Portland truck attack suspect arrested

[Tom Paine 1949]

And yet, there has been violence and looting at a majority of BLM marches and protests from the beginning.

This is manifestly untrue, especially in regards to looting. Violence is what? Taking to the streets without a permit? Burning or overturning a garbage can? Throwing a firecracker? Official BLM protests at least don’t bring guns into state capitols!

But it is certainly true that unorganized or poorly organized demonstrations, especially at night, easily turn out of control. This seems to be a classic example of a chaotic bunch that split off from an organized protest. I know — as an old organizer and security monitor at anti-Vietnam War demos — how easy it is for a few assholes or a single individual to provoke serious violence, especially if tempers toward police are already high or police are acting unprofessionally, as they often enough were. There were no police in this case, but I’ve met real police infiltrators, confronted provocateurs and cowards who throw soda bottles at cops from safe spots behind crowds, and helped fight off attacks on peaceful demonstrators.

In the videos shown here, we see many of the apparently completely unofficial or self-designated security people and many ordinary street people trying to calm down a bad chaotic situation a few blocks from an official BLM protest (according to FOX). I agree the leaders of any “official” groups need to speak out loudly against this sort of thing (they usually do) and try to deal more effectively with troublemakers. But it ain’t easy to stop criminal types or professional provocateurs, or the occasional drunk or hyped up drug addict — believe you me.

All that said, I’ve heard of much worse beatings handed out by a crowd of drunken Irishmen outside a bar in Hell’s Kitchen, Manhattan, a block away from where I once lived. Glad the cops got this cowardly punk, though. One less troublemaker.

 

[westwall]

So if you watched the video then you must have noticed that they swarmed his truck as soon as he got in and started it. You also must have noticed that as he was trying to drive away, he kept honking his horn and moving in fits and starts so as not to run over anyone. Once it was clear there was no one in front of the truck, that's when he gunned it and drove off.

You noticed all this, right?

Nope, didn't notice that at all... I noticed some racist asshole getting his ass kicked after he tried to run down some black people. That's what I saw.

Hey, maybe Trump can give this guy a speaking role at the RNC like Smirky McBitchslap and the Gun-Toting McCloskeys...

That's because you are a dishonest piece of shit. The man tried to defend a transgender woman who was being robbed by YOUR RACIST assholes.

 

[Coyote]

Quite possible that the DA will drop the charges. They've dropped a lot of charges against this lot.

Most of what is dropped are minor things that they can't really make stick, like disorderly conduct. Assault like this is a whole 'other level. It's like what happened in Charlottesville - a lot of the violence ended up not being prosecuted, but the guy that drove the truck into the crowd most certainly will be prosecuted. I think for the minor stuff - getting thrown in jail for the night is traumatic enough to make a lasting impression for many.

Never underestimate to ability of a liberal prosecutor or a biased, liberal-activist judge to exonerate a Marxist asshole for assault and battery...or even murder.

Bullshit.

But we just watched them do exactly that. How is it possible for you to WATCH it happen in front of you and not acknowledge that it is?

Can you give me an example?

Here you go. Three different cities, all Democrat DA's.

Portland's new DA will drop charges against HUNDREDS arrested in riots

People arrested in Portland since late May on non-violent misdemeanor charges during the protests that have racked Oregon´s largest city for more than two months won't be prosecuted.

www.dailymail.co.uk

Manhattan DA Cy Vance says he won’t prosecute low-level protest arrests

Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance announced Friday that his office won’t prosecute protesters for low-level offenses. Vance said in a statement that he won’t pursue raps involving…

nypost.com

Looters, rioters not being prosecuted by circuit attorney, says attorney general; Kim Gardner responds

St. Louis police arrested 36 people during violent protests. All have been released without criminal charges

www.ksdk.com

That really isn’t an example. You claimed: ...exonerate a Marxist asshole for assault and battery...or even murder.

