U.S. Riots of May 2020 over George Floyd and others - ITT: a bunch of faggots butthurt about worthless internet stickers

Status
Not open for further replies.
Apparently, it's from a journo directive during the initial BLM mania that mandated that Black be capitalized. Something, something historical reparation.

It's utterly stupid, and I'm seeing it even in the media in my bumfuck third world country. (Though likely they just copypasted whatever they got off AP or Reuters.)

Oh so it's people providing niggers with weird reparations.

Yeah, no, I'm not doing that - lowercase 'b' for me, uppercase 'W'.
 
Even in clear-cut self defense situations it can be dicey for gun owners, which is why any concealed carry class will strongly emphasize not shooting people until the very last resort. I'd give the kid 50/50 odds of avoiding prison, because even though there's video evidence of him being attacked in the moment, you can bet any lawyer is going to go the "he knowingly put himself in the situation" route.
Which is why I have often said stay away at all costs. If you can avoid confrontation with these people do so. If you cant then well damned ID you do and damned if you dont
 
1598436329537.png
designedtowound.bmp

They got a taste of a "post-police" world. If not for the police, armed groups of Kenoshans would be hunting Antifa in the street right now.
What people often forget is that Police have another duty aside from enforcing laws and protecting people - it's to moderate and deescalate. A cop can put you in jail for assaulting someone, the person being assaulted will put you into a hospital or a grave.

I was wondering if the evidence was going to come out in favor of the idea that he was looking to pick a fight and ruthlessly shot someone in the head, but nah, it seems the more that comes out the worse the rioters look. First dude that got shot threw a molotov at him (although I guess we didn't see what happened before that), and the guy who got his arm blasted had a handgun pointed right at the kid.
I can only hope that with this amount of evidence this kid will go free. Well, that and that if I'm ever in his situation I'll have half of his situational awareness, skill and luck - he managed to salvage a really grim situation.
 
Define "best." I'd say if they decide not to charge, they should just keep it quiet with no statement for as long as possible. Announcing no charges will just further inflame whatever riot is already going on that night.
Disagree, letting the public know citizens have the right to defend themselves will be demoralizing for the rioters and boost morale of everyone else. Also people will feel more empowered to actually defend themselves.
 
Interestingly, though, the judge's justification for the acquittal in that particular case essentially amounted to "yo, fuck that particular part of the conventions, we like being able to run around in enemy uniforms".

This happened post WW2, so the judge wasn't German. I have no clue where you take the "We like being able to run around in enemy uniforms" thing from.

I would disagree, they get enforced on the street level. Let's start by speculating for what purpose someone would attempt to infiltrate the other side. Intelligence gathering? They're a disorganized mob, they have no intelligence to gather. Optics smearing? The media opinion has already been firmly entrenched, and everyone either does or does not give a shit about what the media says, but he might get his ass beat for the trouble. To commit random acts of violence? His punishment will be delivered at muzzle velocity.

How do they get enforced? Will uniformed people ask other people with the same uniform politely and they'll be honor bound to name their correct affiliation? This can't be enforced at all is what I am saying.

Also, if wearing a uniform is important for the anti-rioters, it is also important for the rioters to wear the same uniforms, if only to cause confusion. Being able to cause trouble that gets attributed to the other side can be invaluable in itself, even if you think "optics smearing" is pointless. If there is a point in wearing a uniform, there is a point in wearing the uniform of the other side as well, this goes hand in hand.

This ability to smear the other side by donning their uniform alone is a pretty good reason not to adopt a uniform, tbh. It also allows for plausible deniablity on your own side.

To commit random acts of violence? His punishment will be delivered at muzzle velocity.
You mean like that guy that shot someone in the face and got away in his jeep, leading to some other guy being attacked, shooting someone in self-defense and being taken into custody? Yeah... what is your point again? That this thing can't happen when it literally happened within minutes twice and is the basis for this thread in the first place?

