3 ms·

These people are a lost cause. There was a vicious attack on an unassuming black woman in LA yesterday where more than 20 trump supporters held her down and pun

These people are a lost cause. There was a vicious attack on an unassuming black woman in LA yesterday where more than 20 trump supporters held her down and punched and maced her. These people are terrorists and should be dealt with accordingly.

flowerlad 6y ago
LA Times story on this: https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2021-01-08/black-woman-describes-terrifying-attack-by-trump-mob-in-l-a-im-thinking-im-dead https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2021-01-08/black-wo...
- throwaway201103 6y ago
  That's a very disturbing read.
45t3424rgf 6y ago
So? Just because a few people did something unacceptable doesn't all of them are like this. A while back a child got killed named Cannon Hinnant by a black person for no reason does that mean we should label all blacks as a terrorist?
- mcphage 6y ago
  And what happened to the killer?
- virtual_void 6y ago
  When people use violence in the name of a cause then i think the cap fits. Also i think you’re making a false equivalence here. There is a not insignificant fraction of them willing to be violent because because they either don’t (or don’t want to) understand how democracy works. I think it’s fine to lump those people together as domestic terrorists.
  - adnzzzzZ 6y ago
    >I think it’s fine to lump those people together as domestic terrorists. You can do that, but after many people in power and including in this site supported BLM riots earlier this year this rings hollow. It's clear most people don't care about violence being a limit given that violence was used tremendously throughout the entire year in all those protests and supporting them was the trendy position among the elites, that now suddenly decided violence must be opposed at all costs and those who support it must be terrorists. Give me a break. Call it for what it is, when one side uses violence it's good, when the other uses it it's bad, because this is a battle, and in a battle all that matters is punishing your enemies and rewarding your friends. I'm glad that this is becoming more and more clear as time passes and all pretense of principles is being dropped, and anyone with any sense can see that this is true.
    - virtual_void 6y ago
      This is still false equivalence. BLM Didn't use violence to achieve their goals. Quite the opposite they were consistently attacked by police dressed up like the army, heaving people off the streets. Where were the police in DC? This wasn’t a protest it was a violent attempt to overthrow. Call it what it is indeed.
      - adnzzzzZ 6y ago
        >BLM Didn't use violence to achieve their goals. I don't know how you can reconcile cities being burned, statues toppled, police stations being overtaken, parts of a city being declared an autonomous zone with "violence wasn't used" but whatever, discussion is clearly pointless. I will re-state my claim: this is a battle, and in a battle all that matters is punishing your enemies and rewarding your friends. When you defend the BLM riots yet condemn this one you're engaging in that behavior. You can disagree with me all you want but that's the truth to anyone who has any sense.
        virtual_void 6y ago
        Perhaps saying there was no violence is overstating it but it was a very different scale with very different intent abhorrent in either case. People are undoubtedly angry because they are seeking to be treated equally. To not be murdered by the police. There’s still such an astonishing amount of injustice and yet they didn’t try to overthrow the government. The crux of my argument is that these two groups are not comparable. One seeks equality and the other seeks to go against democracy and attempt a coup. This is what i mean by false equivalence.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
s1artibartfast 6y ago
I see a of comments like this expressing frustration, but find them confusing. They are framed as an opinion or position, but don't contain any real substance. Who exactly are these people? What exactly do you mean by "to be a "lost cause"? What does it mean to be treated like a terrorist?

flowerlad 6y ago

LA Times story on this: https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2021-01-08/black-woman-describes-terrifying-attack-by-trump-mob-in-l-a-im-thinking-im-dead https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2021-01-08/black-wo...

throwaway201103 6y ago
That's a very disturbing read.

45t3424rgf 6y ago

So? Just because a few people did something unacceptable doesn't all of them are like this. A while back a child got killed named Cannon Hinnant by a black person for no reason does that mean we should label all blacks as a terrorist?

mcphage 6y ago
And what happened to the killer?
virtual_void 6y ago
When people use violence in the name of a cause then i think the cap fits. Also i think you’re making a false equivalence here. There is a not insignificant fraction of them willing to be violent because because they either don’t (or don’t want to) understand how democracy works. I think it’s fine to lump those people together as domestic terrorists.
- adnzzzzZ 6y ago
  >I think it’s fine to lump those people together as domestic terrorists. You can do that, but after many people in power and including in this site supported BLM riots earlier this year this rings hollow. It's clear most people don't care about violence being a limit given that violence was used tremendously throughout the entire year in all those protests and supporting them was the trendy position among the elites, that now suddenly decided violence must be opposed at all costs and those who support it must be terrorists. Give me a break. Call it for what it is, when one side uses violence it's good, when the other uses it it's bad, because this is a battle, and in a battle all that matters is punishing your enemies and rewarding your friends. I'm glad that this is becoming more and more clear as time passes and all pretense of principles is being dropped, and anyone with any sense can see that this is true.
  - virtual_void 6y ago
    This is still false equivalence. BLM Didn't use violence to achieve their goals. Quite the opposite they were consistently attacked by police dressed up like the army, heaving people off the streets. Where were the police in DC? This wasn’t a protest it was a violent attempt to overthrow. Call it what it is indeed.
    - adnzzzzZ 6y ago
      >BLM Didn't use violence to achieve their goals. I don't know how you can reconcile cities being burned, statues toppled, police stations being overtaken, parts of a city being declared an autonomous zone with "violence wasn't used" but whatever, discussion is clearly pointless. I will re-state my claim: this is a battle, and in a battle all that matters is punishing your enemies and rewarding your friends. When you defend the BLM riots yet condemn this one you're engaging in that behavior. You can disagree with me all you want but that's the truth to anyone who has any sense.
      - virtual_void 6y ago
        Perhaps saying there was no violence is overstating it but it was a very different scale with very different intent abhorrent in either case. People are undoubtedly angry because they are seeking to be treated equally. To not be murdered by the police. There’s still such an astonishing amount of injustice and yet they didn’t try to overthrow the government. The crux of my argument is that these two groups are not comparable. One seeks equality and the other seeks to go against democracy and attempt a coup. This is what i mean by false equivalence.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

s1artibartfast 6y ago

I see a of comments like this expressing frustration, but find them confusing. They are framed as an opinion or position, but don't contain any real substance. Who exactly are these people? What exactly do you mean by "to be a "lost cause"? What does it mean to be treated like a terrorist?