after part of the executive order was declared invalid by a judge. i hope the courts fuck shit up with this.
DasSheeple !pE87XcIVxw replied with this 9 years ago, 47 minutes later, 11 hours after the original post[^] [v] #756,071
@756,067 (Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU)
The orange rushed it and no one is denying some of it backfired, but that ny times article. Fake anon pls...
The orange rushed it and no one is denying some of it backfired, but that ny times article. Fake anon pls...
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU replied with this 9 years ago, 58 minutes later, 12 hours after the original post[^] [v] #756,072
Sheila LaBoof replied with this 9 years ago, 1 hour later, 13 hours after the original post[^] [v] #756,080
@previous (Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU)
his party is instructed to hate the paper in general, that's what sheeps do is follow party directive
his party is instructed to hate the paper in general, that's what sheeps do is follow party directive
