70 million pissed off republicans and not one city burned to the ground.

[Helz]

So is the general defense of raiding the us capitol and LITERALLY trying to stop democracy that “BLM was bad too”? Hence democrats would have been same/worse! Because BLM = all of the Biden voters?

No. Not at all. You asked what the difference was between the Hillary loss and hypothetical Biden loss.
My statement has nothing to do with the 'raid of the US capitol to stop democracy.'

But yeah; I dont care for the media but from what I understand there was hardcore groups of people set up to riot if trump won. When people set up with firebombs and still use them after they win I would call that terrorism in favor of the democratic party.

I think that Republicans will be worse in the coming years. But fuck off with your efforts to put words in my mouth. I have no problem crossing lines and being emphatically clear about it as I do it.

[Firebringer]

Why is it that every single thread about some criticism of the right always turns into deflections and whataboutisms? I see this constantly.

The BLM protests/riots aren't even relevant to the discussion at hand, why are they being brought up?

The initial post was mocking the rights thing about antifa being violent protestors. To not expect backlash from right wingers or them to point out cases where left wing were violent is like so many layers of delusional i don't even know where to begin.

[Firebringer]

I believe that trying to figure out which is worse is difficult, because of how you measure it and what they stand for.

BML where riots and protests against their belief police brutality and racism.
Capitol riots and protests where for the belief of a fraudulent election.

BML where long lasting protests which a minority abused to riot and loot
Capitol where a short-term protest which a minority abused to invade the Capitol.

BML damaged peoples lives and lively hood.
Capitol damaged democracy and the country's foundations.



So, what is worse it is totally depend on how you measure it and what your opinion is in what is more important. And to argue is only really a aggressive way to tell someone what opinion more important.

Yeah the comparison of the two isn't fair. But that will not stop people from making one or being hypocritical about one of these events to support their team.

If you are right wing and supporting this riot but were hyper critical of riots pre election you better have a good reason why one was okay and other not. Because if its about scale/damage I think you will always argue on those lines and theres no true line your drawing in the sand and probably always moving goalpost. If you are arguing about the foundations of the initial protest being valid (racism and police brutality vs fraudulent election) you are just admitting your political beliefs have more standing to do as you please than others and thus you never cared about riots being bad.

[Stealthbomber16]

To these protesters, their behavior is completely justified. They believe that the election was fraudulent and they are attempting to restore democracy. That’s a sign of an inherent distrust in the media and in science... I wonder where that was perpetrated from?

I’m far more annoyed with the lack of prepared response for the capital raid. This is something that had been planned for multiple weeks and wasn’t exactly a secret. There is absolutely no reason why these people should have gotten even close to the capital.

The people on both sides that I’ve found to be respectable all agree that the inherent problem here isn’t the fact that there was a riot, it was the disproportionate level of response to the riot. I disagree with my parents on a lot of things but we both agree that the response to this should have been the same as the response to the BLM riots (which for the record were much worse in scale, whether you agree or disagree with them). The top level management here needs to be completely gutted and redone. There are massive issues that are visible now.

[oops_ur_dead]

The discussion title is "70 million pissed off republicans and not one city burned to the ground." I don't think there are many bits of conversation that could be any more directly related.

I do feel like whataboutisms is an issue on both sides. Maybe more so for republicans. I think a larger portion of republicans justifications boils down to a little kid saying 'we they did it too' although I am not sure how you could call pointing to BLM protests/riots whataboutisms in the slightest given the thread name..

The initial post was mocking the rights thing about antifa being violent protestors. To not expect backlash from right wingers or them to point out cases where left wing were violent is like so many layers of delusional i don't even know where to begin.

Ah shit you know you're right, I forgot the context of the thread and thought it was a general conversation about the capitol stuff.

My complaining was misplaced then, your comparisons are apt and relevant. Shouldn't have gone at your neck for that Helz, my b.

To comment on the topic then, in short I think both sets of protests/riots/whatever were justified responses to what the people involved thought was happening. In fact if the election really was stolen then I think the capitol riots didn't go far enough.

