# Charlottesville killer James Fields found guilty of all charges, faces six life sentences



## Xzi (Dec 7, 2018)

http://www.nbc12.com/2018/12/07/man-who-plowed-into-charlottesville-crowd-found-guilty/

Not much to say about this one, justice served.  Glad the judge and jury didn't buy into flimsy excuses of self-defense.


----------



## smf (Dec 7, 2018)

He's obviously mentally ill, but you can't go round doing stuff like that.


----------



## gameboy (Dec 8, 2018)

all government propaganda


----------



## Xzi (Dec 8, 2018)

gameboy said:


> all government propaganda


The government propaganda was that there were "very fine people" on both sides of this killing.


----------



## smf (Dec 8, 2018)

Xzi said:


> The government propaganda was that there were "very fine people" on both sides of this killing.



On both sides of the violence, I don't think even he is dumb enough to think it was both sides of the killing.

And he may have a point, like there were fine people on both sides of world war 2. It doesn't mean that fighting against the far right is wrong.


----------



## Xzi (Dec 8, 2018)

smf said:


> On both sides of the violence, I don't think even he is dumb enough to think it was both sides of the killing.


It can be interpreted either way.  Since Trump never speaks in complete thoughts or sentences, we'll probably never know for sure.



smf said:


> And he may have a point, like there were fine people on both sides of world war 2.


Yikes, might want to re-think that statement.  The US has never been perfect by any measure, but at least we have yet to attempt genocide.  The only 'fine people' in the axis powers were those that refused to follow morally reprehensible orders, and those that tried to assist their fellow man without violence.


----------



## smf (Dec 8, 2018)

Xzi said:


> It can be interpreted either way.  Since Trump never speaks in complete thoughts or sentences, we'll probably never know for sure.



I'm not sure if he does that so he can "clarify" everything afterwards, or he's just dumb.



Xzi said:


> Yikes, might want to re-think that statement.  The US has never been perfect by any measure, but at least we have yet to attempt genocide.



You can't know that everyone who was on the other side supported genocide.

Like not all americans supported napalm in vietnam or nuclear bombs on japan etc.

Racism is an inherent human trait.


----------



## Xzi (Dec 8, 2018)

smf said:


> I'm not sure if he does that so he can "clarify" everything afterwards, or he's just dumb.


He never does come back to clarify previous statements, so it's likely the latter.



smf said:


> You can't know that everyone who was on the other side supported genocide.
> 
> Like not all americans supported napalm in vietnam or nuclear bombs on japan etc.


Yeah I elaborated a bit further on what I meant by that.


----------



## smf (Dec 8, 2018)

Xzi said:


> Yeah I elaborated a bit further on what I meant by that.



A lot of germans saw hitler in the same way americans see trump, they both promised to sort the country out because they were better than everyone else. Paraphrasing Stewart Lee. Not all the people that voted for hitler and trump were racists, some of them were cunts. But maybe they think they are nice people too & in some ways they probably are. But that is true for all cunts.


----------



## Xzi (Dec 8, 2018)

smf said:


> Racism is an inherent human trait.


I suppose I'd agree with that, but I'd also posit that some of us clearly have an easier time overcoming our baser instincts than others.  Not every state is Mississippi, after all.


----------



## smf (Dec 8, 2018)

Xzi said:


> I suppose I'd agree with that, but I'd also posit that some of us clearly have an easier time overcoming our baser instincts than others.  Not every state is Mississippi, after all.



It's practically impossible to overcome them completely, because it affects your perception in ways that you don't even notice.

It goes in both directions and it's harder to overcome them if you feel hard done by, which causes feedback into the system.

All you can do is make racism illegal and hope it all calms down. Free speech is highly overrated.


----------



## Navonod (Dec 8, 2018)

Bernie and Hillary supporters are the biggest cunts honestly.


----------



## kuwanger (Dec 8, 2018)

Xzi said:


> The US has never been perfect by any measure, but at least we have yet to attempt genocide.



I guess it depends on if you think the California Genocide counts.  There's also a lot of less direct acts that were definitely at least borderline genocide.  Having said that, yes, Germany went full-on genocide.  It's definitely hard to compare the systematic, industrial murder of millions to more general policy that may lead to the same end.  I'll just go as far as to say both were very, very wrong.


----------



## Arecaidian Fox (Dec 8, 2018)

Good, the man deserves to never set foot on free soil again. Fuck Nazis, fuck Trump.


----------



## Navonod (Dec 8, 2018)

Arecaidian Fox said:


> Good, the man deserves to never set foot on free soil again. Fuck Nazis, fuck Trump.


What did Trump have to do with anything? Other than being President?


----------



## smf (Dec 8, 2018)

DrGreed said:


> Bernie and Hillary supporters are the biggest cunts honestly.



You have some cognitive bias going on there.


----------



## Xzi (Dec 8, 2018)

DrGreed said:


> What did Trump have to do with anything? Other than being President?


Other than failing to condemn a murderer (biggest softball any president can get), he has nothing to do with this case.

Wouldn't be surprised to see Trump tweet some sort of defense of this guy after the guilty verdict, either.


----------



## Navonod (Dec 8, 2018)

smf said:


> You have some cognitive bias going on there.


Nice sarcasm I love it. But I would argue that we both have a bias here. But from what I've read and seen from the left is if they don't like something then they want it banned. If a righty doesn't like something then it doesn't bother them. Unless they are religious and don't like the gays. 

Being a gay person myself they do annoy me. But I don't see them as enemies. Just misinformed buttheads.


----------



## Viri (Dec 8, 2018)

I don't care how "mentally ill" you are, if you murder people, you deserve life in prison. No excuses.


----------



## smf (Dec 8, 2018)

DrGreed said:


> But from what I've read and seen from the left is if they don't like something then they want it banned.



That is pretty normal. You don't like murder, you ban it. You don't like rape, you ban it.

You're suggesting that there is something inherently wrong with the things they don't like, but that is subjective.



DrGreed said:


> If a righty doesn't like something then it doesn't bother them.



Like abortion?


----------



## Navonod (Dec 8, 2018)

Xzi said:


> Other than failing to condemn a murderer (biggest softball any president can get), he has nothing to do with this case.
> 
> Wouldn't be surprised to see Trump tweet some sort of defense of this guy after the guilty verdict, either.



Yeah. I don't believe Trump would defend a murderer.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------



smf said:


> That is pretty normal. You don't like murder, you ban it. You don't like rape, you ban it.
> 
> You're suggesting that there is something inherently wrong with the things they don't like, but that is subjective.
> 
> ...


I'm talking about video games and some words. Like t******. Anyone in there right mind argrees that murder and rape is wrong.


----------



## smf (Dec 8, 2018)

DrGreed said:


> I'm talking about video games and some words. Like t******. Anyone in there right mind argrees that murder and rape is wrong.



Those people marching for white supremacy are not in their right mind though.

The whole point of banning them would be because the groups are harmful to the members in them.

Like you can't drink until (insert random age based on state).


----------



## Navonod (Dec 8, 2018)

smf said:


> That is pretty normal. You don't like murder, you ban it. You don't like rape, you ban it.
> 
> You're suggesting that there is something inherently wrong with the things they don't like, but that is subjective.
> 
> ...


You clearly cut out the part where I said "Unless they are religious."


----------



## Tigran (Dec 8, 2018)

DrGreed said:


> Yeah. I don't believe Trump would defend a murderer.
> 
> --------------------- MERGED ---------------------------
> 
> ...



What about the right that throws such a fit over people not saying "Merry Christmas"?


----------



## Xzi (Dec 8, 2018)

DrGreed said:


> Yeah. I don't believe Trump would defend a murderer.


He already did once, and his supporters unsurprisingly took the bait.  They've been claiming this was a case of self defense since it happened.


----------



## Navonod (Dec 8, 2018)

Tigran said:


> What about the right that throws such a fit over people not saying "Merry Christmas"?


lol. I say it anyway. I agree that the people who were angry about this are silly.


