31 Far Right Extremists In White Masks and Riot Gear Arrested in Idaho on 'Conspiracy to Riot' At a LGBTQ Pride Event At a Park

[homersapien 11,440]

19 hours ago, GoAU said:

You are the one making this about race, not me.   I am saying that rioting, destroying property, arson, etc is a CRIME.   It deserves to be punished accordingly.  There is NO EXCUSE to destroy private (or public) property regardless of your race.  There were plenty of people of all races in the CHOP / CHAZ riots and the defund / BLM riots.  As a matter of fact, you insinuating they were all black is a racist statement.   Protest stops being lawful when things get destroyed, fires are burning out of control and the looting starts.  That is not protest - regardless of what the motive is.   As soon as you start making excuses for breaking the law, you are complicit.  
 

Also, where have I ever advocated for RPGs, gernades or anything similar?  
 

You, sir, are a liar.  And I use “sir” very loosely, and in a non-gender manner so as you are not offended. 

I didn't excuse destroying property, even in the purpose of protesting unacceptable government violence against black people.  I simply pointing out the irony of you using BLM protests as a "whataboutism", equating them to hate groups attacking people because they aren't of the same sexuality. It says a lot about your basis values that would would equate the motivations behind each incident.

 

On 6/14/2022 at 9:26 AM, homersapien said:

If the premise is the 2nd amendment as intended to protect the country (government) - or to protect us from the government - why should it be limited to mere rifles and pistols?

Shouldn't we allow people to bear RPG's or carry grenades (for example)?

Yes - both.  
-------------------------------------------------------------

 

What's the "lie" I have told?    Can you quote it?

 

Edited June 15, 2022 by homersapien

[homersapien 11,440]

16 hours ago, wdefromtx said:

Some can’t help but to make everything about race. 

 

The BLM protests didn't just emerge spontaneously.  And they were overwhelmingly peaceful.  The violence was perpetuated by a tiny fraction of people who participated in the protests. (Unfortunately, it only takes a couple of bad actors to cause a lot of damage.)

Citing BLM as a whataboutism in regards to a hate group attacking innocent people - simply for who they are - has racist implications whether you like it or not.  It equates BLM to hate groups.

[homersapien 11,440]

3 hours ago, GoAU said:

I think you are confusing two different groups of people at the protests.  The first are legitimate protestors there to excercise their first amendment rights.  Obviously there is nothing at all with that.  The second group tries to blend in with the first, but are not in fact protestors and are rioters, looters, vandals, arsonists, etc.  There is no legitimacy or honor in that - they are criminals just using a cause as an excuse.  To try and conflate their acts with a legitimate protest makes all the protestors look complicit and that is wrong. 

I agree.

But why did you bring BLM up in the context of your posting on what the far right group did?

What was the philosophical or policy disparity between how rioters in the BLM protests were treated and how the "Patriot Front" were treated?   

Why bring BLM up at all unless you wanted to make an equivalency of some sort?

Edited June 15, 2022 by homersapien

[icanthearyou 4,463]

10 hours ago, AU9377 said:

The argument is really an excuse pushed by the right wing media.  I don't agree with the argument, but I don't think someone is racist simply because they compare the two.

What do you think the basis of the appeal is?

[homersapien 11,440]

On 6/14/2022 at 3:43 PM, GoAU said:

You, sir, are a liar.  And I use “sir” very loosely, and in a non-gender manner so as you are not offended. 

If you call someone a "liar" you should at least be able to state the lie in question.

Still waiting.

 

[AURex 2,031]

Back to the original topic .........

I have 2 questions:

1. Do these heavily armed right-wing militia members really think that a small group of queers are a threat to American or Idahoan government control, requiring military-like action to protect us from a few lesbians and trannies parading?

2. This awesome militia can muster only 31 dudes with guns and uniforms from across our great nation to protect us from these dangerous LGBTQ+ marchers?

 

Edited June 18, 2022 by AURex

[cole256 17,084]

On 6/14/2022 at 10:32 AM, icanthearyou said:

This is a blatantly racist statement. 

It's always well what about when black people did this? As if there will ever be a tit for tat counter on how the foundation of this country was built

[GoAU 1,600]

On 6/14/2022 at 1:15 PM, homersapien said:

Speaking of disingenuous, I find it rather ironic you dismiss the motivation of black people to violently object to the government persecuting (killing) them, while at the same time advocating the common possession of assault rifles, RPGs, and grenades (for starters) to allow for more effective opposition to the government.