But in terms of the underlying cause, I personally agree with the goals and ideas of the BLM protests/riots/what have you, but the election fraud thing is completely made up BS. Most of the blame for what happened go to the people wilfully spreading disinfo about the subject.

This totally censures all the people who pretended for the last 4-5 years that Trump's rhetoric was harmless and "locker room talk" or whatever people claimed it was. This is why rapid firing legal cases to overturn the results, pretty much all of which failed, is a bad thing and not just "oh well he's just making sure things are fair, if the election wasn't rigged then everything will be ok so there's nothing to worry about". This is why Trump's vague language and phrasing was horrible and very intentional, and everyone who pretended like he meant nothing by things like telling the Proud Boys to "stand back and stand by" was either being disingenuous or just completely naive and delusional. It's not a mistake that it led to this, it was the intent, and pretending otherwise is just continuing to fan the flames of disinformation that will lead to further violence and terrorism.

I can't put blame or even hatred on the people who marched on the capitol ready to do whatever it takes to ensure that the election results were fair and democracy was upheld. The real evil comes from the people who perpetrated and tolerated this stuff in the first place.

[DJarJar]

No. Not at all. You asked what the difference was between the Hillary loss and hypothetical Biden loss.
My statement has nothing to do with the 'raid of the US capitol to stop democracy.'

But yeah; I dont care for the media but from what I understand there was hardcore groups of people set up to riot if trump won. When people set up with firebombs and still use them after they win I would call that terrorism in favor of the democratic party.

I think that Republicans will be worse in the coming years. But fuck off with your efforts to put words in my mouth. I have no problem crossing lines and being emphatically clear about it as I do it.

Could you cite your source on firebombs and plan to revolt if Biden lost?

[SuperJack]

Could you cite your source on firebombs and plan to revolt if Biden lost?

Oh shit. Sounds dangerous. Better press them panic alarms...

[Helz]

Could you cite your source on firebombs and plan to revolt if Biden lost?

A man by the name of Dillan Hoppe who works for the LA Fire department. He said large chunks of hotels were rented out by your typical black skinny jean crowd and after Trump lost they still caused a lot of problems.

I can't speak to him saying they planned to revolt but when you have people massing with riot gear and making Molotov's its a reasonable assumption that 'something' is being planned. Given what we saw in the months leading up to the election I would be surprised to hear anyone claim there would not have been mass rioting if Trump had won.

[rumox]

I absolutely wouldn't be surprised of destructive riots if Trump won. I think anyone who tries to confidently argue there wouldn't have been is being pretty dishonest.

[SuperJack]

I absolutely wouldn't be surprised of destructive riots if Trump won. I think anyone who tries to confidently argue there wouldn't have been is being pretty dishonest.

You are more likely to get less due to the split base. Some republicans name trump, some blame their party, some blame democrats, some blame fraud. Because there is no common enemy that is easily identifiable there won't be as much of a heavy reaction compared to fighting racism and police brutality.

Yet I expect there to be some, I expect some people will riot for the sake of rioting and committing crimes whilst having no intention to riot because of trump/election. And I expect every single crime to be blamed on republicans no matter who does it for what reason.

[DJarJar]

I absolutely wouldn't be surprised of destructive riots if Trump won. I think anyone who tries to confidently argue there wouldn't have been is being pretty dishonest.

I don’t see why losing to trump the 2nd time would be THAT much worse than losing the first time. So I can agree just like the first time there would be “not my President” marches everywhere but I just have a hard time believing in the violence conspiracy theories without evidence. I mean a key issue between left and right is guns and frankly the left just aren’t as in to guns.

Now, anarchists who would have started shit no matter who won? That I can buy into as it just makes sense they’d try to ride the wave whatever the wave was.

But nonetheless there’s a key difference here. Your trumpy voters felt right in their insurrection because they were convinced that the election was stolen from them. Can’t even really blame someone who thinks they are just defending their country right? But if trump had won, you would NOT have the majority of democrat voters thinking that they’d been swindled, cheated, etc. Maybe largely cuz Biden just wouldn’t be a little bitch like trump was. Would there be some salty fucks? Sure. But I still haven’t heard a reason why they would act significantly more violently than they did after Hillary lost

[rumox]

I think after the 4 years of Trump there is a lot more kindle to ignite a violent reaction compared to the reaction of his win over Clinton. Trump was polarizing when vying for office and he has only gotten worse since. Just because the extreme right used the allegation of voter fraud as their catalyst doesn't mean the extreme left would have it as their catalyst. Take your pick from that list of controversies during Trumps presidency, there are a couple that can easily reignite into violence if Trump was to be declared president again.

