7 ms·

Ironically, giving ideological ammo to the protestors that the system is rotten to the core and needs to be completely replaced. Unmarked rented vehicles kidnap

Ironically, giving ideological ammo to the protestors that the system is rotten to the core and needs to be completely replaced. Unmarked rented vehicles kidnapping protestors that lead to interrogations in a secret offsite location sounds a lot like the Stasi or Nazi germany. No one should be ok with this, ever. Where are the "second amendments against tyranny folks"? Oh, they probably support the police. Nice to see that when democracy is under attack, it's fine if they're just attacking the other side. An alternate sources: https://www.newsweek.com/trump-accused-deploying-secret-police-portland-political-stunt-1518595 https://www.newsweek.com/trump-accused-deploying-secret-poli... https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-53453077 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-53453077 Seems like it's largely to shore up Trump's flagging poll numbers as the hope is that it plays well on Fox News. Feels like a fascist Nixonian "law and order" political calculation but like most Trumpian endeavors it will probably backfire. edit: Let's put this another way. If these were the anti-mask protestors or the anti-lockdown protestors how do you think this would go down? Do you think elements on the right would be okay with this? My feeling is that it would be a shit storm. But because it's happening to "left wing thugs", "looters" and "antifa" it's ok right? Whether you believe these people have committed crimes or not, having secret police round them up is completely unamerican. If they committed crimes, serve up formal arrest warrants, give them their Miranda rights and their day in front of a judge with lawyer representation. Democratic values and human rights only exist for those who political positions we agree with, right? I forgot there was a clause in the constitution that allowed you to just skip articles because it happened to people you don't like /s

whoseonthat 6y ago
Is the sentiment that the system is working or at least improving in the right ways?
pravus 6y ago
We were told to shut up and put away our guns because these things could never happen...
- jorblumesea 6y ago
  Well if you don't use it to defend democratic values then I'd say you don't deserve those guns. The 2nd amendment was literally a hedge against these situations but many of those strong believers in the second amendment are conspicuously absent and probably side with the right wing fascist elements. Unfortunately many if not most gun owners seem to be entirely ok with eroding American democratic values and freedom so long as the other side "gets what's coming to them".
  - whatthesmack 6y ago
    Yeah, because we’re tired of mayors and governors letting the real fascists own the streets, causing untold violence and damage. If those folks are breaking the law, it should be no surprise when they’re placed under arrest.
  - seiferteric 6y ago
    Getting really tired of these stupid strawman arguments being used to push an agenda that has nothing to do with current events. Why are you even talking about the 2nd amendment here? Why do you assume people that support the 2nd amendment are all right wing fascists?
- jfengel 6y ago
  Just out of curiosity, if the next headline is that the protesters have shot back at police or border patrol rather than be shoved into a van, what is your likely response?
- ntsplnkv2 6y ago
  Gun owners are just as likely to be on tyranny's side as against it. If it was truly about freedom and anti-authoritarianism not a single gun rights voter should be for the actions taken by the federal government in Portland. They would be against Trump suggesting to send in the army - in fact, they would show force against these things - not against masks.
- krapp 6y ago
  But you didn't. You replied to those people that they could pry your guns from your cold, dead hands and they would be the first against the wall when the revolution came. You told us you and your guns were the only things keeping the only free state in existence truly free. You waxed poetic about watering the tree of liberty with the blood of tyrants. You called anyone who believed in any form of gun control a coward and traitor, clucking with disappointment and condescending to them that "Those who would give up essential Liberty to purchase a bit of safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." And you were happy to rise up in arms over something as trivial as local quarantine ordinances requiring wearing masks in public or limiting your God given right to go to Applebees' any time you wanted. But when it comes to actual secret police snatching people up off the street into unmarked vans, I guess it's fair game as long as it's "leftists" getting snatched.
_red 6y ago
"Lets tear down all confederate statues!" AND "My states rights!!!!" Do you think anyone even processes the irony or has median IQ fallen that its now an impossible realization?
mindslight 6y ago
Yes there is an apparent a correlation between groups, at least with how mass media portrays things. But at this point we need less animosity between libertarian sects with different backgrounds and different immediate concerns. Rather than continuing to alienate them for being wrong, figure out how to make friends with those "second amendments against tyranny folks".
itsoktocry 6y ago
>Where are the "second amendments against tyranny folks"? Not supporting the people who blame them for violence and want to take their guns away. Does that surprise you? Perhaps there is a lesson here somewhere.
- jorblumesea 6y ago
  I think my point was that it was entirely a bad faith argument. They never cared about preserving freedoms, American democracy or the values that this country stands for. It was just a political tool in a cultural war chess game. It was to drive gun sales and get people out to vote. They talk about having these guns to stand up to government overreach, preserving liberty and freedoms etc. Then when we have literal secret police in American cities taking away the very ideas of this country, they are nowhere to be found. They never believed it in the first place, or their interpretation is so skewed it's meaningless. If your defense of freedoms or enforcement of American values is selective or entirely based on political ideology, what you actually believe is nothing at all.
  - itsoktocry 6y ago
    >They never cared about preserving freedoms, American democracy or the values that this country stands for. I disagree, they do care about personal liberty and safety. If you are infringing on their rights, you aren't an ally. >They never believed it in the first place, or their interpretation is so skewed it's meaningless. This argument is so backwards it's hard for me to grasp. You have people saying "Ban guns! Ban guns!". Then the moment there's government overreach they cry, "where are the people with guns to defend us???" I can tell you one thing: if the secret police were snatching 2A advocates off the streets, there would be a shooting war. This is why they want their guns, and right now, I'm sure they're happy they have them.
    - jorblumesea 6y ago
      > If you are infringing on their rights, you aren't an ally. Then they never cared about the values they hold dear. If you believe in "Freedoms" but those freedoms are entirely selective based on political ideology or convenience you believe in nothing. The constitution has no "rights whenever you feel like it" clause. > "where are the people with guns to defend us???" I'm actually not saying that at all. I'm not asking for anyone to defend anyone else. I'm noting the irony of how strong the arguments for the second amendment were mostly based around "standing up to government" and how much silence there is about very obvious and illegal government overreach. The exact same behavior that the 2nd amendment proponents literally said that's why they own guns. It's just political hypocrisy and I'm pointing it out. They were certainly happy to show up in armed groups when their local bar was closed, but snatching people in unmarked vehicles to be taken to secret detention centers is ok? I actually do not want 2nd amendment people to get involved at all, I feel they aren't well trained, they are mostly unequipped to handle the situation and based on most 2nd amendment people I know, I would not actually want them near any volatile situation. Rights for me and not for thee I guess.
crocodiletears 6y ago
It's hard to get conservatives and libertarians riled up about a town that gave stand-down orders to its police force so that the local antifa chapter could enact political violence on its opponents more or less unadulterated. Even if many of its targets deserved every bit of trouble they got. The conservatives were always hypocrites in this regard. The Libertarians generally just don't see the point of looking out for regions where they perceive that most people would turn around and restrict their liberties the moment they were off the defensive. Doesn't mean it's right, but everyone who cared about the powers that made this shit legal (I almost guarantee many of these poor souls will be charged with terrorism), have long since become sick of being told they're paranoid, resigned themselves to our current trajectory, and are just sitting back to watch the fireworks,
- ZoomerCretin 6y ago
  > a town that gave stand-down orders to its police force so that the local antifa chapter could enact political violence on its opponents Do you have a source for any of this? It seems really far-fetched.
  - crocodiletears 6y ago
    Wheeler himself has denied it to be the case, however police actions and statements have strongly hinted it to be the case. I believe right-wing media vastly blows the degree to-which this policy is in effect. The washington Times cites an incident where the police involve themselves at moments of mutual violence, but conducted no arrests. Portland's been a flashpoint for extremist violence for years. 2018: https://washingtontimes.com/news/2018/oct/14/ted-wheeler-portland-mayor-stands-decision-allow-a/ https://washingtontimes.com/news/2018/oct/14/ted-wheeler-por... 2019, more explicitly, via the president of the Portland Police Association: https://katu.com/news/local/mayor-wheeler-portland-police-association-pres-respond-to-violence-at-protests https://katu.com/news/local/mayor-wheeler-portland-police-as... "It’s time for our Mayor to do two things: tell both ANTIFA and Proud Boys that our City will not accept violence in our City and remove the handcuffs from our officers and let them stop the violence through strong and swift enforcement action. Enough is enough."
- 6y ago

