|
beatlegs posted:Actually Walsh will be forgotten in the trash heap of history while Maru will be long-remembered as a pop culture icon. Imagine that, being worth less than a cat. Well cats bring more value and substance to the internet than Matt Walsh, so...
|
# ? Jun 1, 2016 03:38 |
|
|
# ? Jun 6, 2024 22:28 |
|
Hi reactionaries aren't people and beating them should be a national sport god bless
|
# ? Jun 1, 2016 03:38 |
Obviously he's acting under duress. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RDnvXAkMnx8
|
|
# ? Jun 1, 2016 03:39 |
|
CC Johnson, Walsh, Crowder, they're all weak. If they really cared, they'd be out there like Dean.
|
# ? Jun 1, 2016 03:46 |
|
This all could have been avoided if that guy had been wearing a helmet.
|
# ? Jun 1, 2016 03:47 |
|
Moktaro posted:Republicans are the party of the Bible and fiscal responsibility. This is some inaccurate bullshit right here it was 1.5 trillion
|
# ? Jun 1, 2016 04:03 |
|
Also Walsh is just salty that American Pharoah is exponentially more valuable than him by the only metric that really matters.
|
# ? Jun 1, 2016 05:07 |
|
swampland posted:I do not subscribe to the "They're just words" mindset. Screaming at potential rape victims they deserved it and should be mocked for it is a form of assault in itself in my view. I feel bad that this guy got to the point of becoming so loving awful but I couldn't care less he got hit in the head with a baseball bat by someone who was probably a rape victim who had been screamed at by this guy regularly. 'Fighting words' is a real legal term recognized by the court of law and isn't protected by the 1st amendment. https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/fighting_words It's up to the judge to decide if this guy actually was 'asking for it'
|
# ? Jun 1, 2016 05:31 |
|
Necc0 posted:'Fighting words' is a real legal term recognized by the court of law and isn't protected by the 1st amendment. It's incredibly unlikely to work as a defense. The court has been narrowing to definition of fighting words ever since they were established. Cohen v. California alone makes it a terrible defense without any personally abusive language. And that was against the state. There is no way the court is going to let a regular person go around bashing skulls in, even if they belong to assholes.
|
# ? Jun 1, 2016 05:43 |
|
Yeah that was more in response to the guy I quoted. If someone is running up to people and yelling at them that they deserved to be raped they're gonna get beat up. Don't know how aggressive this guy was though
|
# ? Jun 1, 2016 05:47 |
|
Necc0 posted:'Fighting words' is a real legal term recognized by the court of law and isn't protected by the 1st amendment. "Fighting Words" have- to my (limited) knowledge been very narowlly defined. quote:The "fighting words" doctrine comes from the Supreme Court's decision in Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire in 1942. Fans of censorship like to quote the broader language of the opinion: https://popehat.com/2014/02/03/professor-than-rosenbaum-deceptively-carries-on-the-tradition-of-censorship-cheerleading/ (A biased source but generally good on legality and free speech matters) I'm going to imagine just off the top of my head but I'm guessing that that any invocation of "fighting words" is going to determine if Dean's words were directed at Brubaker as a individual. Nckdictator fucked around with this message at 05:58 on Jun 1, 2016 |
# ? Jun 1, 2016 05:56 |
|
Sir Tonk posted:edit, found the problem Let's do the interview from inside our blanket fort! ...Dad strikes me as a man who has seen too much.
|
# ? Jun 1, 2016 05:58 |
|
Goatman Sacks posted:Hi reactionaries aren't people and beating them should be a national sport god bless But if you do, what's the justification for not beating them to death? Just giving the dude one solid hit--sure, it might make you feel like you've accomplished something with your day, but that's a sketchy justification for violence.
|
# ? Jun 1, 2016 06:31 |
|
Is it assault to just jump the guy and start kissing him? Man or woman, I expect that would mess him up way worse than any kind of violence. Maybe throw in a little ball massage. God knows universities don't take sexual assault cases seriously.