----------



## smf (Dec 8, 2018)

DrGreed said:


> You clearly cut out the part where I said "Unless they are religious."



Not all pro life are religious, most right wing seem to be religious.


----------



## Tigran (Dec 8, 2018)

DrGreed said:


> lol. I say it anyway. I agree that the people who were angry about this are silly.



Yet the right wing little snowflakes are still fucking bitching about this... and they don't get a pass on "Religious beliefs." because to them "Everything is religious."


----------



## Navonod (Dec 8, 2018)

smf said:


> Aren't they all religious?


No. I'm right leaning and nonreligious. And I know other people who are also right leaning and nonreligious. 
Mostly family and friends. Nice to know that you generalize people based off of what you see on the news and what you're told. 

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------



Tigran said:


> Yet the right wing little snowflakes are still fucking bitching about this... and they don't get a pass on "Religious beliefs." because to them "Everything is religious."


So? Laugh at them. I do.


----------



## smf (Dec 8, 2018)

DrGreed said:


> Nice to know that you generalize people based off of what you see on the news and what you're told.



Well you're doing the same thing about the left, so it's fair.

You have generalised that all the left want to ban everything, but the right doesn't.

But you have only based that on what you say, not what all right wing people say.

You don't want to be generalised, but you will generalise the "opposition".


----------



## Tigran (Dec 8, 2018)

DrGreed said:


> So? Laugh at them. I do.



I would if these fuckers wern't breaking laws and making laws to obey -THEIR- hypocritial fucking shithead of a "God."


----------



## Arecaidian Fox (Dec 8, 2018)

DrGreed said:


> What did Trump have to do with anything? Other than being President?


You mean besides using racism and hate to rally people? Besides doing nothing but bend or break civil liberties while in office? Besides spew nothing but vile words from his tiny, tiny thumbs? Besides stripping away environmental protections? Besides prying crying and scared children from their parents? Besides being a traitorous, spineless slime? He's done plenty, he can go now.

EDIT: Add felon to the list.


----------



## Navonod (Dec 8, 2018)

Tigran said:


> I would if these fuckers wern't breaking laws and making laws to obey -THEIR- hypocritial fucking shithead of a "God."


That makes no sense. I'm sure if they are breaking laws then they will be arrested. There is no law demanding you to obey their god. You have freedom of religion in America.


----------



## Xzi (Dec 8, 2018)

Arecaidian Fox said:


> You mean besides using racism and hate to rally people?


That's definitely the biggest culprit here.  I know the news moves fast now, but god there were at least two or three 'MAGA terrorists' in the weeks leading up to the midterm.  I don't doubt that helped move the vote in the Democrats' direction, but that's not worth losing American lives over.  I can only imagine the violence will get worse, just as the rhetoric does, the closer we get to the 2020 race.


----------



## smf (Dec 8, 2018)

DrGreed said:


> You have freedom of religion in America.



pastafarianism only exists because that isn't true.

How do you stop parents indoctrinating children into their religions?


----------



## Navonod (Dec 8, 2018)

Arecaidian Fox said:


> You mean besides using racism and hate to rally people? Besides doing nothing but bend or break civil liberties while in office? Besides spew nothing but vile words from his tiny, tiny thumbs? Besides stripping away environmental protections? Besides prying crying and scared children from their parents? Besides being a traitorous, spineless slime? He's done plenty, he can go now.
> 
> EDIT: Add felon to the list.


He didn't use racism or hate to rally people. lol You could argue scare tactics. But the amount of illegals coming in and breaking laws has been frequent. The rest of that is to laughable to reply to. But I will anyway. HE didn't pry any child from there parents. They came to America illegally and were detained. What happens to American people when they are detained? They are also separated from their kids. And it still hard to get any visitation even for American detainees.


----------



## Arecaidian Fox (Dec 8, 2018)

DrGreed said:


> That makes no sense. I'm sure if they are breaking laws then they will be arrested. There is no law demanding you to obey their god. You have freedom of religion in America.


Good, then everyone can stop using doctrine to justify laws and we can all pass common-sense reforms. Religion has ZERO place in politics or forming policy.


----------



## smf (Dec 8, 2018)

DrGreed said:


> But the amount of illegals coming in and breaking laws has been frequent.



Damn cheek of those people illegally coming to the country you stole two centuries ago.

There is going to be some law breaking because they are disadvantaged, the way to solve that is to give them opportunity & not to keep beating them with a stick.

Trump has broken laws and caused more financial damage than any of those "illegals".

A lot of peoples ancestors were criminals who made their way to America to get a clean slate.


----------



## Navonod (Dec 8, 2018)

Arecaidian Fox said:


> Good, then everyone can stop using doctrine to justify laws and we can all pass common-sense reforms. Religion has ZERO place in politics or forming policy.


We can all dream but that wont happen as much as I would like it to.


----------



## Tigran (Dec 8, 2018)

Arecaidian Fox said:


> Good, then everyone can stop using doctrine to justify laws and we can all pass common-sense reforms. Religion has ZERO place in politics or forming policy.



Dunno... I almost hope they pass some of the "Christian law is the only law that matters." because then I will be free to kill almost every christian in the US.


----------



## Navonod (Dec 8, 2018)

smf said:


> Damn cheek of those people illegally coming to the country you stole two centuries ago.


See this is also laughable. ALL land has been fought over or stolen throughout human history. So you can't demonize one race or group of people for doing what every race has done before. The Indians fought over land long before the "White devils" came to America.


----------



## smf (Dec 8, 2018)

DrGreed said:


> See this is also laughable. ALL land has been fought over or stolen throughout human history. So you can't demonize one race or group of people for doing what every race has done before. The Indians fought over land long before the "White devils" came to America.



And yet you are demonizing the illegals, even though they are just doing what every race has done before.

I agree it's laughable


----------



## Navonod (Dec 8, 2018)

smf said:


> And yet you are demonizing the illegals.


No. I never demonized illegals. If they want to be American then they need to go through the legal process like everyone else. I think I should clarify that I don't think all illegals are bad that way you can't twist my words. lol


----------



## Xzi (Dec 8, 2018)

smf said:


> And yet you are demonizing the illegals, even though they are just doing what every race has done before.


It wouldn't be as big a deal if Trump actually had conviction behind anything he says.  The anti-immigrant stance is just as hypocritical as anything else coming from this administration, though, as Trump himself employs illegal immigrants all the time:

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/trump-golf-club-employed-illegal-immigrants-report-2018-12-06


----------



## smf (Dec 8, 2018)

DrGreed said:


> No. I never demonized illegals. If they want to be American then they need to go through the legal process like everyone else. I think I should clarify that I don't think all illegals are bad that way you can't twist my words. lol



This is laughable. You say it's fine for people to steal countries, because it's always been like that. But you now expect them to go through legal process, even though it's something you only recently invented.

You can't have it both ways. This is the problem with the right, you want it both ways and can't even conceive that it's wrong.


----------



## Arecaidian Fox (Dec 8, 2018)

DrGreed said:


> He didn't use racism or hate to rally people. lol You could argue scare tactics. But the amount of illegals coming in and breaking laws has been frequent. The rest of that is to laughable to reply to. But I will anyway. HE didn't pry any child from there parents. They came to America illegally and were detained. What happens to American people when they are detained? They are also separated from their kids. And it still hard to get any visitation even for American detainees.


How can you not see what's going on here? You _literally_ have people going on record saying they like Trump only because it pisses people off. How is that a viable solution to political discourse? He's a fucking child and most of his supporters are, I'm sure, also "very fine people." And what you consider "laughable," I consider serious issues, among many others. And you're right, that's what happens to people who are detained, but the sheer incompetence on display down at the border is shocking. There is NO FUCKING EXCUSE for a secure detainment facility being unable to put a child back with their parents. And if we can't, then we have no business taking children away from people at the border. And I still maintain that we shouldn't be doing so in the first place! Trump wanted to be President, he can get blamed like a President when he fucks up and he can be held accountable for his actions.


