ProMinnesota House speaker, her husband shot and killed in 'assassination'
n3m37h100% a Drumpf supporter
Wangari MaathaiMaybe. Maybe not. They are saying suspect was appointed by Tim Walz. They also found anti-trump signs in car. Could be just to throw people off the scent, or maybe just a personal thing thing against people. We don’t know. Regardless of what size shooter is on, it’s not good for any political parties, but it’s just gonna cause more dissent and division.
I remember when Trump got shot at people here we celebrating and saying things like “Oh wish he had better aim.” Now it’s happened to Democrats and people here are saying how terrible it is.
Shooting political people is never a good thing, regardless of what party they are in. Lemmy needs to stop celebrating shootings when it happens to people they don’t like. Because stuff is also happening to people they do like. Violence is never the answer and always just ends up badly.
Sometimes violence is the answer, actually. What would you do to hitler before the genocide if you knew what would happen?
Sometimes violence is the answer, actually.
Looks like the shooter of these democrats agreed with you that violence is the answer. You approve? He was just as strong in his beliefs as you. Think that’s a good thing?
I’m a lifelong pacifist and activist. You can come up with all the scenarios you want, but I will never advocate violence.
I won’t advocate for violence. I will always wish the perpetrator had found a better solution. But there are definitely politicians whose death I will not mourn, whatever the cause.
I agree with your sentiment.
The comment in question pulled a “both sides” on an issue that is beyond overwhelmingly coming from the right side of the spectrum.
Two Democratic state Senators were just brutally attacked, and at least one killed. That’s not the time for Democrats to introspect, it’s a time to be outraged.
Drawing some kind of similarity between internet commenters wishing a conservative assassin had succeeded in killing Trump, and a (almost certainly) right wing chud actually assassinating two Democratic Senators is bullshit. Political violence in this country comes almost entirely one direction. Pretending otherwise just blunts that reality and makes future attacks all the more likely.
Two Democratic state Senators were just brutally attacked, and at least one killed. That’s not the time for Democrats to introspect, it’s a time to be outraged.
Which is exactly what happened when Trump got shot at. My point being that the whole narrative of “violence is right to fight back” is the exact same mindset this shooter had. In his mind, he thought violence is right to fight back.
I’m saying it’s wrong. But hey, you keep advocating for violence. Let me know how what works for you. I’m not going to join in your bloodlust and I don’t care what side you are on. Be sure let us know how your FBI interview goes after they read this thread.
I agree with outrage. I don’t agree with violence as a reaction though.
Who called for violence as a reaction? Anyways, it doesn’t seem like this guy is likely to come quietly when the cops find him, so I do have to wonder what you think the cops should do if he is armed and refuses to negotiate or surrender? Some level of violence may just end up being the correct reaction. We shall see.
Be sure let us know how your FBI interview goes after they read this thread.
Uh, OK. I’ll stay by the phone.
Who called for violence as a reaction?
Read the thread.
So, nobody.
Ahhh, I guess i just read every single comment here wrong.
So you’re saying that you and everyone in this thread agree that violence is not the answer then?
What does “violence is not the answer” exactly mean? I see several people pointing out that it sometimes is the answer. I don’t see anyone calling for violence as a reaction to this incident, which is what you claimed.
What does “violence is not the answer” exactly mean?
That means that I hope no one retaliates with violence, for the awful thing that happened with the democrats shooting? And that I don’t think violence against an politician for anything is called for. What else do you think I would mean?
I don’t see anyone calling for violence as a reaction to this incident, which is what you claimed.
Ok, then I am glad this thread agrees that no one. So people here agree that this no politician should have violence inflicted upon them? Correct? Good, I think that’s a sensible way to approach it. And I’m glad cooler heads are prevailing.
I’m unsure why some people seem to be annoyed that I an calling for non-violence. Especially since everyone agrees. I’m glad no one is calling for violence against politicians.
So people here agree that this no politician should have violence inflicted upon them?
There you go, completely off the rails again. I never said that, and I’m pretty certain that a lot of this thread disagrees with that statement. There are absolutely cases where politicians should have violence inflicted on them. That doesn’t mean anyone is calling for it in this case.