[Marshmallow Marshall]

I think after the 4 years of Trump there is a lot more kindle to ignite a violent reaction compared to the reaction of his win over Clinton. Trump was polarizing when vying for office and he has only gotten worse since. Just because the extreme right used the allegation of voter fraud as their catalyst doesn't mean the extreme left would have it as their catalyst. Take your pick from that list of controversies during Trumps presidency, there are a couple that can easily reignite into violence if Trump was to be declared president again.

100 % correct. I think that's what you were saying too, but I'd like to specify something: it could easily reignite into violence from both sides. The immense issue with the vote fraud strategy, which also makes its power, is that it completely removes any form of legitimacy from the opposing side. If you think the opposing side is made solely of liars who only want to seize power against the will of the people, and that you even happen to legally own an assault rifle... I'll let you guess what will happen.

Disclaimer: I'm referring to the "vote fraud strategy" because there is no proof it actually happened on a scale big enough to swing the results. If you have actual evidence it did, before arguing here, you should be immediatly contacting courts in the US with that evidence, since it appears noone could show them any valid one. The only way this isn't right is if all judges involved in this in each state were biased and part of a conspiracy, in which case the US are already doomed anyway lol.

[Firebringer]

Could you cite your source on firebombs and plan to revolt if Biden lost?

I don't know about threats of violence, but i will say there were hundreds of businesses boarding up their businesses in fear of Trump winning and the left rioting. All over the country you can read stories of businesses doing so. When interviewed they didn't say they were scared if Biden won. They were scared if Trump won.

[Light_Yagami]

[Marshmallow Marshall]

I don't know about threats of violence, but i will say there were hundreds of businesses boarding up their businesses in fear of Trump winning and the left rioting. All over the country you can read stories of businesses doing so. When interviewed they didn't say they were scared if Biden won. They were scared if Trump won.

Isn't everyone who isn't completely disconnected from politics scared of the "opposing side" in the US atm? There's a political crisis, and people are crazy and own guns. That's a good reason to be scared.

[Helz]

Isn't everyone who isn't completely disconnected from politics scared of the "opposing side" in the US atm? There's a political crisis, and people are crazy and own guns. That's a good reason to be scared.

Imagine if the political side you are afraid of has power and you are not allowed to have guns.

This is the basic idea behind gun ownership. Its not like the right to have a 'well formed militia' was created to hunt deer. Its about the population being able to build the means to fight their own government if thy feel its necessary.

Not that you should use force when you disagree with political bullshit but oppression has a pattern that starts with disarming the populous.

[rumox]

I can understand the logic from pro gun people saying a ban on automatic guns is a slippery slope to a ban on all guns, but I just don't buy into that train of thought.

[Grayswandir]

I can understand the logic from pro gun people saying a ban on automatic guns is a slippery slope to a ban on all guns, but I just don't buy into that train of thought.

Did the rioters at the Capitol have automatics?

[rumox]

https://www.justice.gov/opa/press-re...51661/download

This guy did

[Helz]

I can understand the logic from pro gun people saying a ban on automatic guns is a slippery slope to a ban on all guns, but I just don't buy into that train of thought.

More children are killed by swimming pools than by assault rifles each year in America but you do not hear a public outcry against them. I am sure if there was one there would be some swimming pool lobbyists promoting how its a 'slippery slope' to end the creation of something thats ending the lives of children at a greater rate than devices designed to murder people.

I would like to see our public reactions actually be in line with the things causing human suffering but instead we focus on the things that are cosmetically marketable. Think about it next time you walk into a restaurant and the first 5 steps you wear a mask but for the next hour while you chill and eat your food you dont. We live in a society that promotes 'doing something' to ensure the feeling of control when we are afraid of something even when that thing we do has absolutely no impact on the thing we are afraid of. Just think back to 9/11 when national guard soldiers were put in airports with M16s but not given bullets. I think we should advocate to ban swimming pools!