Tigran said:


> Dunno... I almost hope they pass some of the "Christian law is the only law that matters." because then I will be free to kill almost every christian in the US.


Lolz, fair point.


----------



## Navonod (Dec 8, 2018)

smf said:


> This is laughable. You say it's fine for people to steal countries, because it's always been like that. But you now expect them to go through legal process, even though it's something you only recently invented.
> 
> You can't have it both ways.


Wow. Where did I say it was okay? I just said you can't demonize one group of people for doing what other groups of people have done. I honestly think it's wrong to steal anything. But I wasn't there back then so nothing I can do about it now.


----------



## smf (Dec 8, 2018)

DrGreed said:


> But I wasn't there back then so nothing I can do about it now.



If your ancestors were there, then you have benefited from it though. While holding the opinion that anyone new has to jump through more hoops.

You were only born there, just dumb luck that your parents were horny one day.

These people have travelled a long way to get there. Surely their right to be in America is therefore greater than yours?


----------



## Navonod (Dec 8, 2018)

Arecaidian Fox said:


> How can you not see what's going on here? You _literally_ have people going on record saying they like Trump only because it pisses people off. How is that a viable solution to political discourse? He's a fucking child and most of his supporters are, I'm sure, also "very fine people." And what you consider "laughable," I consider serious issues, among many others. And you're right, that's what happens to people who are detained, but the sheer incompetence on display down at the border is shocking. There is NO FUCKING EXCUSE for a secure detainment facility being unable to put a child back with their parents. And if we can't, then we have no business taking children away from people at the border. And I still maintain that we shouldn't be doing so in the first place! Trump wanted to be President, he can get blamed like a President when he fucks up and he can be held accountable for his actions.



Well those people are dicks I do agree. You do know we're fighting this thing called child trafficking? We need to be 100% sure we're handing these kids back to the right parents. It sucks but there is a process they have to go through. This happened under Obama and no one said anything or very little at all about the matter.


----------



## Arecaidian Fox (Dec 8, 2018)

DrGreed said:


> This happened under Obama and no one said anything or very little at all about the matter.


That's been proven false numbers of times... https://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/i...bama-administration-separate-families-n884856


DrGreed said:


> Well those people are dicks I do agree.


 Yes, yes they are.


DrGreed said:


> You do know we're fighting this thing called child trafficking? We need to be 100% sure we're handing these kids back to the right parents.


That's about the flimsiest fucking excuse for incompetence I've ever heard...


----------



## smf (Dec 8, 2018)

DrGreed said:


> This happened under Obama and no one said anything or very little at all about the matter.



Obama didn't say that all families had to be split up, Trump did. Not because of child trafficking, but he wanted to make it as awful as possible so people would stop coming.

Why are you peddling those lies?


----------



## kuwanger (Dec 8, 2018)

DrGreed said:


> Yeah. I don't believe Trump would defend a murderer.



*cough*Saudi Arabia's Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman*/cough*

If it suits Trump's interest, he will defend a murderer the same way he defends just about everything else he does, by lying a lot and pleading ignorance.


----------



## Navonod (Dec 8, 2018)

smf said:


> If your ancestors were there, then you have benefited from it though. While holding the opinion that anyone new has to jump through more hoops.
> 
> You were only born there, just dumb luck that your parents were horny one day.
> 
> These people have travelled a long way to get there. Surely their right to be in America is therefore greater than yours?


Yeah I did hit that baby lottery but it came with poverty and eating out of trashcans because we were very poor and had to live in tents for awhile. But it made me a better person and I'm really grateful for all the freedoms I have and everything I've earned for myself.


----------



## smf (Dec 8, 2018)

DrGreed said:


> Yeah I did hit that baby lottery but it came with poverty and eating out of trashcans because we were very poor and had to live in tents for awhile.



Right, so imagine what it's like for people in similar or worse situations that are also labelled "illegals". You're still way more privileged than they are.

If after all that you think that you somehow deserve more rights than them, then it didn't make you a better person.


----------



## Navonod (Dec 8, 2018)

Arecaidian Fox said:


> That's been proven false numbers of times... https://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/i...bama-administration-separate-families-n884856
> Yes, yes they are.
> 
> That's about the flimsiest fucking excuse for incompetence I've ever heard...


Yeah


smf said:


> Right, so imagine what it's like for people in similar or worse situations that are also labelled "illegals". You're still way more privileged than they are.


You would be label illegal if you where trying to enter another country illegally. So what makes it different when America does it?


----------



## smf (Dec 8, 2018)

DrGreed said:


> You would be label illegal if you where trying to enter another country illegally. So what makes it different when America does it?



Nothing, but we're discussing America. I thought the whole point was to Make America Great Again? Why do you want to make the same mistakes as other countries??

You saw North Korea and thought, hey we should get an insane dictator too????


----------



## Navonod (Dec 8, 2018)

smf said:


> Nothing, but we're discussing America. I thought the whole point was to Make America Great Again? Why do you want to make the same mistakes as other countries??
> 
> You saw North Korea and thought, hey we should get an insane dictator too????


Lol. Nice try. We need secure borders. Otherwise we're weak as a country.


----------



## Xzi (Dec 8, 2018)

DrGreed said:


> Lol. Nice try. We need secure borders. Otherwise we're weak as a country.


We tear gas women and children who try to seek asylum.  We're already seen as extremely weak.


----------



## smf (Dec 8, 2018)

DrGreed said:


> Lol. Nice try. We need secure borders. Otherwise we're weak as a country.



You don't have secure borders, or there wouldn't be any illegals. You are weak as a country and you're becoming weaker doing the things you're doing.



You actually need illegal immigration or your economy falls apart, by keeping them as second class citizens then it keeps their wages low.

Studies have shown that illegal immigrants commit less crime than legal residents, they have more to lose if they get caught as they'll be deported.


----------



## Tigran (Dec 8, 2018)

Having a President that grabs women by their pussy's and acts like an illiterate baby and keeps screaming "CNN IS ENEMY OF THE PEOPLE" makes us weak as a country.

Not to mention by his own fucking words he should be fired as the president.


----------



## Joe88 (Dec 8, 2018)

kuwanger said:


> *cough*Saudi Arabia's Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman*/cough*
> 
> If it suits Trump's interest, he will defend a murderer the same way he defends just about everything else he does, by lying a lot and pleading ignorance.


Just like President Obama tried to veto a bill that would allow families of 9/11 victims to sue saudi arabia? 
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-sept11-saudi-idUSKCN11Y2D1


----------



## Arecaidian Fox (Dec 8, 2018)

DrGreed said:


> Lol. Nice try. We need secure borders. Otherwise we're weak as a country.


Not at the cost of being xenophobes. Not at the human cost we are exacting from people. The policies and corruption of the current administration are what makes us weak as a country.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------



Joe88 said:


> Just like President Obama tried to veto a bill that would allow families of 9/11 victims to sue saudi arabia?
> https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-sept11-saudi-idUSKCN11Y2D1


Here you're talking about potential complacency and promotion of violence in regards to an entire foreign power. With major national security implications. Whereas the Saudi Crown Prince simply decided to continue the tradition of murdering people he didn't like. Trying to compare the two doesn't quite stack up.


----------



## Navonod (Dec 8, 2018)

Arecaidian Fox said:


> Not at the cost of being xenophobes. Not at the human cost we are exacting from people. The policies and corruption of the current administration are what makes us weak as a country.
> 
> --------------------- MERGED ---------------------------
> 
> ...


Yet you are quick to compare Trump and Hitler. Comedy gold right here.