If Trump refuses to leave office in 2028, I would be totally behind an assassination attempt. If the state doesn’t use its monopoly on the use of violence to maintain democracy, it loses the right to that monopoly.
Wait, so I am confused. I said that some people seemed to be for violence, and you said I was wrong. Now youa resaying that a lot in this thread disagree with my statement that violence isn’t the answer.
There are absolutely cases where politicians should have violence inflicted on them.
And I disagree. Which I have from the beginning. Please disengage from this conversation. You and I are not going to agree on the violence thing. Good day to you.
What is this, an Abbott and Costello bit? The words in a sentence are important - all of them. There are differences between people being for violence (as if that’s a thing), people recognizing that violence is sometimes necessary, people thinking that violence is appropriate in response to this issue, and people calling for violence. Those all mean different things. Maybe you throw them all in the same mental bucket, but they are not the same. This is a symptom of thinking in thought terminating cliches. That used to be a Republican thing, but its sad how often I’m seeing it now on the left.
And I disagree… You and I are not going to agree on the violence thing.
Which is fine. There is nothing wrong with us disagreeing on that. The problem is when you mix that in with accusations that I (and others) support violence in cases where we don’t, or claim we are calling for violence in response to this incident when we have done no such thing.
Please disengage from this conversation.
Sure, I have no doubt that you can keep it going all by yourself. You really don’t need me for it.
disengage
You don’t get to decide when others disengage, only yourself. If you don’t want more replies, just stop commenting.
You just had a comment in this thread removed for advocating violence. You trying to get your comments removed for slapfighting too or what? Just move on. wth?!
You just had a comment in this thread
Mods will mod. I don’t think that comment should have been removed, but I’m not going to protest it.
You trying to get your comments removed for slapfighting too or what?
I’ll go with “what”. I’m not sure the mods will penalize me for not following your commands.
let it go
It may go whenever it wants.
Well, based on your the history of you getting stuff removed, our conversation here is done. I’m now blocking you, so I won’t see your reply. Good luck! Looks like you are gonna need it in your life.
KoboldCoterieI kind of hate the ‘Violence is never the answer’ rhetoric. Violence should not be the first course of action, nor is it a desirable one to have to resort to, but sometimes there’s simply not another reasonable way to resolve a problem.
Which is probably the exact thought process this shooter had. And he followed through. Do you think that’s a good thing?
Fuck Donald Trump, fuck the current government, and they should all jump off a building together. Pacifism doesn’t work until everyone is enlightened and some people are the manifestation of evil. You cannot cure them, unfortunately.
K. So if people couldn’t even be bothered to get out of their chairs to vote, do you think they are suddenly gonna jump up and down with excitement and join you in your adventures?
People tend to get activated once they feel they’re personally being threatened. Voter suppression notwithstanding, I’m sure there are plenty of people who couldn’t be bothered to vote but could definitely be bothered to physically defend themselves and their neighbors.
I’m sure there are plenty of people who couldn’t be bothered to vote but could definitely be bothered to physically defend themselves and their neighbors.
You would think… but I disagree.
You’re straw manning. Please don’t.
Recognizing that violence has in fact “been the answer” to various circumstances in the past, and will be in the future, is different from saying everyone should pick up a gun today.
You’re straw manning. Please don’t.
No, I’m not. I’m advocating non-violence. Disagree all you want. That’s fine. You do what you wanna.
Let’s say, hypothetically, there’s a mass shooting in progress. Literally a gunman shooting people in the street. How are you going to solve that situation with non-violence?
Another hypothetical. There’s someone with the detonator to a bomb that’s planted in a full stadium. You have a gun. If you don’t shoot them, they will detonate the bomb. Are you still advocating for pacifism?
You can’t make a statement like ‘Violence is never the answer’ if you’re not willing to apply it to these situations, too, so is your position that it’s better to let tens, hundreds or thousands of people die if the only way to prevent it is with violence?
The alternative, of course, is to acknowledge that sometimes, though regrettable, violence is the answer, and once we’ve established that, we can start examining where the line is where it becomes justified.