The articles talk about dropping charges for low level crimes...from your articles:

....won't prosecute future 'non-deliberate' acts including criminal trespass, harassment and disorderly conduct

Vance said in a statement that he won’t pursue raps involving unlawful assembly, disorderly conduct and “other protest-related charges where appropriate”

That is not assault or murder. A lot of times these charges, like disorderly conduct don’t end up being prosecuted. A night in jail and a boot out is usually a sufficient. If they keep getting picked up, that changes.

 

[Coyote]

westwall...are we talking about two different things?

Self defense (or immediate defense of another)...

Or..taking the law into your own hands and meting out justice?

Because imo those are two different things. The first, I agree with you on and the law recognizes it as valid. That is not vigilantism.

Vigilantism begins with self defense. When the State refuses to defend the people, the people are going to defends themselves. Then, if the State CONTINUES to do nothing, the vigilantes will mete out justice. They will do so under control however. Your interpretation of vigilante justice is completely wrong. In all the cases in the west where it was used, the accused was duly tried, had a jury determine guilt, and then was summarily hanged for the crimes they were convicted of. The vigilantes rose up ONLY as a last resort.

They then disbanded. That was true in all cases. Unlike what progressives claim, the regular people are not the bloodthirsty mob you claim them to be. They are NOT the BLM assholes who are doing exactly that! That sort of behavior is a LEFTIST thing. Not a normal human being thing.

I don’t agree...while I agree with you on self defense, I can never condone vigilantism. It is lawlessness at best, and caused the deaths of thousands at worst. It is mob justice.

 

[eagle1462010]

westwall...are we talking about two different things?

Self defense (or immediate defense of another)...

Or..taking the law into your own hands and meting out justice?

Because imo those are two different things. The first, I agree with you on and the law recognizes it as valid. That is not vigilantism.

Vigilantism begins with self defense. When the State refuses to defend the people, the people are going to defends themselves. Then, if the State CONTINUES to do nothing, the vigilantes will mete out justice. They will do so under control however. Your interpretation of vigilante justice is completely wrong. In all the cases in the west where it was used, the accused was duly tried, had a jury determine guilt, and then was summarily hanged for the crimes they were convicted of. The vigilantes rose up ONLY as a last resort.

They then disbanded. That was true in all cases. Unlike what progressives claim, the regular people are not the bloodthirsty mob you claim them to be. They are NOT the BLM assholes who are doing exactly that! That sort of behavior is a LEFTIST thing. Not a normal human being thing.

I don’t agree...while I agree with you on self defense, I can never condone vigilantism. It is lawlessness at best, and caused the deaths of thousands at worst. It is mob justice.

And now as the police stand down...........there is no justice..............when people are backed into a corner......with no where to run...........the shit WILL GET REAL...............BLM and the anarchist are pushing the envelope.............sooner or later the shit will explode.

 

[Tom Paine 1949]

A thoughtful article by a writer who apparently watched pretty much ALL the available internet videos of this tiny chaotic incident, and read and understandably overdosed on all the spin in the media:

On the Portland Beating: The Ubiquity of Phones is Arresting

Portland, Oregon It’s a weird position to find oneself in, a pacifist scanning video feeds for hours to detect “intentions of violence.” How is it that

www.counterpunch.org

 

[Dogmaphobe]

And yet, there has been violence and looting at a majority of BLM marches and protests from the beginning.

This is manifestly untrue, especially in regards to looting. Violence is what? Taking to the streets without a permit? Burning or overturning a garbage can? Throwing a firecracker? Official BLM protests at least don’t bring guns into state capitols!

But it is certainly true that unorganized or poorly organized demonstrations, especially at night, easily turn out of control. This seems to be a classic example of a chaotic bunch that split off from an organized protest. I know — as an old organizer and security monitor at anti-Vietnam War demos — how easy it is for a few assholes or a single individual to provoke serious violence, especially if tempers toward police are already high or police are acting unprofessionally, as they often enough were. There were no police in this case, but I’ve met real police infiltrators, confronted provocateurs and cowards who throw soda bottles at cops from safe spots behind crowds, and helped fight off attacks on peaceful demonstrators.