----------



## smf (Dec 8, 2018)

Joe88 said:


> Just like President Obama tried to veto a bill that would allow families of 9/11 victims to sue saudi arabia?
> https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-sept11-saudi-idUSKCN11Y2D1



Why should you be able to sue a country? What benefit will they get from trying to sue a country? Are you ready for being sued for your own misdeeds?

It sounds like someone is abusing those families for political gain.


----------



## kuwanger (Dec 8, 2018)

Joe88 said:


> Just like President Obama tried to veto a bill that would allow families of 9/11 victims to sue saudi arabia?



That was wrong.  AFAIK there is no smoking gun that Saudi Arabia paid al Qaeda to attack the US.  Hopefully as the suits against Saudi Arabia move forward, we'll have more definitive proof on the point.  If it turns out that Saudi Arabia knowingly funded attacks against US, then what you state is something to compare against Trump's actions.  If it turns out Saudi Arabia funded many terrorist groups believing they were paying "freedom fighters" with mutual goals, then the situation is a lot more murky--look no further than the many times the CIA has funded "freedom fighters" under similar circumstances.  This is, of course, the great problem with funding proxy fighters/terrorists.

As it stands, however, the situation with Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman is not murky.  There isn't some sort of hazy of understanding.  It is clear that a murderer is being explicitly defended with murky words instead of facing facts.  There isn't some vagueness of interpretation or circumstance to justify looking the other way nor putting it off for another day and trying to resolve it in civil suits.  If 9/11 justified invading Afghanistan to capture or kill members of al Qaeda along with members of the Taliban who fought off such efforts, what does the murder of one journalist justify?

PS - If not at all clear, I don't believe it justifiable to fund "freedom fighters" precisely because it leads to not only this sort of situation but often much worse situations, where those who gain power are often even more terrible than the people they replace, and mass rape and murder frequently ensues.  Of course, one could argue this the common component and/or end-state of war, but that's really a whole thing to discuss.


----------



## Saiyan Lusitano (Dec 8, 2018)

Serves him right. Either that or a death penalty, but I guess that's not available.


----------



## smf (Dec 8, 2018)

DrGreed said:


> Yet you are quick to compare Trump and Hitler. Comedy gold right here.



It's fine https://www.independent.co.uk/life-...ttesville-virginia-donald-trump-a7892171.html

"If you’re thoughtful about it and show some real awareness of history, go ahead and refer to Hitler or Nazis when you talk about Trump," he wrote in the Washington Post late last year. "Or any other politician."


----------



## Hanafuda (Dec 8, 2018)

4 pgs of political bickering when everyone here should be on the same page about this one and just leave it at that. The dude intentionally plowed into & killed people with his car. Jury wasted no time finding him guilty. Job well done, members of the jury. Now he gets to rot at taxpayer expense. He deserves worse than he'll get.


----------



## Arecaidian Fox (Dec 8, 2018)

DrGreed said:


> Yet you are quick to compare Trump and Hitler. Comedy gold right here.


Where the fuck did you pull Hitler from, lolz? I never once mentioned Hitler. Trump is awful on his own merit, he doesn't need help. Though The following is a good point...



smf said:


> It's fine https://www.independent.co.uk/life-...ttesville-virginia-donald-trump-a7892171.html
> 
> "If you’re thoughtful about it and show some real awareness of history, go ahead and refer to Hitler or Nazis when you talk about Trump," he wrote in the Washington Post late last year. "Or any other politician."


----------



## Xzi (Dec 8, 2018)

Hanafuda said:


> 4 pgs of political bickering when everyone here should be on the same page about this one and just leave it at that. The dude intentionally plowed into & killed people with his car. Jury wasted no time finding him guilty. Job well done, members of the jury. Now he gets to rot at taxpayer expense. He deserves worse than he'll get.


Well, the only other option is the death penalty, and I think that's a much easier out than having to spend every day of the next 60+ years rotting away in a small cell.  We're in agreement for the rest of that though.


----------



## Navonod (Dec 8, 2018)

Hanafuda said:


> 4 pgs of political bickering when everyone here should be on the same page about this one and just leave it at that. The dude intentionally plowed into & killed people with his car. Jury wasted no time finding him guilty. Job well done, members of the jury. Now he gets to rot at taxpayer expense. He deserves worse than he'll get.


No. We all agree the dude deserves what he has coming. The only reason I jumped in the wagon was because they brought up Trump when he had nothing to do with it. Also I have nothing else better to do. Work is slow.


----------



## Arecaidian Fox (Dec 8, 2018)

DrGreed said:


> they brought up Trump when he had nothing to do with it.


And that, ladies and gentleman, is how you miss a point. But yes, we can all agree plowing your car into people is bad.


----------



## Navonod (Dec 8, 2018)

Explain how I'm missing the point? Read the first page. Clearly you're not paying attention. Lol


----------



## Hanafuda (Dec 8, 2018)

DrGreed said:


> No. We all agree the dude deserves what he has coming. The only reason I jumped in the wagon was because they brought up Trump when he had nothing to do with it. Also I have nothing else better to do. Work is slow.




Oh, I understand that. I've allowed myself to be pulled into, and have thrown myself into, more pointless dickswinging in this subforum than I want to admit. Not recently though, and not any more I hope. I've seen the light. Not that politics isn't worth arguing about ... just that its a counterproductive force HERE, for me. I'm out. I've got no problem with this board being here for those who want to take part, but it didn't make GBATEMP a better place for me. Quite the opposite.




Xzi said:


> Well, the only other option is the death penalty, and I think that's a much easier out than having to spend every day of the next 60+ years rotting away in a small cell.  We're in agreement for the rest of that though.



I can think of some interesting ways we could have him spend his time that are between the extremes of the 1) death penalty and 2) protective cushtody in the penitentiary, which he'll probably get as a high profile inmate. But yeah, that darned 8th amendment. oh well lol.


----------



## Navonod (Dec 8, 2018)

Hanafuda said:


> Oh, I understand that. I've allowed myself to be pulled into, and have thrown myself into, more pointless dickswinging in this subforum than I want to admit. Not recently though, and not any more I hope. I've seen the light. Not that politics isn't worth arguing about ... just that its a counterproductive force HERE, for me. I'm out. I've got no problem with this board being here for those who want to take part, but it didn't make GBATEMP a better place for me. Quite the opposite.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


It helps pass the time. It's not like anyone comes to this site to make the world a better place. I hear they attempt that on Twitter.


----------



## the_randomizer (Dec 8, 2018)

Xzi said:


> Well, the only other option is the death penalty, and I think that's a much easier out than having to spend every day of the next 60+ years rotting away in a small cell.  We're in agreement for the rest of that though.



And pay for that miserable abortive subhuman trash to get free meals, medical and room/board for 60 years through taxes? Rather would have him executed. Murderer shouldn't be locked up for life, they should be neutralized.


----------



## UltraDolphinRevolution (Dec 8, 2018)

Since they decided it was 1st degree murder, why won't he be executed?
Just curious.


----------



## the_randomizer (Dec 8, 2018)

UltraDolphinRevolution said:


> Since they decided it was 1st degree murder, why won't he be executed?
> Just curious.



Because "he's a human being" or some BS


----------



## Navonod (Dec 8, 2018)

the_randomizer said:


> Because "he's a human being" or some BS


Well he is a human. You can't just dehumanize people that's wrong.


----------



## the_randomizer (Dec 8, 2018)

DrGreed said:


> Well he is a human. You can't just dehumanize people that's wrong.



And you can't let murderers get away with well, murder, either.


----------



## Xzi (Dec 8, 2018)

the_randomizer said:


> And pay for that miserable abortive subhuman trash to get free meals, medical and room/board for 60 years through taxes? Rather would have him executed. Murderer shouldn't be locked up for life, they should be neutralized.


With the for-profit prison system in this country, they're going to keep that cell filled regardless.  Might as well be filled with a murderer instead of a guy who smoked a joint.  Plus there's always the additional threat of being raped or murdered in jail anyway.