|
# ? Jun 1, 2016 06:59 |
|
People advocate for non violence by I'm not sure why we should follow that path. Sure, in some colonial situations it lets you get the moral high ground (like India) but violence seems to work just as well in those situations (America, Vietnam, China). In a civilized society I'm for universal healthcare and against guns. That way if you talk poo poo and get hit you are likely to survive with an important lesson learned. Racist police complicate this but only insofar as you accept the legitimacy of the police. I don't. Its no different from ancient Sparta or any other slave society you could name. The warrior class claims a false legitimacy. You have nothing to lose but your chains. Revolutionary Suicide remains the best path forwards.
|
# ? Jun 1, 2016 07:14 |
|
fishmech posted:He's constantly going to different high schools, colleges, etc. Many have booted him from the premises in the past, the one someone finally whacked him good at was one that hadn't booted him yet. Oh true I got the impression from that vice clip he was just a regular at the same one my bad
|
# ? Jun 1, 2016 07:34 |
|
Shbobdb posted:People advocate for non violence by I'm not sure why we should follow that path. ... Because even being objectively right with regards to the opinions you espouse doesn't grant immunity to politically motivated violence? The prohibition on violence as a means to quell dissent is part of a social contract that prevents people who hold views in opposition to yours from freely doing the same thing to silence you. Even if we agree, for the sake of argument, to suspend higher minded or ethical concerns, there's still a very real element of reciprocity here where society as a whole agrees that it's innapropriate to respond with violence to views that you deem incorrect or offensive because otherwise you wind up with gangs of thugs roaming around trying to silence their political rivals with violence and threats of violence.
|
# ? Jun 1, 2016 08:05 |
|
Shbobdb posted:People advocate for non violence by I'm not sure why we should follow that path. Sure, in some colonial situations it lets you get the moral high ground (like India) but violence seems to work just as well in those situations (America, Vietnam, China). Okay then, you're drifting into crazy territory. As screwed up as the country is, we are nowhere near the point where bloody revolution is either necessary or possible.
|
# ? Jun 1, 2016 10:13 |
|
Shbobdb posted:Revolutionary Suicide remains the best path forwards. you first
|
# ? Jun 1, 2016 14:02 |
|
I thought only Russians hang carpets on the walls
|
# ? Jun 1, 2016 14:30 |
|
Shbobdb posted:Revolutionary Suicide remains the best path forwards. Listen, we all miss LF but this isn't going to bring it back.
|
# ? Jun 1, 2016 14:37 |
|
I remember being 15 and angry.
|
# ? Jun 1, 2016 14:46 |
|
There is already a great deal of politically motivated violence going on without reprisal. The woman hitting the man with a bat is an example of reciprocal violence against the very violent patriarchy. I'm OK with that. Most violence against women is not reciprocated and I think that is a shame.
|
# ? Jun 1, 2016 15:50 |
Shbobdb posted:There is already a great deal of politically motivated violence going on without reprisal. The woman hitting the man with a bat is an example of reciprocal violence against the very violent patriarchy. I'm OK with that. Most violence against women is not reciprocated and I think that is a shame. It's not sporting to get rid of your avatar just so people will bite, shbobdb.
|
|
# ? Jun 1, 2016 15:57 |
|
We all agree she was in the wrong to actually attack him, and she'll serve her time. ...he still deserved it. CommieGIR fucked around with this message at 16:13 on Jun 1, 2016 |
# ? Jun 1, 2016 16:07 |
|
RareAcumen posted:While you were crying about a dead cop, 410 BILLION BABIES WERE ABORTED IN THE LAST TWO MINUTES. Pro-joke.
|
# ? Jun 1, 2016 16:20 |
|
CommieGIR posted:We all agree she was in the wrong to actually attack him, and she'll serve her time. What is right and what is just don't always align.