In the videos shown here, we see many of the apparently completely unofficial or self-designated security people and many ordinary street people trying to calm down a bad chaotic situation a few blocks from an official BLM protest (according to FOX). I agree the leaders of any “official” groups need to speak out loudly against this sort of thing (they usually do) and try to deal more effectively with troublemakers. But it ain’t easy to stop criminal types or professional provocateurs, or the occasional drunk or hyped up drug addict — believe you me.

All that said, I’ve heard of much worse beatings handed out by a crowd of drunken Irishmen outside a bar in Hell’s Kitchen, Manhattan, a block away from where I once lived. Glad the cops got this cowardly punk, though. One less troublemaker.

Well, that is one very strong voice in favor of the race-based beating of an innocent person, anyway.

Thanks for being so forthright in supporting it. I mean, he WAS a white devil, after all.

 

[Coyote]

A thoughtful article by a writer who apparently watched pretty much ALL the available internet videos of this tiny chaotic incident, and read and understandably overdosed on all the spin in the media:

On the Portland Beating: The Ubiquity of Phones is Arresting

Portland, Oregon It’s a weird position to find oneself in, a pacifist scanning video feeds for hours to detect “intentions of violence.” How is it that

www.counterpunch.org

That is a very grounding article...thanks for posting it.

....Is this a parable that shows the degree to which we willfully blur the boundaries between reality and spin because we believe, deep down, that our arguments will be lost if we don’t show allegiance to an absolute Us versus an absolute Them?

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Dogmaphobe — You are a lying sick piece of trash. Neither I nor the writer I linked to said or believe anything of the kind. You are lower than dogshit on the pavement ... which normal people avoid stepping on.

You CLEARLY diminished the nature of the attack in your second to last sentence.

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

And yet, there has been violence and looting at a majority of BLM marches and protests from the beginning.

This is manifestly untrue, especially in regards to looting.

I say it is manifestly true.

Violence is what? Taking to the streets without a permit? Burning or overturning a garbage can? Throwing a firecracker?

I don't need to tell you what violence is.

Official BLM protests at least don’t bring guns into state capitols!

No, but they will take over an entire section of a city and bring guns there against state and city firearm laws.

But it is certainly true that unorganized or poorly organized demonstrations, especially at night, easily turn out of control. This seems to be a classic example of a chaotic bunch that split off from an organized protest. I know — as an old organizer and security monitor at anti-Vietnam War demos — how easy it is for a few assholes or a single individual to provoke serious violence, especially if tempers toward police are already high or police are acting unprofessionally, as they often enough were. There were no police in this case, but I’ve met real police infiltrators, confronted provocateurs and cowards who throw soda bottles at cops from safe spots behind crowds, and helped fight off attacks on peaceful demonstrators.

In the videos shown here, we see many of the apparently completely unofficial or self-designated security people and many ordinary street people trying to calm down a bad chaotic situation a few blocks from an official BLM protest (according to FOX). I agree the leaders of any “official” groups need to speak out loudly against this sort of thing (they usually do) and try to deal more effectively with troublemakers. But it ain’t easy to stop criminal types or professional provocateurs, or the occasional drunk or hyped up drug addict — believe you me.

All that said, I’ve heard of much worse beatings handed out by a crowd of drunken Irishmen outside a bar in Hell’s Kitchen, Manhattan, a block away from where I once lived. Glad the cops got this cowardly punk, though. One less troublemaker.

I agree with much of what you say here but I have to point out that, even if there is no violence at a BLM march, some of the things they propose and say at these marches reek of unjust behavior. A BLM official organizer in Chicago, Ariel Atkins, recently said that looting is a form of reparations.

That sounds to me like BLM sanctions looting.

 

[iceberg]

Quite possible that the DA will drop the charges. They've dropped a lot of charges against this lot.

I wonder if the DA does that the people will start taking to vigilantism for self protection?

Vigilantism is just another word for mob justice. You know, like what this mob does.

It works...........and only is needed if the system of justice breaks down.....................and in DNC run places ordering police to stand down............and DA's that cherry pick what they will charge...........