----------



## Subtle Demise (Dec 8, 2018)

smf said:


> All you can do is make racism illegal and hope it all calms down. Free speech is highly overrated


Umm no it's not.


----------



## The Catboy (Dec 8, 2018)

I don't understand the debate going on here. He's a murder, he got sentenced, the day goes on. I mean, I understand that this brings up the topic of Trump being garbage, but I feel like that should warrant a sperate topic. Trump being a piece of shit is a much bigger topic than just one incident.
(Although it's still worth repeating that Trump is a horrible president and person.)


----------



## Whole lotta love (Dec 8, 2018)

Xzi said:


> Yikes, might want to re-think that statement.  The US has never been perfect by any measure, but at least we have yet to attempt genocide.  The only 'fine people' in the axis powers were those that refused to follow morally reprehensible orders, and those that tried to assist their fellow man without violence.



The US was founded on the genocide of indigenous people which continues to this day.
We are currently involved in the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians by Isreal and have played roles in many other genocides around the world (Guatemala, Congo, etc).

Fuck fascism and people like Gameboy saying this was a false flag, but if we are to consistent in our opposition to mass murder and authoritarianism, we have to take a long hard look at the role of US imperialism in the world.


----------



## Navonod (Dec 8, 2018)

the_randomizer said:


> And you can't let murderers get away with well, murder, either.


Well duh. No one said he should.


----------



## FAST6191 (Dec 8, 2018)

Re: cost paying for the next ?? years vs some kind of lethal injection? Have you actually looked to see how much such a thing runs? Death row is a rather expensive endeavour between all the appeals, costs and whatever else.



smf said:


> All you can do is make racism illegal and hope it all calms down. Free speech is highly overrated.



Free speech is not overrated and I would hate to see anybody prosecuted for simple racist speech. Racist actions on the other hand.


----------



## KingVamp (Dec 8, 2018)

Reading about failed executions and wrongful executions, yeah, just jail people and be done with it.


----------



## Saiyan Lusitano (Dec 8, 2018)

Arecaidian Fox said:


> And that, ladies and gentleman, is how you miss a point. But yes, we can all agree plowing your car into people is bad.


That it is. Let's see if cars are going to get banned somehow.


----------



## Saiyan Lusitano (Dec 8, 2018)

smf said:


> All you can do is make racism illegal and hope it all calms down. Free speech is highly overrated.


This is insanity right here. People nowadays claim anything and everything is "racism" so thank God that's not an actual thing.. yet.

However, the UN with the Migration Pact which will run on December 10 and 11 will make criticism of migrants a "hate crime" so you'll eventually get what you want, smf.

1984 warned us about the future and now it's showing its face.


----------



## smf (Dec 8, 2018)

FAST6191 said:


> Free speech is not overrated and I would hate to see anybody prosecuted for simple racist speech. Racist actions on the other hand



How is speech not an action?



Saiyan Lusitano said:


> People nowadays claim anything and everything is "racism" so thank God that's not an actual thing.. yet.



People throw around the word "murder" all the time. Traffic was murder, I'll murder him when he gets home. It doesn't stop it being a crime.



Saiyan Lusitano said:


> 1984 warned us about the future and now it's showing its face.



1984 was about thought crime. It shouldn't be used as an excuse to abuse people.

You can think racist thoughts all you want, but neo nazi rallies are not acceptable in any decent society.



Subtle Demise said:


> Umm no it's not.



It is. Holding free speech above all other rights is ludicrous.


----------



## FAST6191 (Dec 8, 2018)

smf said:


> How is speech not an action?
> 
> You can think racist thoughts all you want, but neo nazi rallies are not acceptable in any decent society.
> 
> It is. Holding free speech above all other rights is ludicrous.



Because words don't cause damage, give or take direct threats, intellectual property concerns and the fire in a crowded theatre type thing aka the limitations and not being put above certain other rights.

I am OK with neo nazi rallies. It is always nice when the people attending them save me the trouble figuring out if they need to be on my shithead list.


----------



## kuwanger (Dec 8, 2018)

the_randomizer said:


> And pay for that miserable abortive subhuman trash to get free meals, medical and room/board for 60 years through taxes?



As I always like to think, maybe instead of decrying how good the life of prisoners are, we strive to make life outside of prison better than prison life?


----------



## Whole lotta love (Dec 8, 2018)

kuwanger said:


> As I always like to think, maybe instead of decrying how good the life of prisoners are, we strive to make life outside of prison better than prison life?


Prisoners in the US live terrible lives. They are tortured and enslaved.


----------



## Viri (Dec 8, 2018)

Whole lotta love said:


> Prisoners in the US live terrible lives. They are tortured and enslaved.


If you're in a maximum security prison, then you probably did some fucked up shit to get in there. You pretty much deserve all that is coming to you.


----------



## kuwanger (Dec 8, 2018)

Viri said:


> If you're in a maximum security prison, then you probably did some fucked up shit to get in there. You pretty much deserve all that is coming to you.



If you value freedom, removal of that freedom for years or life should be enough punishment.  If you think it requires torture on top of that, then you don't value freedom nor human integrity much.


----------



## Whole lotta love (Dec 8, 2018)

Viri said:


> If you're in a maximum security prison, then you probably did some fucked up shit to get in there. You pretty much deserve all that is coming to you.


A few things.

1) All US prisons rely on torture as punishment. Solitary confinement, rape, violence, financial ruin, and poor/unavailable medical care are all among de jour and de facto forms of torture used by the state. Many prisons enslave their prisoners by paying them $1 an hour for labor. This is not just maximum security prisons.
2) The U.S. justice system is often wrong. Innocent people go to prison every day, even to maximum security prisons.
3) Torturing perpetrators of crimes (and their innocent peers) has no proven benefit to society. It is an extremely fiscally irresponsible way to keep the crime rate up.
4) IMO, the state should not have the right to kill or torture its citizens.


----------



## smf (Dec 8, 2018)

FAST6191 said:


> Because words don't cause damage



They cause damage to the brains of the people who listen and have their own prejudices bolstered. With enough damage they will then go on to cause physical damage.



kuwanger said:


> As I always like to think, maybe instead of decrying how good the life of prisoners are, we strive to make life outside of prison better than prison life?



That doesn't really fit into the american ethos, where it's all about making it for yourself & being beaten with a stick until you do.

That attitude isn't unique to America, it's common for people to wonder why ex prisoners are being looked after. It's because then they will stop offending and start contributing to society. Putting them in prison costs too much money.


----------



## guicrith (Dec 9, 2018)

KingVamp said:


> Reading about failed executions and wrongful executions, yeah, just jail people and be done with it.



There is a method that would be 100% successful, use heroin, the really potent kind they use to knockout elephants(carfentanyl), they will be dead in 5 minutes and its painless, this issue was invented solely by drug companys not wanting there drugs associated with killing and the US governments complicity in there greed.

I would rather be executed then spend 1 year in solitary wrongfully convicted, dont know why so many people think a shit life is better than no life, the very fact I ended up there for something I didnt do would mess me up for life and I would likely just kill my self after getting out anyway.


----------



## Subtle Demise (Dec 9, 2018)

smf said:


> How is speech not an action?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Are neo nazis any different than the groups that originated the "kill whitey" phrase? Or are white people exempt from your proposed "protections" because an extremely small subset of our race holds extreme views? Again, free speech needs to be protected because it's still the most effective weapon against oppressive regimes and special interest groups who want to give themselves more rights than others because things exist in the world tbat hurt their feelings. You can't make people's feelings public policy, sorry. I'll fight to the death about it if necessary.


----------



## Whole lotta love (Dec 9, 2018)

Subtle Demise said:


> Are neo nazis any different than the groups that originated the "kill whitey" phrase?



How many people have Nazi's killed?
How many people have "kill white" people killed?


----------



## Subtle Demise (Dec 9, 2018)

Whole lotta love said:


> How many people have Nazi's killed?
> How many people have "kill white" people killed?


