Originally Posted by
Exeter350
You’re right, Stop the Steal crossed the boundaries like you described earlier.
In the case of violence, I think it’s pretty clear cut that it should be shut down.
However, even before that stage, there are other negative outcomes that could be prevented.
For instance, civil unrest, peaceful protests, strikes, social disharmony / divisiveness, etc.
Isn’t it better to nip the problem in the bud, rather than wait for it to escalate to riots before saying “Ok, it’s time to stop”?
Those other problems, while not as extreme as violence, can still have significant, far-reaching and subtle consequences on the country.
And while I admire your willingness to let those Stop the Steal people propagate their ideas and protest as long as it isn’t violent, I wouldn’t do the same.
If I analyse their arguments and conclude that their cause is misguided, based on misinformation / disinformation, I would not allow them to disrupt the peace. Whether violent or peaceful, their actions will impact others in society.
There may be a chance that my conclusion is wrong, but letting the problem drag on forever is not the solution either. There has to be a cut-off time to make a decision. The protesters will not like it, because they think they’re right, but they have to accept the judgment of the authorities. Failing that, they have to be isolated where they cannot stir further unrest, i.e. imprisonment.
All to avoid the consequences of civil unrest. Not just the violence, but the effects of discontent and disharmony.