This shit ends when these people get a taste of their own medicine........in other areas of the country they tried it........didn't turn out well for them.............because WHERE I COME FROM...........they get educated VERY QUICKLY.

No. It doesn’t work. It completely avoids the the law, the justice system, our right a jury trial, the protections and presumptions of innocence we are supposed to be granted.

Vigilantism is mob justice where the color of your skin is enough to prove tbe crime whether it is the by the mob who pulled a white man from a car or the men who followed, ambushed and shot a black man jogging in a white neighborhood.

Have to laugh though. Though you guys were the law and order folks...but I see far more posts advocating Violence, whether it is shooting protestors for trespassing or...vigilante “justice” from the right than I do from the left supporting Riots. Don’t see much support for that at all.

When the government through corruption, or incompetence, refuses to protect the people, the people WILL, protect themselves.

That is simple reality.


And why do you inject race into this? Race has NOTHING to do with desiring to protect your family.

Any one with a knowledge of history knows race has been a factor and outside of race. .many innocent people have been murdered by vigilante "justice". Who gives you tbe right to be judge jury and executioner? What if you are wrong about the person you execute or beat up? What makes you any different then than the man who pulled the guy from the car and meted out his version of "justice"? And by the way...I didnt bring race into it. It was ALREADY brought in when someone pointed out the victim was white and the assaulter black.

I have an extensive knowledge of histtory and the reality is the western vigilance committees were not racist in any way. The "victims" of their justice were overwhelmingly white.

I think instead of your very shallow history knowledge you should do some research on the subject. Elton mentioned the Sydney Ducks of San Francisco. These were 3,000 gang members, mainly from Australia, who during the 1850's would set fire to the neighborhoods of San Francisco and then loot them before the flames destroyed everything after the people who lived there had fled the flames. This went on for a number of years until the San Francisco vigilance committee formed and destroyed them.

No racism, just a bunch of hard working people who had had enough. Racism is the last cry of the ignorant. And that is born out by massive amounts of scholarly research that shows the western States vigilantes were far from racist.

YOU need to stop making ignorant claims.

Westwall. I AM aware of history. I did not BRING race into it. It was already there brought up SPECIFICALY by the poster who advocated retaliatory violence against blacks. Did you MISS that bit on your haste.

I do not CARE what the race is of either the victimq or perpetrator is becaise the end result is the same.

Your knowledge of history ought to show you that, historicaly, race was significant factor in a portion of vigilante "justice". You cant ignore. You also cant ignore the many innocent victims of this extra judicial violence.

Who are they accountable to?

Who determines guilt?

Because rumor has it that.....? Everyone knows...that guy was always kind of weird....he looks at kids funny...he must have...where there is smoke there is fire...it was on twitter...why dont the police do anything....we need to DO something!

For everything they were legitimately right as aggrieved citizens (if can ever call lawlessness legitimate) there are 20 or more innocent victims.

When you have someone advocating going after "negros" in retaliation for a black man pulling an innocent white man out of a car and beating him (which was said by another poster) ...then you are just another lawless mob, no different than the one you are condemning.

Your claim about race being a significant factor in vigilante justice is a LIE. A well proven lie. The KKK and their terrorist attacks against blacks is not what we are talking about. We are talking about civilians being FORCED to take the law into their own hands because the government won't do their job for whatever reason. I suggest you read a book called "Gunfighters, Highwaymen, and Vigilantes" it is a scholarly study of western violence, and vigilantism in the most violent city in the west. Bodie California.

That is just one scholarly look at vigilantism, and how all the things you have been told are an outright lie. There are many others. Like i said, I have been studying violence in general for a very long time. The people are getting fed up and the backlash is going to be terrible. You ask some valid questions, questions that you SHOULD be asking the authorities in those cities that are allowing the cities they supposedly protect, to burn.

And you allow yourself to paint a broad brush against anyone who is opposite you because of one racist jackass. BLM is CLEARLY racist and nary a peep from you.