Is opposing government tyranny reserved only for white people?

 

On 6/17/2022 at 11:59 AM, homersapien said:

If you call someone a "liar" you should at least be able to state the lie in question.

Still waiting.

 

The lie is question is in bold above.  

[autigeremt 6,686]

On 6/19/2022 at 7:23 AM, cole256 said:

It's always well what about when black people did this? As if there will ever be a tit for tat counter on how the foundation of this country was built

Even then you have gaps in who was building the foundation of the country. Whether it was slaves from Africa or indentured servants from Ireland or slaves from China or……dirt poor from everywhere around the globe. 

[icanthearyou 4,463]

1 hour ago, autigeremt said:

Even then you have gaps in who was building the foundation of the country. Whether it was slaves from Africa or indentured servants from Ireland or slaves from China or……dirt poor from everywhere around the globe. 

Slaves from China?

[cole256 17,084]

1 hour ago, autigeremt said:

Even then you have gaps in who was building the foundation of the country. Whether it was slaves from Africa or indentured servants from Ireland or slaves from China or……dirt poor from everywhere around the globe. 

No you really don't but once again anything to make pretend that black people weren't mistreated or it wasn't that bad you better believe it will get posted on here.

But go ahead and show how the South here wasn't built off the backs of slaves. I'll be waiting

[wdefromtx 3,159]

2 hours ago, icanthearyou said:

Slaves from China?

Technically weren’t slaves…..but you you are showing that you don’t know much about reconstruction if you don’t know how Chinese labor plays into things after the Civil War. 
 

While technically not slaves, by all practical matters they pretty much were. 

[homersapien 11,440]

On 6/19/2022 at 7:35 PM, GoAU said:

 

The lie is question is in bold above.  

Did you or did you not state that individuals should be allowed to "bear" RPGs or "carry" grenades. (see below)

Did I misunderstand you?

 

 

On 6/14/2022 at 9:26 AM, homersapien said:

If the premise is the 2nd amendment as intended to protect the country (government) - or to protect us from the government - why should it be limited to mere rifles and pistols?

Shouldn't we allow people to bear RPG's or carry grenades (for example)?

To which you replied:

Yes - both.  

Edited June 21, 2022 by homersapien

[homersapien 11,440]

12 hours ago, wdefromtx said:

Technically weren’t slaves…..but you you are showing that you don’t know much about reconstruction if you don’t know how Chinese labor plays into things after the Civil War. 
 

While technically not slaves, by all practical matters they pretty much were. 

The contribution of the Chinese was significant - especially in infrastructure, particularly in the west.  And we need to acknowledge that in our history.

But to Cole's point, it's hardly comparable to what chattel slavery contributed to the whole country for such a long time.  The southern economy was literally built on slavery. 

Here's an interesting analysis on how slavery affected our nation's economic development by region:

https://equitablegrowth.org/new-research-shows-slaverys-central-role-in-u-s-economic-growth-leading-up-to-the-civil-war/

Edited June 21, 2022 by homersapien

[wdefromtx 3,159]

8 minutes ago, homersapien said:

The contribution of the Chinese was significant - especially in infrastructure, particularly in the west.  And we need to acknowledge that in our history.

But to Cole's point, it's hardly comparable to what chattel slavery contributed to the whole country for such a long time.  The southern economy was literally built on slavery. 

Here's an interesting analysis on how slavery affected our nation's economic development by region:

https://equitablegrowth.org/new-research-shows-slaverys-central-role-in-u-s-economic-growth-leading-up-to-the-civil-war/

I’m not comparing the magnitude of the two to each other. 
 

Just pointing out to ICHY the use of Chinese labor in reconstruction. 
 

 

[icanthearyou 4,463]

2 hours ago, wdefromtx said:

I’m not comparing the magnitude of the two to each other. 
 

Just pointing out to ICHY the use of Chinese labor in reconstruction. 
 

 

You are wrong.

https://tnmuseum.org/Stories/posts/the-story-of-chinese-laborers-and-the-reconstruction-south

Here is the truth. 

[wdefromtx 3,159]

16 minutes ago, icanthearyou said:

You are wrong.

https://tnmuseum.org/Stories/posts/the-story-of-chinese-laborers-and-the-reconstruction-south

Here is the truth. 