You live how you choose to, I’ll live the way I choose to. Violence is never the answer. There is no scenario where that will change for me. Not Hitler. Not babies. Not family. etc. Just so you know, I’m not the only pacifist in existence. There are many others like me in the world. Just not on Lemmy! lol
That’s well and fine, but if your honest opinion is that violence isn’t justified in even the above scenarios, I think you’re living in a fantasy world of idealism. If violence is being done, and you have the power to stop it (even through violence) but choose not to, you’re complicit in that violence.
I’ll also point out that this wasn’t a case where you were minding your own business and people started calling you out; you were the first one to reply in this comment chain. You opened the debate, and you seem very willing to criticize other peoples’ views, but when yours start to be examined critically, you seem to shy away.
That’s well and fine, but if your honest opinion is that violence isn’t justified in even the above scenarios, I think you’re living in a fantasy world of idealism.
I get to live how I want to. You get to live how you want to. Good luck on your journey.
I’ll also point out that this wasn’t a case where you were minding your own business and people started calling you out; you were the first one to reply in this comment chain.
I’ve never inferred anything different. I gave my opinion. People disagree. I’m fine with that. They haven’t changed my mind. I haven’t changed their mind. According to the modlog, some people went a bit too far and had comments removed for advocating violence. That’s how these things go. Lemmy has never been subtle in their extremism. Makes no difference in my life whatsoever and doesn’t upset me.
I also take comfort in the fact that most here aren’t going to do anything violent anyway, regardless of what they say they are going to to. That’s just a fact of society.
Opinions have been made known. I’ll stay on my same path. All good.
The real problem I have with this entire discussion is that (as you’ve been called out for here already), you’re basing it on a straw man. You’re taking statements like “Violence is sometimes the answer” and twisting that to mean “Violence is [often / always] the answer” or “Violence is the solution to the problem in this article”, and trying to paint your view as the moral high ground based on that misrepresentation. In fact, that’s the whole reason we’re even having this discussion, now - you did that to [i]my[/i] first comment in this chain. You’re trying to position other people as unreasonable and violent by misrepresenting their viewpoints.
You’re taking statements like “Violence is sometimes the answer” and twisting that to mean “Violence is [often / always] the answer”
No, I’m stating that my opinion is that it is never the answer. I haven’t changed my mind. People have have had comments here removed by the mods for “advocating violence.” So obviously some things about violence have been said that others have felt the need to remove.
I’m fine that you disagree. You haven’t changed your mind. I haven’t changed my mind. All good. Carry on how you want to live your life, and I’ll carry one with how I want to live mine.
trying to paint your view as the moral high ground
No, I gave my opinion. Which hasn’t changed. I am allowed to have a different opinion than you, and voice it. Just as you are allowed to have a different opinion than me, and voice it. We both have. So all good.
Let me wrap this up, so we can move on. I don’t care if every single Lemmy poster on the planet earth replies that they think violence is the answer or it sometimes the answer and downvotes me to oblivion. I don’t think violence is ever the answer. No matter the hitler, knife, nuke bomb, dinosaur time machine, black hole travels to every bad time period etc scenario. I’m not going to change my mind. You aren’t either. That’s fine. It’s Lemmy, it’s not real life.
What would you do to hitler before the genocide if you knew what would happen?
While we all like to imagine that a time-traveling assassin could prevent WWII genocide and atrocities, the reality is that nazis didn’t appear in a vacuum. Do you believe that eliminating trump would end what’s happening in the US?
Do you believe that eliminating trump would end what’s happening in the US?
By vote. Why don’t you tell us here what you mean by eliminating Trump?
If people couldn’t even be bothered to get out of their chairs to vote, do you think they are suddenly gonna jump up and join you in your fight?
Violence is never the answer. Sometimes it’s the question, and sometimes the answer is yes.
Maybe not the answer ya want but sometimes the answer that is deserved.
Just to refresh memories, the assassination attempts on Trump were done by people with right wing backgrounds.
I just got back from a peaceful “No Kings” protest in Illinois, and aright wing chud waving a Trump flag swerved his oversized SUV right onto the shoulder in front of some protesters. This is not a both sides problem.
I never said it was a both sides problem. I said that violence isn’t the solution, and that republicans are hoping for a violent uprising. Because they outnumber you and are trained better than you. Even if all the armchair warriors and Lemmy joined together, still wouldn’t have the numbers.