Westwall, I am not broad brushing anything. And I am not talking about the kkk. I am talking ordinary people who THINK they are right and act on it, outside the law.

Once you start that....who determines guilt? And how? And what if they are wrong?

Can you address that?

It's pretty easy to determine guilt when a rioter is caught in the act, don't you think? It is easy to determine guilt when a person invades you home. Don't you think? it is easy to determine guilt when a person attacks someone and you have multiple videos to prove it. Don't you think?

If some asshole were to attack you for no apparent reason while we were walking our dogs together, I can assure you that i wouldn't wait for the DA to determine if he was guilty or not. i would DEFEND you from an attack. That is what is going to start happening. Some asshole, is going to try and burn some poor business persons building down, and he is going to shoot that asshole.

THAT is what the end result of this wholesale abandonment of the cities by the authorities is going to lead. And nowhere do we hear the Democrat establishment condemning these actions.

NO WHERE!

I dont agree that it is that easy to determine guilt, because people, ESPECIALLY in a mob (whether it is a mob rioting or a mob exacting justice on rioters) don't behave rationally.

And justice needs to be rational and unemotional. That is why we have trained law enforcement (and no, I am not anti police), courts, judges and juries.

You know how it worked with Ahmed Arbery? 3 "vigilantes" decided to take justice into their own hands because the decided this guy was responsjble for some robberies, they followed him, ambushed him, and in the encounter ended up killing him.

That is the other side of the vigilante coin you want to ignore.

Then shut the mob down. If we stop them from breaking 5he law, or simply arrest them when the do, then vigilantes are not needed.

Stop making excuses got the rioters and no appreciation shown for those simply tired of it.

 

[iceberg]

Quite possible that the DA will drop the charges. They've dropped a lot of charges against this lot.

Most of what is dropped are minor things that they can't really make stick, like disorderly conduct. Assault like this is a whole 'other level. It's like what happened in Charlottesville - a lot of the violence ended up not being prosecuted, but the guy that drove the truck into the crowd most certainly will be prosecuted. I think for the minor stuff - getting thrown in jail for the night is traumatic enough to make a lasting impression for many.

Never underestimate to ability of a liberal prosecutor or a biased, liberal-activist judge to exonerate a Marxist asshole for assault and battery...or even murder.

Bullshit.

But we just watched them do exactly that. How is it possible for you to WATCH it happen in front of you and not acknowledge that it is?

Can you give me an example?

Here you go. Three different cities, all Democrat DA's.

Portland's new DA will drop charges against HUNDREDS arrested in riots

People arrested in Portland since late May on non-violent misdemeanor charges during the protests that have racked Oregon´s largest city for more than two months won't be prosecuted.

www.dailymail.co.uk

Manhattan DA Cy Vance says he won’t prosecute low-level protest arrests

Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance announced Friday that his office won’t prosecute protesters for low-level offenses. Vance said in a statement that he won’t pursue raps involving…

nypost.com

Looters, rioters not being prosecuted by circuit attorney, says attorney general; Kim Gardner responds

St. Louis police arrested 36 people during violent protests. All have been released without criminal charges

www.ksdk.com

Arrest these lawbreakers and problem solved.

Period.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Quite possible that the DA will drop the charges. They've dropped a lot of charges against this lot.

Most of what is dropped are minor things that they can't really make stick, like disorderly conduct. Assault like this is a whole 'other level. It's like what happened in Charlottesville - a lot of the violence ended up not being prosecuted, but the guy that drove the truck into the crowd most certainly will be prosecuted. I think for the minor stuff - getting thrown in jail for the night is traumatic enough to make a lasting impression for many.

Never underestimate to ability of a liberal prosecutor or a biased, liberal-activist judge to exonerate a Marxist asshole for assault and battery...or even murder.

Bullshit.

But we just watched them do exactly that. How is it possible for you to WATCH it happen in front of you and not acknowledge that it is?

Can you give me an example?

Here you go. Three different cities, all Democrat DA's.