Being able to blend in with the crowd is an advantge precisely cause this isn't war, civil or otherwise. Being able to just duck down and get out of a bad situation without having to use lethal force is a good thing for both sides. You can just pretend to be a random person and haul ass.
This whole situation is way too chaotic, there are no clear frontlines, it's an ever-shifting zone of several conflicts, meaning that people will always move in group-bubbles within a larger gathering of people that stretches over several blocks. At best, you have a group of people standing in front of a store or memorial protecting it and by that point, you don't really need another sign to show off your affiliation.

The entire purpose is to stand out and be an obvious threat to the rioters, not to blend in with them. A month or two ago, just being armed was enough, but now that increasing numbers of armed rioters are showing up, it's getting harder to distinguish between the two, hence the value of uniforms.
Being able to identify someone as friend or foe is important, I agree, but uniforms do nothing to accomplish that here, since not everyone is going to wear them and wearing them is no guarantee that it is genuine.

All it takes is one guy with an idea, see any of /pol/'s projects in the last four years. It's not going to be as simple as they all show up with a uniform tomorrow night, it will be a mimetic spread, possibly of multiple different uniform ideas (vests, hats, etc) until it manages to reach ubiquity, at which point any kind of attempt to infiltrate will simply be lost in the noise.
I just doubt that the various groups involved here are coherent enough to establish some set of clothes as a uniform. A uniform is not necessary at this point anyway, it might be if this shitshow escalates to a point of genuine civil war, but as long as it's riots, not using a uniform is better for various reasons mentioned above.
The yellow vests are a good counterpoint, but I would argue that the situation with them is a bit different. They are a large group of people opposed to the government, here we have several groups of civilians fighting each other, much more chaotic.

>Cops murder in cold blood
>Leads to
>Cops getting bricked
>Leads to
>Cops letting right wing militia run wild

Gee, it almost seems like there's something in that chain of events that's entirely in your control. It's something that, should you remove it, would prevent the next event from happening. I can't for the life of me think of it though...

Clearly, the best way to stop this cycle of violence is to abolish cops. Without cops, black communities would be thriving hubs of peace and prosperity, right?
 
Two completely random people in two completely random places doing completely random things, but having the exact opposite thought at exactly the same time.
View attachment 1548488

Edit- Who had their money on them calling out the hand signal?
View attachment 1548491
"Waving is white supremacist dog whistling,"

Oh good fucking lord I thought it couldn't get worse than the fucking OKAY hand symbol. These people are actually retarded. Mentally deficiant. How the fuck are most of them college educated?
 
Unlikely - how did the deaths of people like David Dorn not stop sympathy?

I suppose I'm looking at it more from a critical mass idea, which may be fallacious. Maybe David Dorn did get sympathy, but not quite enough to tip the scales. It's certainly on the optimistic side for sure, but my hope is that each and every one of these incidents has gradually increased, bit by bit, the number of people who are shaking out of support or ambivalence towards this.

Small enough outpourings of opposition are easy to muzzle and erase in favor of the narrative, but if enough get turned by each outpouring, the idea is that eventually there's too many people who aren't buying it. The idea, I suppose, of a silent majority.
 
I've seen a lot of talk on the net about how it wasn't a molotov and didn't hit him or place him in danger.

I want to point out when it comes to self defense, it doesn't matter if you are actually in danger, it matters if a reasonable person in your position would fear for their life or grevious bodily harm

You can be in no -actual- danger, but if someone puts you in that apprehension and you shoot, you are justified.

Fuck around and find out.
Just don't fucking chase people with weapons down and throw shit at them, how hard is it to practice a modicum of self control?
 
"Waving is white supremacist dog whistling,"

Oh good fucking lord I thought it couldn't get worse than the fucking OKAY hand symbol. These people are actually retarded. Mentally deficiant. How the fuck are most of them college educated?
He wasn't even waving, he was holding his hand up and at a few points in the video raised his other hand in an attempt to show he wasn't a threat to the police and was surrendering to turn himself in.

Edit:

That photo was probably taken at exactly 1:00 into the video, where he's starting to walk after running from the mob, lifts his left hand and still has his right hand on the gun. A second later his right hand is in the air too.
 