|
# ? Jun 1, 2016 16:22 |
|
Didn't the ACLU basically say that it's wrong to suppress hate speech (either with violence / authority), and the best way to fight it was to use free speech of your own to counter it? I'm not entirely sure how I feel about that. I remember my senior year of college, the school made a decision to ban the LaRouche pac and anti-abortion supporters (who would hold up blown up pictures of aborted fetuses) on campus on the basis that it didn't contribute to a healthy learning environment. Hell, when they were on campus, I would take routes to avoid having to deal with them. I don't think anyone besides them shed a tear that they were gone.
|
# ? Jun 1, 2016 16:28 |
|
Goatman Sacks posted:Hi reactionaries aren't people and beating them should be a national sport god bless Why are they not people? You keep posting this same worthless garbage over and over.
|
# ? Jun 1, 2016 16:28 |
|
Also,to whoever asked, the best and most effective way to deal with people like this is to make fun of them non-stop. Point and laugh and get other people to point and laugh also.
|
# ? Jun 1, 2016 16:30 |
|
oh my god how is this an actual debate people are having? if the blackshirts are preparing to march down to the parliament and seize power by force then by all means, bash the fash. otherwise no, you can't assault people for saying things you don't like
|
# ? Jun 1, 2016 16:32 |
|
icantfindaname posted:oh my god how is this an actual debate people are having? if the blackshirts are preparing to march down to the parliament and seize power by force then by all means, bash the fash. otherwise no, you can't assault people for saying things you don't like stop me nerd
|
# ? Jun 1, 2016 16:41 |
|
WoodrowSkillson posted:stop me nerd you're gonna be censured by the party disciplinary committee and sent to re-education or a struggle session if you keep it up
|
# ? Jun 1, 2016 16:43 |
|
icantfindaname posted:oh my god how is this an actual debate people are having? if the blackshirts are preparing to march down to the parliament and seize power by force then by all means, bash the fash. otherwise no, you can't assault people for saying things you don't like This is true, but if someone does assualt someone saying things I don't like or presenting themselves in an abhorrent fashion, I will still be happy to see it. That's all despite knowing that it's wrong. Like that guy. Or Milo. Or Crowder or Walsh. Assaulting people is wrong but if someone does it I will be glad because they suck and I hope that it won't be deemed so extreme that the assualter is shot on sight.
|
# ? Jun 1, 2016 16:54 |
|
Shbobdb posted:People advocate for non violence by I'm not sure why we should follow that path. Sure, in some colonial situations it lets you get the moral high ground (like India) but violence seems to work just as well in those situations (America, Vietnam, China). People like this are why I am a liberal but not a leftist.
|
# ? Jun 1, 2016 16:55 |
|
I don't even know where to put this... Creationist, Ken Ham, blames gorilla killed because of sin quote:Because we live in a fallen world, sin has affected everything, including gorillas and three-year-olds.
|
# ? Jun 1, 2016 17:09 |
|
I don't think original sin applies to animals, otherwise the Catholics would let dogs into heaven.
|
# ? Jun 1, 2016 17:13 |
|
Shbobdb posted:People advocate for non violence by I'm not sure why we should follow that path. Sure, in some colonial situations it lets you get the moral high ground (like India) but violence seems to work just as well in those situations (America, Vietnam, China). you my sad friend, are an rear end. you remind me of those dudes who comment on the police abuse/blm threads, who say they want blood on the streets and to murder every cop and uninvolved bystander. Deified Data posted:People like this are why I am a liberal but not a leftist. this.
|
# ? Jun 1, 2016 17:17 |
|
Mr Ice Cream Glove posted:I don't even know where to put this... wait. how the gently caress do animals "sin". i know its ken ham and he "needs" to believe poo poo like that. but holy poo poo.
|
# ? Jun 1, 2016 17:19 |
|
|
# ? Jun 6, 2024 22:28 |
|
Ken Hamm believes that bananas are proof that god loves us, yet is conspicuously silent on the subject of pineapples.
|
# ? Jun 1, 2016 17:22 |