Portland's new DA will drop charges against HUNDREDS arrested in riots

People arrested in Portland since late May on non-violent misdemeanor charges during the protests that have racked Oregon´s largest city for more than two months won't be prosecuted.

www.dailymail.co.uk

Manhattan DA Cy Vance says he won’t prosecute low-level protest arrests

Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance announced Friday that his office won’t prosecute protesters for low-level offenses. Vance said in a statement that he won’t pursue raps involving…

nypost.com

Looters, rioters not being prosecuted by circuit attorney, says attorney general; Kim Gardner responds

St. Louis police arrested 36 people during violent protests. All have been released without criminal charges

www.ksdk.com

Arrest these lawbreakers and problem solved.

Period.

The problem in this is that they are leftists and the hive nind protects its own

Heck, here in this thread, we are being treated to propaganda from the hate site called counterpunch. I am VERY familiar with it as many of the most extreme anti-american radicals liked to reference it to show their support for Islamic terrorism at a forum I frequented around 2001.

 

[westwall]

westwall...are we talking about two different things?

Self defense (or immediate defense of another)...

Or..taking the law into your own hands and meting out justice?

Because imo those are two different things. The first, I agree with you on and the law recognizes it as valid. That is not vigilantism.

Vigilantism begins with self defense. When the State refuses to defend the people, the people are going to defends themselves. Then, if the State CONTINUES to do nothing, the vigilantes will mete out justice. They will do so under control however. Your interpretation of vigilante justice is completely wrong. In all the cases in the west where it was used, the accused was duly tried, had a jury determine guilt, and then was summarily hanged for the crimes they were convicted of. The vigilantes rose up ONLY as a last resort.

They then disbanded. That was true in all cases. Unlike what progressives claim, the regular people are not the bloodthirsty mob you claim them to be. They are NOT the BLM assholes who are doing exactly that! That sort of behavior is a LEFTIST thing. Not a normal human being thing.

I don’t agree...while I agree with you on self defense, I can never condone vigilantism. It is lawlessness at best, and caused the deaths of thousands at worst. It is mob justice.

What do you think is going to happen when the rioters continue to wreak havoc without consequence. Human nature tells us that if they suffer no consequences, they will escalate. How many murders do they have to commit before you start paying attention?

 

[Dogmaphobe]

westwall...are we talking about two different things?

Self defense (or immediate defense of another)...

Or..taking the law into your own hands and meting out justice?

Because imo those are two different things. The first, I agree with you on and the law recognizes it as valid. That is not vigilantism.

Vigilantism begins with self defense. When the State refuses to defend the people, the people are going to defends themselves. Then, if the State CONTINUES to do nothing, the vigilantes will mete out justice. They will do so under control however. Your interpretation of vigilante justice is completely wrong. In all the cases in the west where it was used, the accused was duly tried, had a jury determine guilt, and then was summarily hanged for the crimes they were convicted of. The vigilantes rose up ONLY as a last resort.

They then disbanded. That was true in all cases. Unlike what progressives claim, the regular people are not the bloodthirsty mob you claim them to be. They are NOT the BLM assholes who are doing exactly that! That sort of behavior is a LEFTIST thing. Not a normal human being thing.

I don’t agree...while I agree with you on self defense, I can never condone vigilantism. It is lawlessness at best, and caused the deaths of thousands at worst. It is mob justice.

What do you think is going to happen when the rioters continue to wreak havoc without consequence. Human nature tells us that if they suffer no consequences, they will escalate. How murders do they have to commit before you start paying attention?

I have raised rwo children to become fine adults and always followed the motto "do not reward bad behavior".

Right now, the democrat party is doing just that with all these thugs who refuse to become responsible adults

 

[flacaltenn]

This is manifestly untrue, especially in regards to looting. Violence is what? Taking to the streets without a permit? Burning or overturning a garbage can? Throwing a firecracker? Official BLM protests at least don’t bring guns into state capitols!