Nazis or modern neo nazis? Modern neo nazis are already very niche, and even fewer of those actually act out their delusions. It's actually kind of funny, groups like ANTIFA keep drawing attention to these fringe groups and actually giving them more power lol.


----------



## Whole lotta love (Dec 9, 2018)

Subtle Demise said:


> Nazis or modern neo nazis? Modern neo nazis are already very niche, and even fewer of those actually act out their delusions.



I don't see the point of drawing a distinction between "Nazi's" and "Neo-Nazi's". They have the same ideologies and end goals. There would be no distinction between the two had Germany succeeded in WW2.

Why are you evading the question? Even if we do go with your arbitrary neo-nazi distinction, you should answer.



Subtle Demise said:


> It's actually kind of funny, groups like ANTIFA keep drawing attention to these fringe groups and actually giving them more power lol.



FWIW, Anti-fascists have been an effective force disempowering white supremacists, at least according to Richard Spencer.

Richard Spencer cites anti-fascists at the reason he can no longer hold successful college tours.


> Antifa is winning



Anti-fascists near me outted a GOP state senate candidate as a white supremacist and forced him to drop out of the race. They literally prevented a fascist from taking power. If that's not effective activism I don't know what is.


----------



## Glyptofane (Dec 9, 2018)

Subtle Demise said:


> Nazis or modern neo nazis? Modern neo nazis are already very niche, and even fewer of those actually act out their delusions. It's actually kind of funny, groups like ANTIFA keep drawing attention to these fringe groups and actually giving them more power lol.


Either way, his answers to your questions appear imply yes, only whites must be stripped of free speech and prosecuted for an ever broadening definition of hate speech.


----------



## Subtle Demise (Dec 9, 2018)

Whole lotta love said:


> I don't see the point of drawing a distinction between "Nazi's" and "Neo-Nazi's". They have the same ideologies and end goals. There would be no distinction between the two had Germany succeeded in WW2.
> 
> Why are you evading the question? Even if we do go with your arbitrary neo-nazi distinction, you should answer.


I don't think I've evaded anything. I don't have any figures for you. The distinction matters because the Nazis in Germany actually gained political power and killed millions, whereas modern nazis amount to little more than angry rednecks without the balls to actually follow through.


----------



## Whole lotta love (Dec 9, 2018)

Glyptofane said:


> Either way, his answers to your questions appear imply yes, only whites must be stripped of free speech and prosecuted for an ever broadening definition of hate speech.



Most white people aren't calling for ethnic cleansing.




Subtle Demise said:


> I don't think I've evaded anything. I don't have any figures for you.



White supremacists are currently working to gain power, just like the Nazi's in Germany in the 20's and 30's while the liberals let them.

But sure, let's talk about contemporary white supremacy.



Subtle Demise said:


> The distinction matters because the Nazis in Germany actually gained political power and killed millions, *whereas modern nazis amount to little more than angry rednecks without the balls to actually follow through.*





Spoiler












































































Yea... they never follow through.


----------



## Xzi (Dec 9, 2018)

Glyptofane said:


> Either way, his answers to your questions appear imply yes, only whites must be stripped of free speech and prosecuted for an ever broadening definition of hate speech.


Only when it comes to whites with a victim complex.  The rest of us don't feel oppressed by the fact that we have to act civil toward everyone while expressing our views in public.


----------



## guicrith (Dec 9, 2018)

Xzi said:


> Only when it comes to whites with a victim complex.  The rest of us don't feel oppressed by the fact that we have to act civil toward everyone while expressing our views in public.



Sadly I think Glyptofane is right, being civil is important, but its gone beyond "just dont be mean" now, saying you think its OK to dress up as a black character for Halloween will get you a hate mob for being "racist", playing a role in a movie without having the same "gender identity" as the character in real life will get you called a "transphobe" and wanting race not to be a factor in college admissions is "oppressing minoritys".

Alot of people think "diversity" has gone too far, me included, without advocating for a white ethnostate, genocide or killing people like the wacko that got convicted.

It should also be OK to hate someones religion, I hate all religions because I think they promote apathy and stupidity, just because you hate what someone believes doesnt mean you hate them or want to insult or punish them for their beliefs.

I believe in simple equality, everyone gets the same treatment, not equity where "oppressed" people get special treatment.


----------



## Xzi (Dec 9, 2018)

guicrith said:


> Sadly I think Glyptofane is right, being civil is important, but its gone beyond "just dont be mean" now, saying you think its OK to dress up as a black character for Halloween will get you a hate mob for being "racist", playing a role in a movie without having the same "gender identity" as the character in real life will get you called a "transphobe" and wanting race not to be a factor in college admissions is "oppressing minoritys".
> 
> Alot of people think "diversity" has gone too far, me included, without advocating for a white ethnostate, genocide or killing people like the wacko that got convicted.


What you're talking about is PC culture, and I agree it's gone too far when comedians have to apologize for tweets made a decade ago.  At the same time, people need to realize that sexism and racism have _always_ been prevalent in parts of this country to this very day, so it's not surprising to see some hypersensitivity to those behaviors as society progresses.  Just look at Whole lotta love's post for reasons why we always have to be on guard in order to keep this country from sliding backwards into absolute ignorance and bigotry toward anyone who isn't exactly like us.


----------



## SG854 (Dec 9, 2018)

Xzi said:


> What you're talking about is PC culture, and I agree it's gone too far when comedians have to apologize for tweets made a decade ago.  At the same time, people need to realize that sexism and racism have _always_ been prevalent in parts of this country to this very day, so it's not surprising to see some hypersensitivity to those behaviors as society progresses.  Just look at Whole lotta love's post for reasons why we always have to be on guard in order to keep this country from sliding backwards into absolute ignorance and bigotry toward anyone who isn't exactly like us.


Sexism and Racism will always be around and will never go away. It’s an impossible and pointless task to eradicate it completely. You’ll never succeed. You’ll eventually get to a point of diminishing returns.

What’s a more important question to ask is are systemic disadvantages explained by racism/sexism or something else.


----------



## Xzi (Dec 9, 2018)

SG854 said:


> Sexism and Racism will always be around and will never go away. It’s an impossible and pointless task to eradicate it completely. You’ll never succeed. You’ll eventually get to a point of diminishing returns.


I'm not suggesting we try to eradicate it completely, only that we keep the mouth breathers down in the cellar, so to speak.  Open racism/sexism should be shamed and mocked, and most of all we need to reject any racism and sexism from our leaders and politicians going forward.  It's very easy to normalize those behaviors otherwise.



SG854 said:


> What’s a more important question to ask is are systemic disadvantages explained by racism/sexism or something else.


There are obvious systemic issues when it comes to race and/or gender, just look at the law's distinction between cocaine and crack.  Or take for instance the black security guard who stopped a mass shooting and then was killed by police the second they arrived.  Not a peep from the NRA, an organization which has always failed to stand up for minority gun rights.  We have a lot of sweeping justice system reforms which need to happen, but as long as one of two major political parties refuses to admit that there's a problem, progress is largely stonewalled.


----------



## SG854 (Dec 9, 2018)

Xzi said:


> I'm not suggesting we try to eradicate it completely, only that we keep the mouth breathers down in the cellar, so to speak.  Open racism/sexism should be shamed and mocked, and most of all we need to reject any racism and sexism from our leaders and politicians going forward.  It's very easy to normalize those behaviors otherwise.
> 
> 
> There are obvious systemic issues when it comes to race and/or gender, just look at the law's distinction between cocaine and crack.  Or take for instance the black security guard who stopped a mass shooting and then was killed by police the second they arrived.  Not a peep from the NRA, an organization which has always failed to stand up for minority gun rights.  We have a lot of sweeping justice system reforms which need to happen, but as long as one of two major political parties refuses to admit that there's a problem, progress is largely stonewalled.