Last edited:
Lol, I mean their "medics" are just chicks too morbidly obese to participate in the rioting directly 99% of the time. In this case, even if it was a trained 68W or paramedic, the dude would almost certainly be dead. @Drain Todger is most likely right and the little bit of movement you see in the video from him is just a post mortem reflex.

Agonal breathing pretty much means it's game over. Take, for instance, the courtroom suicide of Michael Marin after his guilty verdict for burning down his own house.


Seven minutes before this point, he covertly ingested a cyanide pill. Cyanide inhibits mitochondrial cellular respiration. Even if someone is breathing normally, their tissues, in effect, begin to suffocate on the metabolic level. This led to cerebral hypoxia, and, in turn, agonal breathing. Those pig-snorts are the brain stem desperately trying to draw air into the body.

Now, check the video from Kenosha, at about a minute in. *snoooooort*, *snooooooooort*. Same cause. The telencephalon, the part of the brain that actually does the thinking, has been disabled.

No point in even giving first aid at that point. It's already over.

@Defend posted this in another thread, might aswell archive and pull it here, its the fellow that got shot in the head at the dealership:

video archive:
View attachment 1548347
 
I suppose I'm looking at it more from a critical mass idea, which may be fallacious. Maybe David Dorn did get sympathy, but not quite enough to tip the scales. It's certainly on the optimistic side for sure, but my hope is that each and every one of these incidents has gradually increased, bit by bit, the number of people who are shaking out of support or ambivalence towards this.

Small enough outpourings of opposition are easy to muzzle and erase in favor of the narrative, but if enough get turned by each outpouring, the idea is that eventually there's too many people who aren't buying it. The idea, I suppose, of a silent majority.

Inbetween the masses of people who fight for ideology lay the great, ideologically apathetic mass that prefers recreational media & entertainment and quite frankly the mass will only give a fuck about this in episodes, the episodes that directly threaten them, otherwise it's a largely passive opinion of indifference due to complete degenerated ignorance towards what's going on and once the opinion DOES begin to set in, they often shift so far towards one side (and both sides have completely lost capacity for debate and 'conversion' through words.) that there's no drawing them back - the amount of normies who still display relative apathy or worse yet actual ignorance to all these events would be pretty split by something like this, some supporting the shooter, others standing against him looking at him like he's the befuddling demon who killed a bunch of justified rioters (((peaceful protesters))) - the narrative 'they may be burning buildings down but they're not killing people' has already been cited on Twitter and they're gonna go far with it.

As for David Dorn, he was an idol of sympathy for the moderate right and an example some of those the left used for a week or two to say 'wow, this is bad, watch it guys!' and then allowed him to be forgotten as more and more people simply concluded he was a coon trying to stand against righteous, racial justice.

Sociology (and history) will tell you that as the mass of a nation begins to "ideologize" itself, it shifts towards radical ideology due to the fact that the events pressing their "ideologization" are often life or death situations that create immediate feelings of frustration and concern; moderates get drowned out in events like this, more and more, until shades of radicalism themselves begin to seem moderate; the Overton window is already fucked beyond belief, do not expect a great mass of people to be swayed by a white boy standing against Communist street thugs.

He'll be vilified by many, revered by many, and ignored by many - just like every previous victim of these riots to date; don't get me wrong, people will turn more & more to the right, but not the moderate right.
 
Only problem is that, in most states (TX being the exception), it's not legal to use deadly force just to protect property, if you're not in imminent danger of death.

Arson tends to be an exception to that (that is, AFAIK lethal force is justified to prevent arson in most states).

It *is* legal to open carry and to protect property and to use less-than-lethal force to prevent property damage, but you can't typically shoot if people are just stealing shit or smashing shit (possible exceptions in Stand Your Ground states if burglary is involved). However if they turn their attention towards you and threaten to kill you, it's justifiable. This would include if you used less-than-lethal force to prevent the destruction and they escalated to a deadly threat.

Notable exceptions to self defense would be if you were intending to kill someone and take actions to provoke them to attack you so you could off them.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back