[Helz]

More children are killed by swimming pools than by assault rifles each year in America but you do not hear a public outcry against them. I am sure if there was one there would be some swimming pool lobbyists promoting how its a 'slippery slope' to end the creation of something thats ending the lives of children at a greater rate than devices designed to murder people.

I would like to see our public reactions actually be in line with the things causing human suffering but instead we focus on the things that are cosmetically marketable. Think about it next time you walk into a restaurant and the first 5 steps you wear a mask but for the next hour while you chill and eat your food you dont. We live in a society that promotes 'doing something' to ensure the feeling of control when we are afraid of something even when that thing we do has absolutely no impact on the thing we are afraid of. Just think back to 9/11 when national guard soldiers were put in airports with M16s but not given bullets. I think we should advocate to ban swimming pools!

I feel like I am really gona dislike that I brought up this point tomorrow but at the same time I feel like advocacy against devices to curve violence is one of the most dumbass thought processes that is widely accepted in our society. Most people are more dangerous with a vehicle or a chainsaw than with a gun and every retard acts like putting a gun in someones hands makes them John Wick while in reality the majority of people wouldn't know how to chamber a round or flip a safety switch.

[Grayswandir]

More children are killed by swimming pools than by assault rifles each year in America but you do not hear a public outcry against them. I am sure if there was one there would be some swimming pool lobbyists promoting how its a 'slippery slope' to end the creation of something thats ending the lives of children at a greater rate than devices designed to murder people.

I would like to see our public reactions actually be in line with the things causing human suffering but instead we focus on the things that are cosmetically marketable. Think about it next time you walk into a restaurant and the first 5 steps you wear a mask but for the next hour while you chill and eat your food you dont. We live in a society that promotes 'doing something' to ensure the feeling of control when we are afraid of something even when that thing we do has absolutely no impact on the thing we are afraid of. Just think back to 9/11 when national guard soldiers were put in airports with M16s but not given bullets. I think we should advocate to ban swimming pools!

LOL what? Soldiers weren’t given bullets?

[rumox]

I mean if we are to all care about every fucked up thing in the world with the same intensity we would be miserable wreaks to the point we probably couldn't even function. This is a classic whataboutism. To entertain it though, pool safety should be thoroughly pursued and in fact I can say I'm proud of my countries pool safety activism. I bet any Australian reading this will get a certain song in their head after reading this - kids alive do the 5.

[rumox]

Anyway, obviously other measures should be taken to decrease the rampant mental illness that plagues Americans who decide to shoot as many people as they can. I'm just saying this argument that a proposed ban on automatic weapons being a slippery slope to more restrictions is mindless alarmist talk.

[Light_Yagami]

I Believe. Under The Second Amendment That. All People Have The Right To The Same Hardware. If They Can Afford It As The IDK Government. To Protect Their Selves Not Only From Other Aggressors. But Against The Government Its Self.

[Helz]

I mean if we are to all care about every fucked up thing in the world with the same intensity we would be miserable wreaks to the point we probably couldn't even function. This is a classic whataboutism. To entertain it though, pool safety should be thoroughly pursued and in fact I can say I'm proud of my countries pool safety activism. I bet any Australian reading this will get a certain song in their head after reading this - kids alive do the 5.

Sure, but I am not saying we should care about everything with the same intensity. If anything we should care about things in ratio to the dangers they present but we just dont. We focus on whatever the 'hot topic' is and the things that have marketable presentation. Someone arguing 'swimming pool safety' does not come with the same presentation as someone arguing to 'ban assault riffles.' And the solutions we push have the same cosmetic focus. Chicago had over 4,000 shootings last year with some of the most strict gun laws in the country.

I don't want to make this about gun control but we are incompetent as a society in both how we focus our attention as well as our incessant need to give ourselves a false sense of control.

[yzb25]

I think you touched on some really fascinating points Helz. I don't think it's just about marketing and the need to feel in control though (though those are definitely huge factors in things like gun control and the war on terror).