Think about it: If people couldn’t even be bothered enough to do something easy like rise up and vote, you think they are suddenly gonna join in on a violent mob uprising against the government?
This violence is the answer mindset is exactly what this shooter had. You happy with that outcome?
I never said it was a both sides problem
I can do that to. I never said that you said it was a both sides problem. You just presented it that way and made no effort to avoid that interpretation.
republicans are hoping for a violent uprising. Because they outnumber you and are trained better than you.
They outnumber me personally? Sure, I’m just one guy. Outnumber the left? LOL, not a chance. Better trained? I kinda doubt it. They might be better at some things, but those chuds can’t plan their way out of a wet paper bag.
If people couldn’t even be bothered enough to do something easy like rise up and vote
Gosh, I wonder why that is. Just imagine what would be coming from the right of it were two Republican Senators. Whatever you are imagining, I’m pretty sure you know it would be passionate. Meanwhile Democrats are giving the same old bloodless speeches that sound like they were worked on by a dozen consultants before being handed to a talking head with instructions to “add pause and a couple of tears here”. Then they hand it off to a newscaster who laments about how “polarized” politics has become. Democrats have no passion, and that is why they lose.
“Now, I know they are killing us now, but we really should stop to consider if leftists might be a little violent too”. Yep, that’s exactly why Democrats consistently fail to inspire anyone.
you think they are suddenly gonna join in on a violent mob uprising against the government?
Um, no? Why on earth would you assume I think that?
This violence is the answer mindset is exactly what this shooter had.
Oh, you’ve met him? When did I say violence is the answer?
Yea this is what I’m hearing from me dad as well and he’s tuned into their media. It use to be that I was more informed then him but something has changed. Hanging out on left wing social media had put me so far behind the information curve.
On left wing spaces I see a lot of angry reactions but nothing really informative about a current event. But then I talk to my dad and he’s got all these facts which I argue like an asshole only to find out my sources were lacking not his. It’s so frustrating.
I’ve noticed stuff like that too. I think it’s because republicans use to be so quick to judge based on emotion, and not facts. And they got called out for it. So now they are more inclined to be more informed so they don’t look like dumbasses.
And as we can see in this thread, Lemmy is starting to do the exact same things that republicans used to be guilty of–acting on emotion rather than facts. I knew as soon as I said violence is never the answer, people were just gonna jump in and say whatabbout hitler bro!
Again, showing their lack of context and facts. I think (hope!) that Lemmy as a whole is smarter than this, but the ones who seem to comment the most aren’t giving me much hope.
Lemmy, you won’t win with violence. I promise. You don’t have the numbers or the skills. You couldn’t even enough people to vote, they aren’t gonna joined you in some armed resistance.
Use your brains, not our fists. You fist are just gonna get you stomped down faster. It’s exactly what the people in power want you to do. They want you to not use your brain, and immediately jump to violence. Downvoting me doesn’t mean I’m wrong, it just means you’re upset. It doesn’t change anything though.
You’re comparing two state senators with seemingly no significant controversy to a felon rapist dictator. You’re both sidesing, and that’s dumb AF.
I’m not both sidesing at all. I said violence isn’t the answer. Regardless of who it is.
Violence isn’t the answer up to the point when people play by the rules. Violence is the only answer for fascism–or do you think we could’ve just voted Hitler out?
Violence is never the answer … if you ignore all of human history, yes. Sadly, it often has been, though.
LucidlethargyLooks like republican christian nationalists have no problems shooting people then eh?? They don’t care about either side
Looks like republican christian nationalists have no problems shooting people then eh?? They don’t care about either side
Well he certainly didn’t have a problem with it. They also found a list with other names too, so it’s good they caught him before he did even more stuff. I thought for sure he’d off himself before he got caught. I’m glad he didn’t thought, because now he’ll spend rest of his life in prison like he deserves.
But violence isn’t the answer. For him or anyone else. And besides his senseless killings, they were also pointless. He didn’t stop politics at all.
So just like anyone would want to do this to republicans, nothing would change, and the politics of republicans won’t change at all. Luigi didn’t change anything at all.
I don’t think violence is the solution to anything in any circumstance, regardless of how many downvotes I get on Lemmy for saying that.
Lemmy, ya can stop with the nasty DM’s to me; I’m not even republican! lol