The crack cocain has an alternate explanation that isn’t racist.

The strict drug laws were heavily pushed by the black Caucasus because they said it was destroying black families. You can point to Nixon but Black leaders were also involved.

If crack cocain is racist because majority that are busted are Black, then methamphetamine is racist against Hispanics and Whites, since the same amount of Meth in possession gives you identical prison sentences as crack, which only 2% of blacks are busted for.

Its 54% white, 39% Hispanic, 2% black in prison for meth. Nearly the same amount of people in prison for crack are in prison for meth. About 5,000.


----------



## Xzi (Dec 9, 2018)

SG854 said:


> The crack cocain has an alternate explanation that isn’t racist.


Uh huh.



SG854 said:


> The strict drug laws were heavily pushed by the black Caucasus because they said it was destroying black families. You can point to Nixon but Black leaders were also involved.


Getting a token black person to sign off on something is not the same as widespread support among the black community.  It used to be Jesse Jackson, and now it's apparently Kanye or someone equally ridiculous.



SG854 said:


> Its 54% white, 39% Hispanic, 2% black in prison for meth. Nearly the same amount of people in prison for crack are in prison for meth. About 5,000.


It's a disproportionate amount of whites and Hispanics that use and make meth.  Roughly the same amount of cocaine/crack use across races, same with marijuana AFAIK.  A disproportionate amount of minorities are arrested for those drugs, however.


----------



## smf (Dec 9, 2018)

Subtle Demise said:


> Are neo nazis any different than the groups that originated the "kill whitey" phrase?



No, of course not.



Subtle Demise said:


> Again, free speech needs to be protected because it's still the most effective weapon against oppressive regimes and special interest groups who want to give themselves more rights than others because things exist in the world tbat hurt their feelings.



And you should have that right. But I fail to see how stopping what the neo-nazi's is doing would impact that. If you can't see the difference then that would point to a lack of education.



Subtle Demise said:


> I'll fight to the death about it if necessary.



Well that would solve the problem. Your attitude stinks, it's either misguided or driven by your desire to abuse free speech. Exactly the two types of people who don't deserve free speech, there are responsibilities that go along with freedoms.



Subtle Demise said:


> Nazis or modern neo nazis? Modern neo nazis are already very niche, and even fewer of those actually act out their delusions. It's actually kind of funny, groups like ANTIFA keep drawing attention to these fringe groups and actually giving them more power lol.



Try replacing ANTIFA with Trump and neo nazis with Muslims. If the american position is white neo nazis shouldn't be judged poorly by the acts of a minority that share their views, but people from certain "muslim" countries should have their travel banned because allowing any of them is too dangerous, then that sounds kinda racist.

Would you fight to the death to protect the free speech of people who wanted to march to promote paedophilia and the removal of laws that prevent it?

And the right of free speech of Harvey Weinstein when he propositioned actresses? It doesn't look like many are bothered about that.


----------



## Subtle Demise (Dec 9, 2018)

Whole lotta love said:


> Most white people aren't calling for ethnic cleansing.


You're right! We're not. Again, it's a fringe minority, and those examples are a minority of that minority. They probably would have done the same crime even if race wasn't a motivating factor.


Xzi said:


> Only when it comes to whites with a victim complex. The rest of us don't feel oppressed by the fact that we have to act civil toward everyone while expressing our views in public.


Why does anyone have to be civil to anyone else? State-mandated kindness causes more harm than good. It would be far from sincere as well, and breed nore resentment and violent acts, since they can no longer vent with words their opinions, however misguided they may be.


smf said:


> Well that would solve the problem. Your attitude stinks, it's either misguided or driven by your desire to abuse free speech.


Wishing death on someone for a differing opinion lol. If you think I agree with nazis on anything, then you are mistaken. They oppose free speech as much as antifa on the other side. Also, rights by their nature are not something that can be abused. They are not privileges that can be taken away, despite governments around the world insisting they can do so. Rights are all-encompassing. All speech is protected speech.

So I'm wondering something, why don't antifa ever go protest actual Klan and skinhead rallies? Instead they impede traffic and harass people who want nothing to do with either side. It's little wonder people have stated their desire to run them over honestly. I wish they would go protest a neo nazi rally so that both sides can cut each other down before either one does real harm to society.


----------



## Xzi (Dec 9, 2018)

Subtle Demise said:


> Why does anyone have to be civil to anyone else? State-mandated kindness causes more harm than good. It would be far from sincere as well, and breed nore resentment and violent acts, since they can no longer vent with words their opinions, however misguided they may be.


I didn't say anything about state-mandated.  It should be pretty obvious why we have to remain civil to one another, though, the fabric of society unravels otherwise.  People slowly stop providing goods and services for others.  It is called a "civilization" for a reason, and not "group of retard trolls that run in circles bashing each other on the head with rocks."  Of course, it has become clear in recent years that some people in this country _do_ prefer the latter, and for them I think we should provide free plane tickets to Russia.


----------



## Subtle Demise (Dec 9, 2018)

Xzi said:


> I didn't say anything about state-mandated.  It should be pretty obvious why we have to remain civil to one another, though, the fabric of society unravels otherwise.  People slowly stop providing goods and services for others.  It is called a "civilization" for a reason, and not "group of retard trolls that run in circles bashing each other on the head with rocks."  Of course, it has become clear in recent years that some people in this country _do_ prefer the latter, and for them I think we should provide free plane tickets to Russia.


Well, some people are rude, but most aren't. I don't see society falling apart because of a few bad apples. If anything is going to cause the collapse of American civilization, it's the unsustainable welfare state, shocking national debt, the militarization of the police due to the us vs. them mentality that keeps being pushed by politicians and the media. This in turn brings extremists from all over the political spectrum, while I'm sitting here as a centrist watching it all crumble down. Trying to bring some logic and a liberty-focused mindset and apparently I'm the extremist lol. Oh well, might be fun watching it burn.


----------



## FAST6191 (Dec 9, 2018)

I find it immensely disconcerting that "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it" and the spirit of https://joshhighland.com/2007/08/28/mentors-last-words-the-hacker-manifesto/ are now such radical positions, especially on a place like this, that it needs to be continually justified.


----------



## smf (Dec 9, 2018)

Subtle Demise said:


> Why does anyone have to be civil to anyone else? State-mandated kindness causes more harm than good. It would be far from sincere as well, and breed nore resentment and violent acts, since they can no longer vent with words their opinions, however misguided they may be.



Nobody said anything about kindness. You can hate who you want, but you shouldn't be able to run a group that promotes that whites are superior.

You're incorrectly assuming that venting has no negative consequences.



Subtle Demise said:


> Wishing death on someone for a differing opinion lol.



I didn't. You volunteered and I don't have the power to stop you. I was merely pointing out that if all people who think free speech should be able to violate the constitution, fought to the death, then that would solve that problem.



Subtle Demise said:


> All speech is protected speech.



No, it's not.

*"Protected speech* means *speech* that is *protected* from government regulation and censorship, depending upon the nature of the *speech* and the nature of regulation."



Subtle Demise said:


> It's little wonder people have stated their desire to run them over honestly.



So you think fields was justified. Makes sense.


----------



## Subtle Demise (Dec 9, 2018)

smf said:


> Nobody said anything about kindness. You can hate who you want, but you shouldn't be able to run a group that promotes that whites are superior.
> 
> You're incorrectly assuming that venting has no negative consequences.


Of course there should be consequences,  but not from the government as you suggest should happen. If someone calls me a racial slur, their consequence from me is I can call them one back, or I go tell friends and family how racist they are, things of that nature. You can't make it illegal to use slurs.


smf said:


> No, it's not.
> 
> *"Protected speech* means *speech* that is *protected* from government regulation and censorship, depending upon the nature of the *speech* and the nature of regulation."


Not sure where that quote comes from, but the Constitution simply says "freedom of speech" that's it. It's broad on purpose, to limit government regulation as much as possible. If government is making regulations against speech, it is acting against the Constitution. Period.


smf said:


> you think fields was justified. Makes sense.