I think people are far more invested in symbolism than we'd like to acknowledge - I don't even mean that in a cynical way necessarily, though people do tend to view it cynically. Just that our calculation about what things are immoral or what things are a moral issue isn't some kind of utilitarian cost/benefit equation. I'm taking a far bigger risk in derailing the conversation with this next point: stop and think about what actually makes desecrating graves immoral for a second. Shit like grave robbery or even necrophillia. Even if the dead person has no relatives, we still view it as deeply inhumane and immoral, even though no actual person is getting hurt. Our impulse to respect the dead speaks to the fact that, even if you don't believe in any religious bullshit, human beings have a natural tendency to view the world in an almost spiritual manner, and elevate the significance of certain events based on their aesthetic or symbolic features.

Dying in a terrorist attack or a shooting is very different from passing away due to some accident. Even though in a simple utilitarian sense the person is dead either way, the former has the feeling of violating some natural process and desecrating the person's (I resent using this word but it's all I can think of) soul. Though I'll be the first to admit these sorts of attacks receive far more media and political attention than makes sense even when we account for the "symbolic element" (again, the marketing and control stuff is also playing a role) the symbolic element remains nonetheless undeniable here.

It's interesting what negative phenomena people rationalize as "a sad fact of life" and what negative phenomena people rationalize as "a systemic issue to be resolved". I think such things are often deeply cultural and ideological in nature. Sometimes we look at other cultures and try to figure out how the hell their people may tolerate certain barbaric customs, yet to the people themselves they don't even view it as an issue in the first place.

[yzb25]

It's interesting what negative phenomena people rationalize as "a sad fact of life" and what negative phenomena people rationalize as "a systemic issue to be resolved". I think such things are often deeply cultural and ideological in nature. Sometimes we look at other cultures and try to figure out how the hell their people may tolerate certain barbaric customs, yet to the people themselves they don't even view it as an issue in the first place.

I might be making this up, but I remember reading how the first reaction to vehicles from many people was to see these machines as these awful, dangerous things that could easily kill 10s of people with just a slight jerk of the steering wheel. The automobile companies actually needed to place pressures/incentives on newspapers to publish favourable stories about automobiles and effectively "victim blame" people who were careless enough to die in accidents, and make sure to place blame squarely on drivers rather than cars. I mean, I see cars as a little more important to a modern society's function than guns, but I can acknowledge that culturally guns mean jackshit to me so it's only natural it'd seem utterly bizarre when Americans get so worked up about holding onto them.

As someone with cringe levels of ignorance about military strategy, I'd just like to ask - How much of a difference does the prevalence of guns in America make to the government's ability to transition to an authoritarian regime? The US military seems insanely powerful, and I thought it was mainly the political barriers that were preventing such a thing from happening.

[Grayswandir]

Going back to the main topic of the thread:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Floyd_protests
There. Protests.
Meanwhile the rioting at the Capitol is:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2021_s...States_Capitol
Also described as a riot on the page. Meanwhile the page on the George Floyd protests says they were mostly peaceful. Yeah, doesn’t really change the fact that the damage caused by the BLM riots was far greater than the damage wrought by the riot.

[SuperJack]

Going back to the main topic of the thread:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Floyd_protests
There. Protests.
Meanwhile the rioting at the Capitol is:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2021_s...States_Capitol
Also described as a riot on the page. Meanwhile the page on the George Floyd protests says they were mostly peaceful. Yeah, doesn’t really change the fact that the damage caused by the BLM riots was far greater than the damage wrought by the riot.

Please list the quantity of damaged caused by both to compare!

[Grayswandir]

Please list the quantity of damaged caused by both to compare!

One federal building was damaged in the capitol riots whilst several hundred were during the ‘George Floyd riots’. One person was shot by police; compare that to 23 this summer. Hundreds of small businesses were damaged, whilst the capitol riot damaged no small businesses.

[SuperJack]

One federal building was damaged in the capitol riots whilst several hundred were during the ‘George Floyd riots’. One person was shot by police; compare that to 23 this summer. Hundreds of small businesses were damaged, whilst the capitol riot damaged no small businesses.

sO. Now we multiply that by time so they are equally able to measure it!

say. 5 monthsish. 150 days.