whoseonthat 6y ago

Is the sentiment that the system is working or at least improving in the right ways?

pravus 6y ago

We were told to shut up and put away our guns because these things could never happen...

jorblumesea 6y ago
Well if you don't use it to defend democratic values then I'd say you don't deserve those guns. The 2nd amendment was literally a hedge against these situations but many of those strong believers in the second amendment are conspicuously absent and probably side with the right wing fascist elements. Unfortunately many if not most gun owners seem to be entirely ok with eroding American democratic values and freedom so long as the other side "gets what's coming to them".
- whatthesmack 6y ago
  Yeah, because we’re tired of mayors and governors letting the real fascists own the streets, causing untold violence and damage. If those folks are breaking the law, it should be no surprise when they’re placed under arrest.
- seiferteric 6y ago
  Getting really tired of these stupid strawman arguments being used to push an agenda that has nothing to do with current events. Why are you even talking about the 2nd amendment here? Why do you assume people that support the 2nd amendment are all right wing fascists?
jfengel 6y ago
Just out of curiosity, if the next headline is that the protesters have shot back at police or border patrol rather than be shoved into a van, what is your likely response?
ntsplnkv2 6y ago
Gun owners are just as likely to be on tyranny's side as against it. If it was truly about freedom and anti-authoritarianism not a single gun rights voter should be for the actions taken by the federal government in Portland. They would be against Trump suggesting to send in the army - in fact, they would show force against these things - not against masks.
krapp 6y ago
But you didn't. You replied to those people that they could pry your guns from your cold, dead hands and they would be the first against the wall when the revolution came. You told us you and your guns were the only things keeping the only free state in existence truly free. You waxed poetic about watering the tree of liberty with the blood of tyrants. You called anyone who believed in any form of gun control a coward and traitor, clucking with disappointment and condescending to them that "Those who would give up essential Liberty to purchase a bit of safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." And you were happy to rise up in arms over something as trivial as local quarantine ordinances requiring wearing masks in public or limiting your God given right to go to Applebees' any time you wanted. But when it comes to actual secret police snatching people up off the street into unmarked vans, I guess it's fair game as long as it's "leftists" getting snatched.

