'Take your a** home!' Heavily-armed black rights groups march through Austin chanting anti-illegal m

Stating that they will defend themselves if attacked is not advocating for violence. Rather it is an attempt by the protestors to prevent their being the victim of violence. The protest was peaceful and obviously intended to be peaceful. The presence of children in the march is perhaps a clue to this fact. The carrying of guns was simply to demonstrate that the 2nd amendment applies to black people. Why is it that liberals are so outraged when people don't "kow tow" to authority? What exactly is your problem with these people exercising their Constitutional rights?

 

or a NATO soldier (USA army). Many ppl around the world consider Americans to be terrorists. Ukraine Azov are terrorists yet USA is allies of them.

Moral of the story, using the phrase "terrorist" ever other word doesn't make it any more real. Let's stop being lazy and treat each group as different. Otherwise we can all start lumping USA in there with alquaida etc.

 

What a HILARIOUSLY inconvenient situation for the left! It poses quite the intersectional problem! Do they attack the black people for what they have said about illegal aliens, or do they defend them?

 

So you DON'T think that the news would have been wall to wall if it was the 'MAGA crowd?' Seriously?

Oh, so it's NOT a humanitarian disaster? Seriously?

 

So you're okay with "Illegals go home?"

 

Okay, so you have no thoughts on the actual story.

 

We certainly think that the media will be. Any time you want to link to a left wing media outlet reporting on this story, you can do so. But I won't be holding my breath.

 

I wanna see Margot Robbie in that bikini.

 

What does the media have to do with me or anything i believe?

 

Not a one... I'm just an 'adoring fan' of the OP and wanted to give him a shoutout...

If I were to bother looking into it, I'm positive I would find many gross exaggerations and mistruths in the OP, like usual, but this topic doesn't interest me all that much...

Sorry..

 

I don't think 'shoot back' is a peaceful message when chanted by a group of armed individuals. Nor is it a good message for society as a whole. I don't want to live in a society that advocates for gun fights with police.

 

Interesting...
That's good to know. So just standing by, or failing to snitch is not contributing to the conspiracy?

 

It was political theatre.

 

Zero relevance or relation, nor is that an accurate assessment.

 

Nonsense.

(c) The constitutional right to bear arms in public for self-defense is not “a second-class right, subject to an entirely different body of rules than the other Bill of Rights guarantees.” McDonald, 561 U. S., at 780 (plurality opinion). The exercise of other constitutional rights does not require individuals to demonstrate to government officers some special need. The Second Amendment right to carry arms in public for self-defense is no different. New York’s proper-cause requirement violates the Fourteenth Amendment by preventing law-abiding citizens with ordinary self-defense needs from exercising their right to keep and bear arms in public.

There's noting here about the vagueness of the NY statute; the requirement to show some special need itself is the infringement.

Clearly , it does not mean what -you- think it means.

 

Your comment has zero relevance to my response to another poster.

 

Why did you feel the need to post the below if nobody mentioned you or what you believe?

 

Well OF COURSE it doesn't interest you! The people attacking illegal immigrants aliens are not a bunch of Trump supporters!

 

Because i felt like it.

It doesn't have anything to do with the media, unless you believe that "we" in my post includes the media.

 

You realize what we're talking about here right?
Just being in the car doesn't make you guilty of ****. You have to take concrete, willing steps in a conspiracy. You can't always bail out of a car going high speed and you have no actual duty to intervene physically to stop any crime in progress.
You also have no duty to narc when doing so might place you in legal jeopardy, and no outright duty to volunteer any information to anyone.

Specifically: When a bit of political performance theatre occurs, you saying "i support their right to protest" does not make you a member of the ****ing conspiracy.

 

You realize what we're talking about here right?
Just being in the car doesn't make you guilty of ****. You have to take concrete, willing steps in a conspiracy. You can't always bail out of a car going high speed and you have no actual duty to intervene physically to stop any crime in progress.
You also have no duty to narc when doing so might place you in legal jeopardy, and no outright duty to volunteer any information to anyone.

Specifically: When a bit of political performance theatre occurs, you saying "i support their right to protest" does not make you a member of the ****ing conspiracy.

^ THIS is what we're talking about.

 

Yes it does.

 

I saw that, but I was applying my question to the car analogy. I guess his stance fits too.
It goes with the saying that evil triumphs when good people do nothing, support of dumb violent ideology makes that person...well dumb.

The act of protesting to support a dumb ideology, and supporting that protest could be considered conspiring if the dumb ideology predictably leads to violence imo.

There are some states with the good Samaritan laws..How that applies to someone for instance supporting a school shooter, or an armed protest threatening people is relevant. I think your position is arguable, but in practice, iv seen trying that line of defense fail.

 

Political theater with underlying tones of violence. You may be okay with that - I'm not.

 

You probably think Mandela was a terrorist too? ??