Thats 150 federal buildings
and 150 shot by police..



tut tut tut. thats so bad.

[Helz]

I might be making this up, but I remember reading how the first reaction to vehicles from many people was to see these machines as these awful, dangerous things that could easily kill 10s of people with just a slight jerk of the steering wheel. The automobile companies actually needed to place pressures/incentives on newspapers to publish favourable stories about automobiles and effectively "victim blame" people who were careless enough to die in accidents, and make sure to place blame squarely on drivers rather than cars. I mean, I see cars as a little more important to a modern society's function than guns, but I can acknowledge that culturally guns mean jackshit to me so it's only natural it'd seem utterly bizarre when Americans get so worked up about holding onto them.

As someone with cringe levels of ignorance about military strategy, I'd just like to ask - How much of a difference does the prevalence of guns in America make to the government's ability to transition to an authoritarian regime? The US military seems insanely powerful, and I thought it was mainly the political barriers that were preventing such a thing from happening.

Thats just about what my understanding is. I believe the origin of the term 'Jay walking' resulted from that. Back in the day calling someone a 'Jay' was a very disrespectful term and automobile manufacturers were concerned because of the number of people being injured by vehicles. They launched a huge advertising campaign blaming the people who were hit by cars for being ignorant for being in the streets. Prior to then roads were just walked on and used by horses.

[Helz]

sO. Now we multiply that by time so they are equally able to measure it!

say. 5 monthsish. 150 days.

Wouldent you have to include the amount of time there have not been riots sense Trump lost? Thats like 1.3 months for 1 riot vs 6ish months for 150 riots if you wanted to scale it using those numbers and still underscores the original point of this thread.

[Marshmallow Marshall]

Imagine if the political side you are afraid of has power and you are not allowed to have guns.

This is the basic idea behind gun ownership. Its not like the right to have a 'well formed militia' was created to hunt deer. Its about the population being able to build the means to fight their own government if thy feel its necessary.

Not that you should use force when you disagree with political bullshit but oppression has a pattern that starts with disarming the populous.

The government is less of a threat than a bunch of people who decide to have a "well-formed Militia" and who declare whatever the hell they want to because they have guns. Democracies all over the world exist without that stuff, and they're going much better (and much more democratically) than the US are right now. History is proving this stance wrong. I understand the idea behind gun ownership, I just believe it is very dumb lol. The majority is too dumb to be given such a powerful tool, sadly.

[SuperJack]

Wouldent you have to include the amount of time there have not been riots sense Trump lost? Thats like 1.3 months for 1 riot vs 6ish months for 150 riots if you wanted to scale it using those numbers and still underscores the original point of this thread.

Nope, Just like politics I handpick what data I want to use and present it in exactly a way that benefits me the most. Despite it being completely misleading and ignorant of many other factors. =).
And if someone points this out I stick my fingers in my ears and make very childish noises whilst screaming more inaccurate bladder or repeating older non-related bladder.

[Marshmallow Marshall]

Nope, Just like politics I handpick what data I want to use and present it in exactly a way that benefits me the most. Despite it being completely misleading and ignorant of many other factors. =).
And if someone points this out I stick my fingers in my ears and make very childish noises whilst screaming more inaccurate bladder or repeating older non-related bladder.

I'll vote for you

[Grayswandir]

The government is less of a threat than a bunch of people who decide to have a "well-formed Militia" and who declare whatever the hell they want to because they have guns. Democracies all over the world exist without that stuff, and they're going much better (and much more democratically) than the US are right now. History is proving this stance wrong. I understand the idea behind gun ownership, I just believe it is very dumb lol. The majority is too dumb to be given such a powerful tool, sadly.

I don’t think there’s any authoritarian regimes with an armed populace, and for a good reason. Europe and the like may not have authoritarian governments, so they don’t need guns yet. But wait until some dictatorship starts to emerge, and ppl will wish they had guns.

To address your points about the US and its stance on gun rights though, the problems in America are much older than ppl marching on the Capitol and trying to take over Congress by force: guns have played a very minor role in this... situation thus far.