_red 6y ago

"Lets tear down all confederate statues!" AND "My states rights!!!!" Do you think anyone even processes the irony or has median IQ fallen that its now an impossible realization?

mindslight 6y ago

Yes there is an apparent a correlation between groups, at least with how mass media portrays things. But at this point we need less animosity between libertarian sects with different backgrounds and different immediate concerns. Rather than continuing to alienate them for being wrong, figure out how to make friends with those "second amendments against tyranny folks".

itsoktocry 6y ago

>Where are the "second amendments against tyranny folks"? Not supporting the people who blame them for violence and want to take their guns away. Does that surprise you? Perhaps there is a lesson here somewhere.

jorblumesea 6y ago
I think my point was that it was entirely a bad faith argument. They never cared about preserving freedoms, American democracy or the values that this country stands for. It was just a political tool in a cultural war chess game. It was to drive gun sales and get people out to vote. They talk about having these guns to stand up to government overreach, preserving liberty and freedoms etc. Then when we have literal secret police in American cities taking away the very ideas of this country, they are nowhere to be found. They never believed it in the first place, or their interpretation is so skewed it's meaningless. If your defense of freedoms or enforcement of American values is selective or entirely based on political ideology, what you actually believe is nothing at all.
- itsoktocry 6y ago
  >They never cared about preserving freedoms, American democracy or the values that this country stands for. I disagree, they do care about personal liberty and safety. If you are infringing on their rights, you aren't an ally. >They never believed it in the first place, or their interpretation is so skewed it's meaningless. This argument is so backwards it's hard for me to grasp. You have people saying "Ban guns! Ban guns!". Then the moment there's government overreach they cry, "where are the people with guns to defend us???" I can tell you one thing: if the secret police were snatching 2A advocates off the streets, there would be a shooting war. This is why they want their guns, and right now, I'm sure they're happy they have them.
  - jorblumesea 6y ago
    > If you are infringing on their rights, you aren't an ally. Then they never cared about the values they hold dear. If you believe in "Freedoms" but those freedoms are entirely selective based on political ideology or convenience you believe in nothing. The constitution has no "rights whenever you feel like it" clause. > "where are the people with guns to defend us???" I'm actually not saying that at all. I'm not asking for anyone to defend anyone else. I'm noting the irony of how strong the arguments for the second amendment were mostly based around "standing up to government" and how much silence there is about very obvious and illegal government overreach. The exact same behavior that the 2nd amendment proponents literally said that's why they own guns. It's just political hypocrisy and I'm pointing it out. They were certainly happy to show up in armed groups when their local bar was closed, but snatching people in unmarked vehicles to be taken to secret detention centers is ok? I actually do not want 2nd amendment people to get involved at all, I feel they aren't well trained, they are mostly unequipped to handle the situation and based on most 2nd amendment people I know, I would not actually want them near any volatile situation. Rights for me and not for thee I guess.

crocodiletears 6y ago

It's hard to get conservatives and libertarians riled up about a town that gave stand-down orders to its police force so that the local antifa chapter could enact political violence on its opponents more or less unadulterated. Even if many of its targets deserved every bit of trouble they got. The conservatives were always hypocrites in this regard. The Libertarians generally just don't see the point of looking out for regions where they perceive that most people would turn around and restrict their liberties the moment they were off the defensive. Doesn't mean it's right, but everyone who cared about the powers that made this shit legal (I almost guarantee many of these poor souls will be charged with terrorism), have long since become sick of being told they're paranoid, resigned themselves to our current trajectory, and are just sitting back to watch the fireworks,

ZoomerCretin 6y ago
> a town that gave stand-down orders to its police force so that the local antifa chapter could enact political violence on its opponents Do you have a source for any of this? It seems really far-fetched.
- crocodiletears 6y ago
  Wheeler himself has denied it to be the case, however police actions and statements have strongly hinted it to be the case. I believe right-wing media vastly blows the degree to-which this policy is in effect. The washington Times cites an incident where the police involve themselves at moments of mutual violence, but conducted no arrests. Portland's been a flashpoint for extremist violence for years. 2018: https://washingtontimes.com/news/2018/oct/14/ted-wheeler-portland-mayor-stands-decision-allow-a/ https://washingtontimes.com/news/2018/oct/14/ted-wheeler-por... 2019, more explicitly, via the president of the Portland Police Association: https://katu.com/news/local/mayor-wheeler-portland-police-association-pres-respond-to-violence-at-protests https://katu.com/news/local/mayor-wheeler-portland-police-as... "It’s time for our Mayor to do two things: tell both ANTIFA and Proud Boys that our City will not accept violence in our City and remove the handcuffs from our officers and let them stop the violence through strong and swift enforcement action. Enough is enough."
6y ago