How about a Portland City Council that AIDS AND ABETS 90 nights of violent arsonists terrorizing any street they choose to pick and DEMANDING their police force NOT be in the vicinity to enforce public safety.. YOU should be appalled as any sane or rational person should be appalled at this stupidity.. Especially when deaths or injuries occur and THEN expect to get their "defunded police" to go in AFTER the rioters have the UPPER HAND and injure a half dozen cops picking up the dead and wounded..

By CONDONING these 3 months of lawlessness, $MILLIONS a night in property damage, lost business, and removing "KILL BEZOS" and "TORCH STARBUCKS" graffiti, broken security cameras, PILLAGED POLICE and FEDERAL facilities -- they are giving BLM "the good part" a bad name..

I heard the victim tonight interviewed tonight. He wasn't concerned with burning trash or fireworks. He's mad at Portland mayor/city council.. And he doesn't LIKE Portland anymore.. How many more months will it take before the businesses and residents FLEE a city with an AUTHORIZED terrorist army running the streets at night at their will??

You can chuckle and cackle all ya want.. But when the bill comes due, it's NOT gonna be funny for Seattle. Portland, LA, D.C., Chicago and NYC...

All this snark from your author about "Repubs having to resolve the fact that he was attempting to rescue a trans woman" is just more political BS... It comes down to dangerously inept muni govts who think they are on the RIGHT SIDE of the revolution, but are BEEFING UP their PERSONAL security details --- just in case...

Don't need snark.. Need adults that think about consequences of their actions...

 

[westwall]

This is manifestly untrue, especially in regards to looting. Violence is what? Taking to the streets without a permit? Burning or overturning a garbage can? Throwing a firecracker? Official BLM protests at least don’t bring guns into state capitols!

How about a Portland City Council that AIDS AND ABETS 90 nights of violent arsonists terrorizing any street they choose to pick and DEMANDING their police force NOT be in the vicinity to enforce public safety.. YOU should be appalled as any sane or rational person should be appalled at this stupidity.. Especially when deaths or injuries occur and THEN expect to get their "defunded police" to go in AFTER the rioters have the UPPER HAND and injure a half dozen cops picking up the dead and wounded..

By CONDONING these 3 months of lawlessness, $MILLIONS a night in property damage, lost business, and removing "KILL BEZOS" and "TORCH STARBUCKS" graffiti, broken security cameras, PILLAGED POLICE and FEDERAL facilities -- they are giving BLM "the good part" a bad name..

I heard the victim tonight interviewed tonight. He wasn't concerned with burning trash or fireworks. He's mad at Portland mayor/city council.. And he doesn't LIKE Portland anymore.. How many more months will it take before the businesses and residents FLEE a city with an AUTHORIZED terrorist army running the streets at night at their will??

You can chuckle and cackle all ya want.. But when the bill comes due, it's NOT gonna be funny for Seattle. Portland, LA, D.C., Chicago and NYC...

All this snark from your author about "Repubs having to resolve the fact that he was attempting to rescue a trans woman" is just more political BS... It comes down to dangerously inept muni govts who think they are on the RIGHT SIDE of the revolution, but are BEEFING UP their PERSONAL security details --- just in case...

Don't need snark.. Need adults that think about consequences of their actions...

Amen to that. More and more we are seeing that the real authoritarians, are the Democrat mayors and governors.

 

[iceberg]

westwall...are we talking about two different things?

Self defense (or immediate defense of another)...

Or..taking the law into your own hands and meting out justice?

Because imo those are two different things. The first, I agree with you on and the law recognizes it as valid. That is not vigilantism.

Vigilantism begins with self defense. When the State refuses to defend the people, the people are going to defends themselves. Then, if the State CONTINUES to do nothing, the vigilantes will mete out justice. They will do so under control however. Your interpretation of vigilante justice is completely wrong. In all the cases in the west where it was used, the accused was duly tried, had a jury determine guilt, and then was summarily hanged for the crimes they were convicted of. The vigilantes rose up ONLY as a last resort.

They then disbanded. That was true in all cases. Unlike what progressives claim, the regular people are not the bloodthirsty mob you claim them to be. They are NOT the BLM assholes who are doing exactly that! That sort of behavior is a LEFTIST thing. Not a normal human being thing.