Hillbillies with rifles are a real threat, but I think paying that price is worth it if it means you can defend yourself if the government wants to take your shit. Imagine how the Cuban/Russian Revolutions would’ve gone if ppl were armed. Imagine how Hitler’s rise to power could’ve been averted or at least Jews could’ve defended themselves if they were as well armed as Americans are.

[Grayswandir]

Somewhat relatedly, I feel that if the current political climate of violence and intimidation continues, the ‘silent majority’ will eventually react in a disproportionate manner. Not that I condone what happened at the capitol in any way but I feel that’s one of the first hints at what may come if this climate continues. People may blame Trump for the riot but ppl wouldn’t have gone to the capitol in the first place if they hadn’t been constantly called chums, racists, idiots who believe in conspiracy theories/lied to/you name it. America really needs to get its extremism under control, or, eventually, we’ll see something truly horrible happen. Much worse than this capitol riot. I’m curious what will happen the first time ppl will be able to express their views without fear of censorship/social suicide/losing their jobs ect. I think there will be so much bottled up anger that ppl will just explode and be VERY mean lol.

[Helz]

Actually I want to fuck with this now.
This projects 1-2 billion in damage just from May 26-June 8 https://www.axios.com/riots-cost-pro...9db4cea9c.html
Wikipedia shows 27 people killed in the riots from May 27th to August 29th. I have a good bit of trouble finding a relevant count so Im just using that and I will note this does not include things like people murdering police in protest of George Floyd or whatever.

So if we take May 26 as the start day and December 3rd as the end its 191 days
If we take the 13 day period and project the cost per day on the lowest end at 1 billion we get roughly 76.9 million per day. Multiply that by the duration of the riots and we get 14.692 Billion dollars so the riots probably cost between 14-29 billion total.
If we take 27 dead people and divide that by the 94 days we get .099 dead people per day we get .287 dead people per day

By the new york times 5 people died in the Capitol Riot and I have not been able to find any news on any other election riots sense the election.
If we take December 3rd as the start day and end it today theres 44 days
So if we take 5 dead people and divide that by the 44 days we get .113 dead people per day

So the pre-election riots cost is something like 77 million dollars and .287 lives per day.
And the post-election riots cost XXX (We can figure this out when cleanup/repair estimates are given) and .113 lives per day.

[Helz]

The government is less of a threat than a bunch of people who decide to have a "well-formed Militia" and who declare whatever the hell they want to because they have guns.

I feel like you have to add in a 'right now' to that statement. The second amendment was a balancing factor for the future.

I pretty much think the government is just a bunch of people who declare whatever they want because they have guns. Think about bullshit traffic tickets. They are given under the justification of public safety but I am sure we all have friends who have gotten a ticket because they rolled down a hill without riding the breaks and a cop nailed them. Then he gives you a ticket with the ultimate end result that you have to give the city money or things will eventually escalate to violence or the loss of your freedom. This issue is underscored by the fact every district in America limited police interaction to matters of public safety and what was the first thing to get shut off? Traffic Tickets. So if by their own actions they acknowledge they are not protecting public safety how is what they are doing very different than a thug robbing you?
Think back to they tale of Robin Hood where the corrupt sheriff 'Taxed' his citizens with silly justifications until the local lord trained a militia and pushed back. Or spaghetti westerns where the town rises up against bandits forming a militia. Classic stories illustrate the reason for our 2nd amendment to exist.

Militias also function under local governments. Its like the 'volunteer fire department' but the military's version. Im sure you have read about the minute men in the revolutionary war or watched 'The Patriot'

[DJarJar]

but for the capitol riots, the time since trump lost to them was 0 days. That was the whole point lol. Why would they bother rioting during all the time they believed trump had won?

[Renegade]

I don’t think there’s any authoritarian regimes with an armed populace, and for a good reason. Europe and the like may not have authoritarian governments, so they don’t need guns yet. But wait until some dictatorship starts to emerge, and ppl will wish they had guns.

To address your points about the US and its stance on gun rights though, the problems in America are much older than ppl marching on the Capitol and trying to take over Congress by force: guns have played a very minor role in this... situation thus far.