That article mirrors what I said……🤣🤣

[icanthearyou 4,463]

12 minutes ago, wdefromtx said:

That article mirrors what I said……🤣🤣

It absolutely refutes what you claimed. 

[GoAU 1,600]

8 hours ago, homersapien said:

Did you or did you not state that individuals should be allowed to "bear" RPGs or "carry" grenades. (see below)

Did I misunderstand you?

 

 

To which you replied:

Yes - both.  

I appreciate your clarification.  My “both”  response was directed to your initial question about the second amendment being to protect the nation / government or to protect us from the government.   
 

I certainly don’t advocate for explosives, RPGs, or fully automatic weapons being any easier to obtain than current laws.  With only a few exceptions I am not advocating for a loosening of existing laws, just not supportive of the continuing creeping of additional restrictions.  
 

If you are wondering about the “few exceptions” I referenced they would be:

1) Elimination of the current restrictions on short barreled rifles - it is completely arbitrary and doesn’t achieve anything

2) Elimination of the restrictions on suppressors - they should be able to be purchased in the same manner as firearms. Even European countries with much stricter regulations than ours have easier access to suppressors.  Contrary to media misconceptions, they do not “silence” gunfire.  
 

3) Reciprocity of carry permits from state to state would be nice. For example I am taking a trip in the next month that will take me across 6 states - it’s taken a couple of hours of research to ensure I am completely in compliance with the laws of every state I’m passing through.  Believe it or not, I think this is the toughest of these 3 to solve.  

[autigeremt 6,686]

On 6/20/2022 at 6:43 PM, cole256 said:

No you really don't but once again anything to make pretend that black people weren't mistreated or it wasn't that bad you better believe it will get posted on here.

But go ahead and show how the South here wasn't built off the backs of slaves. I'll be waiting

Whatever makes you feel better Cole. Facts are facts and you can’t talk it away from the history of the world. 

[autigeremt 6,686]

On 6/20/2022 at 6:43 PM, cole256 said:

No you really don't but once again anything to make pretend that black people weren't mistreated or it wasn't that bad you better believe it will get posted on here.

But go ahead and show how the South here wasn't built off the backs of slaves. I'll be waiting

BTW I never said Africans didn’t build anything. Your racist tendencies did. I’m not the one acting like the very people you like to “highlight”. 

[autigeremt 6,686]

9 hours ago, icanthearyou said:

You are wrong.

https://tnmuseum.org/Stories/posts/the-story-of-chinese-laborers-and-the-reconstruction-south

Here is the truth. 

Railroads and the western frontier more appropriately. 

[autigeremt 6,686]

On 6/20/2022 at 6:41 PM, icanthearyou said:

Slaves from China?

Technicalities 🤷

[icanthearyou 4,463]

1 hour ago, autigeremt said:

Railroads and the western frontier more appropriately. 

They were not slaves.  In no way.  Confederate propaganda.  Spread by the same rich barbarians who talked a bunch of poor, ignorant souls into dying for nothing other than their right to be ruthlessly inhumane and, their greed.  Southerners will believe anything in the effort to never admit how stupid and corrupt, the "cause" really was.

Edited June 22, 2022 by icanthearyou

[homersapien 11,440]

4 hours ago, GoAU said:

I appreciate your clarification.  My “both”  response was directed to your initial question about the second amendment being to protect the nation / government or to protect us from the government.   
 

I certainly don’t advocate for explosives, RPGs, or fully automatic weapons being any easier to obtain than current laws.  With only a few exceptions I am not advocating for a loosening of existing laws, just not supportive of the continuing creeping of additional restrictions.  
 

If you are wondering about the “few exceptions” I referenced they would be:

1) Elimination of the current restrictions on short barreled rifles - it is completely arbitrary and doesn’t achieve anything

2) Elimination of the restrictions on suppressors - they should be able to be purchased in the same manner as firearms. Even European countries with much stricter regulations than ours have easier access to suppressors.  Contrary to media misconceptions, they do not “silence” gunfire.  
 

3) Reciprocity of carry permits from state to state would be nice. For example I am taking a trip in the next month that will take me across 6 states - it’s taken a couple of hours of research to ensure I am completely in compliance with the laws of every state I’m passing through.  Believe it or not, I think this is the toughest of these 3 to solve.  

Blah blah blah....

I am still confused about the "lie" I told.  Could you please explain what I "lied" about (that makes me a "liar")?

Edited June 22, 2022 by homersapien