I don’t agree...while I agree with you on self defense, I can never condone vigilantism. It is lawlessness at best, and caused the deaths of thousands at worst. It is mob justice.

What do you think is going to happen when the rioters continue to wreak havoc without consequence. Human nature tells us that if they suffer no consequences, they will escalate. How many murders do they have to commit before you start paying attention?

Being really mad is no excuse to break laws and being emotionally imbalanced doesn't buy you a grace period.

 

[Coyote]

westwall...are we talking about two different things?

Self defense (or immediate defense of another)...

Or..taking the law into your own hands and meting out justice?

Because imo those are two different things. The first, I agree with you on and the law recognizes it as valid. That is not vigilantism.

Vigilantism begins with self defense. When the State refuses to defend the people, the people are going to defends themselves. Then, if the State CONTINUES to do nothing, the vigilantes will mete out justice. They will do so under control however. Your interpretation of vigilante justice is completely wrong. In all the cases in the west where it was used, the accused was duly tried, had a jury determine guilt, and then was summarily hanged for the crimes they were convicted of. The vigilantes rose up ONLY as a last resort.

They then disbanded. That was true in all cases. Unlike what progressives claim, the regular people are not the bloodthirsty mob you claim them to be. They are NOT the BLM assholes who are doing exactly that! That sort of behavior is a LEFTIST thing. Not a normal human being thing.

I don’t agree...while I agree with you on self defense, I can never condone vigilantism. It is lawlessness at best, and caused the deaths of thousands at worst. It is mob justice.

What do you think is going to happen when the rioters continue to wreak havoc without consequence. Human nature tells us that if they suffer no consequences, they will escalate. How many murders do they have to commit before you start paying attention?

Who says it is without consequence? Most of this is occurring in a very small areas (though the RW media insists entire cities are burning and people everywhere being murdered) - worst have been charged and will be prosecuted. The man who pulled the guy from his car and attacked him is in jail (and apparently has a record of prior violence).

Shooting is not an acceptable consequence for disorderly conduct.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

This is manifestly untrue, especially in regards to looting. Violence is what? Taking to the streets without a permit? Burning or overturning a garbage can? Throwing a firecracker? Official BLM protests at least don’t bring guns into state capitols!

How about a Portland City Council that AIDS AND ABETS 90 nights of violent arsonists terrorizing any street they choose to pick and DEMANDING their police force NOT be in the vicinity to enforce public safety.. YOU should be appalled as any sane or rational person should be appalled at this stupidity.. Especially when deaths or injuries occur and THEN expect to get their "defunded police" to go in AFTER the rioters have the UPPER HAND and injure a half dozen cops picking up the dead and wounded..

By CONDONING these 3 months of lawlessness, $MILLIONS a night in property damage, lost business, and removing "KILL BEZOS" and "TORCH STARBUCKS" graffiti, broken security cameras, PILLAGED POLICE and FEDERAL facilities -- they are giving BLM "the good part" a bad name..

I heard the victim tonight interviewed tonight. He wasn't concerned with burning trash or fireworks. He's mad at Portland mayor/city council.. And he doesn't LIKE Portland anymore.. How many more months will it take before the businesses and residents FLEE a city with an AUTHORIZED terrorist army running the streets at night at their will??

You can chuckle and cackle all ya want.. But when the bill comes due, it's NOT gonna be funny for Seattle. Portland, LA, D.C., Chicago and NYC...

All this snark from your author about "Repubs having to resolve the fact that he was attempting to rescue a trans woman" is just more political BS... It comes down to dangerously inept muni govts who think they are on the RIGHT SIDE of the revolution, but are BEEFING UP their PERSONAL security details --- just in case...

Don't need snark.. Need adults that think about consequences of their actions...

Are you familiar with counterpunch?


It is the website that gives a platform to antisemites, terrorist supporters and radical leftists of all stripes. I don't know if you remember Ward Churchill and his "little Eichmans" comment to justify the bombing of the world trade Center, but that is indicative of its content.