Hillbillies with rifles are a real threat, but I think paying that price is worth it if it means you can defend yourself if the government wants to take your shit. Imagine how the Cuban/Russian Revolutions would’ve gone if ppl were armed. Imagine how Hitler’s rise to power could’ve been averted or at least Jews could’ve defended themselves if they were as well armed as Americans are.

Holy shit, yikes (!!!)

[Helz]

but for the capitol riots, the time since trump lost to them was 0 days. That was the whole point lol. Why would they bother rioting during all the time they believed trump had won?

I am not sure I understand what you mean. The election results were pretty blatant on December 4th.

There were lots of protests arguing for stuff like 'Stop the Steal' and such. They actually started in early November but thats kind of erroneous given the subject of this thread.

[DJarJar]

I am not sure I understand what you mean. The election results were pretty blatant on December 4th.

There were lots of protests arguing for stuff like 'Stop the Steal' and such. They actually started in early November but thats kind of erroneous given the subject of this thread.

From the rioter's pov, trump didn't officially lose until the day of the riots when congress certified the votes

[SuperJack]

@Helz

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=DGPPBJenrXU

[Helz]

From the rioter's pov, trump didn't officially lose until the day of the riots when congress certified the votes

That may be true for some but its also worth noting the day of the riot the election was not certified so Trump had not lost yet. The entire public 'reason' for that gathering was to 'cheer on the congressmen pushing to stop the steal' or some nonsense.

In context to the conversation its about how differently two movements are expressing their discontent. I just felt election day was when the people I know who are on that Trump Train started loosing their minds. I don't think its fair to split hairs about 'having a reason to riot'. If people are motivated enough for thousands to get together and express they are angry that potential exists regardless of if it stays a peaceful protest or turns into a riot; and I think that restraint is kind of the point of this thread.

We could even examine how the violence that does exist is directed to identify patterns that reflect differences between the two sides..

@Helz

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=DGPPBJenrXU

It just says Video unavailable but seems to be called the Riot Song. Lol

[SuperJack]

That may be true for some but its also worth noting the day of the riot the election was not certified so Trump had not lost yet. The entire public 'reason' for that gathering was to 'cheer on the congressmen pushing to stop the steal' or some nonsense.

In context to the conversation its about how differently two movements are expressing their discontent. I just felt election day was when the people I know who are on that Trump Train started loosing their minds. I don't think its fair to split hairs about 'having a reason to riot'. If people are motivated enough for thousands to get together and express they are angry that potential exists regardless of if it stays a peaceful protest or turns into a riot; and I think that restraint is kind of the point of this thread.

We could even examine how the violence that does exist is directed to identify patterns that reflect differences between the two sides..
It just says Video unavailable but seems to be called the Riot Song. Lol

https://open.spotify.com/album/6Zobw...35GRS3KLQnMHiW

[Grayswandir]

That may be true for some but its also worth noting the day of the riot the election was not certified so Trump had not lost yet. The entire public 'reason' for that gathering was to 'cheer on the congressmen pushing to stop the steal' or some nonsense.

In context to the conversation its about how differently two movements are expressing their discontent. I just felt election day was when the people I know who are on that Trump Train started loosing their minds. I don't think its fair to split hairs about 'having a reason to riot'. If people are motivated enough for thousands to get together and express they are angry that potential exists regardless of if it stays a peaceful protest or turns into a riot; and I think that restraint is kind of the point of this thread.

We could even examine how the violence that does exist is directed to identify patterns that reflect differences between the two sides..
It just says Video unavailable but seems to be called the Riot Song. Lol

Do you think Republican protests will become more violent in coming years? You mentioned thinking ppl will try to assassinate (public figures?), do you think it will be restricted to just that kind of protesting? The news I’m reading suggest a deep division between Republicans and Democrats. I mean half the country loves Trump to death and the other hate his guts. With how violent and polarized the political atmosphere seems to have become there, I wouldn’t be surprised if dialogue broke down completely (if it even exists anymore), and with it large scale chaos would emerge. Maybe I’m exaggerating but I’m thinking something like ppl legit forming mobs and beating ppl from the ‘other’ party due to all the pent up frustration and anger.