The only time killing is justified is in defense of yourself or someone else. I was referring to comments of a video I saw of antifa members blocking traffic of people who have nothing to do with white supremacy, and many of them were saying they would floor the gas or similar. Should those people be imprisoned for writing that? Again I'll ask, why don't antifa go protest actual Klan rallies? Why do they harass random passersby simply for being white?


----------



## Glyptofane (Dec 10, 2018)

Too much garbage to quote, but what are neo-nazis doing that is so offensive really. They aren't even identifying with the term you pinkos have ascribed them to btw, I just use it for your sake of understanding.

I think this loser should have got manslaughter charges at most. I wouldn't be caught dead at one of these trap events, but to me, the evidence seems clear he was not motivated to murder anyone directly, just freaked the hell out, floored, and some cow had a heart attack. Antifa should be held equally accountable for events that day.


----------



## Xzi (Dec 10, 2018)

Glyptofane said:


> Too much garbage to quote, but what are neo-nazis doing that is so offensive really.


Wow.  Other than killing people and using terrorist tactics to influence our politics, nothing I suppose.



Glyptofane said:


> They aren't even identifying with the term you pinkos have ascribed them to btw, I just use it for your sake of understanding.


Well we certainly need to be sensitive to how each bigoted narcissist self-identifies.  



Glyptofane said:


> I think this loser should have got manslaughter charges at most. I wouldn't be caught dead at one of these trap events, but to me, the evidence seems clear he was not motivated to murder anyone directly, just freaked the hell out, floored, and some cow had a heart attack. Antifa should be held equally accountable for events that day.


People who had nothing to do with the murder should be held equally accountable for the murder?  Yeah that's...not the way the law works.

And it doesn't matter in the least what his intent was, he plowed into a crowd of pedestrians with a car.  When that happens, the best case scenario is that _only_ one person dies.  Several more were injured of course.  Idiots prone to randomly panicking shouldn't ever get behind the wheel of a car in the first place.


----------



## Whole lotta love (Dec 10, 2018)

Subtle Demise said:


> You're right! We're not. Again, it's a fringe minority, and those examples are a minority of that minority. They probably would have done the same crime even if race wasn't a motivating factor.


I don't mean to be rude, but you do know what "motivating factor" means, right?



Glyptofane said:


> Too much garbage to quote, but what are neo-nazis doing that is so offensive really. They aren't even identifying with the term you pinkos have ascribed them to btw, I just use it for your sake of understanding.



Killing people and advocating for genocide.


----------



## smf (Dec 10, 2018)

Subtle Demise said:


> Not sure where that quote comes from, but the Constitution simply says "freedom of speech" that's it. It's broad on purpose, to limit government regulation as much as possible. If government is making regulations against speech, it is acting against the Constitution. Period.



The constitution gives you the right to pursue happiness, which a nazi rally is actively campaigning against for a large group of people.

You seem to want to minimise it by just saying it's a bit of name calling and you can call back, but these are people who are trying to mobilise support against all non whites. If you keep protecting their right to spread hate, then hate is what you'll get. It is impossible that it will ever turn into reasoned debate.



Subtle Demise said:


> Again I'll ask, why don't antifa go protest actual Klan rallies?



For the same reason you have an army and don't just send people out on holiday to fight wars. You have to be mentally ill to be a klan member and there is no telling what they would do. They should be stopped by government, not civilians. At least the klan members are white, so if the police turned up to stop them then they wouldn't shoot first and ask questions later.


----------



## Whole lotta love (Dec 10, 2018)

Subtle Demise said:


> So I'm wondering something, why don't antifa ever go protest actual Klan and skinhead rallies?



yea im wondering the same thing... why weren't there any anti-fascists in charlottesville opposing these guys???















isn't weird how anti-fascists never oppose the kkk????


----------



## FAST6191 (Dec 10, 2018)

smf said:


> The constitution gives you the right to pursue happiness, which a nazi rally is actively campaigning against for a large group of people.



Maybe, however you then have to try to draw a line and that gets insanely hard to do. To that end as reprehensible and abhorrent as their ideas may be, and worse still to my sensibilities lacking any real foundation in logic, until they cross the line of specific directions or incitement such that someone is likely to get hurt as a direct consequence (the classic example being something like if they were screaming for the killing of all purple eyed people and directed them to do that where they were at -- they may not know have known the name or even that one was around but as a direct and foreseeable consequence...).
To that end if you want to note who they are, not be friends with them, not employ them, not use their services, deny them non essential services you might run... OK then, more power to you in fact.
To deny them the right to speak though... the world has to be big enough and ugly enough to take care of itself.
You appear to be somewhat worried about it being contagious, and maybe it is, however underground it can still thrive. I will also bring up the Superman radio drama -- it had all sorts of real code words and whatever else fed to it by an infiltrator, broadcast out... membership and support fell dramatically once people were aware of the batshit insane ideas they were spouting. Prior to that they were also routinely investigated by law enforcement and not exactly allowed free reign.

Spin it another way. Religions of various stripes, caused no small amount of strife both individual and group wise throughout history, their codified rules in books they purport to follow contain some egregious shit. Big protest saying we need more religion. What do you do? It could be functionally the same thing. Worse is you know it will be one of those slippery slope things; what government in history has really ever surrendered powers (particularly ones that juicy) or not feature crept them? Go another. All those people protesting the police. Someone (or better yet a nice false flag) sees a policeman get popped. If you have that you now have those essential to law and order (not even just citizens) being killed and your protest criminalised, or at least... seriously legally dissuaded, as a result.

The though of surrendering some free speech to combat them... just no. I don't know if in this instance it means they have won but someone has and it ain't me.


----------



## smf (Dec 10, 2018)

FAST6191 said:


> Maybe, however you then have to try to draw a line and that gets insanely hard to do.



That is true for many laws, which is why it takes so long to draft them and then you have courts which interpret them for what is reasonable.

A limit to the size of a group, whether it's said in the moment or premeditated, whether it's parody etc are all things that can be considered. If you're member of a group that says that it's premeditated, then you've instantly incriminated yourself. If they want to rebrand as an equal opportunities social reform group, then that would be an improvement. You can't stop people being racist, it's an inherent human behaviour. You can only make it less acceptable to act on it.

But you have to want to do it. What it points to is that there are a lot of people who agree with the klan, but don't want the damage to their reputation that they would get by publicly saying it. You just need a way to force the klan members to do the same, but without a legal basis there isn't really any way.


----------



## FAST6191 (Dec 10, 2018)

smf said:


> That is true for many laws, which is why it takes so long to draft them and then you have courts which interpret them for what is reasonable.
> 
> A limit to the size of a group, whether it's said in the moment or premeditated, whether it's parody etc are all things that can be considered. If you're member of a group that says that it's premeditated, then you've instantly incriminated yourself. If they want to rebrand as an equal opportunities social reform group, then that would be an improvement. You can't stop people being racist, it's an inherent human behaviour. You can only make it less acceptable to act on it.
> 
> But you have to want to do it. What it points to is that there are a lot of people who agree with the klan, but don't want the damage to their reputation that they would get by publicly saying it. You just need a way to force the klan members to do the same, but without a legal basis there isn't really any way.



There are already plenty of laws, sentencing guidelines and modifiers to things covering everything from denying services to violence. Plenty adequate from where I sit, certainly nothing I am inclined to surrender some rights to speech for or complicate existing ones when there are already fairly simple tried and tested lines.


----------



## smf (Dec 10, 2018)

FAST6191 said:


> There are already plenty of laws, sentencing guidelines and modifiers to things covering everything from denying services to violence. Plenty adequate from where I sit, certainly nothing I am inclined to surrender some rights to speech for or complicate existing ones when there are already fairly simple tried and tested lines.



These are people who are campaigning to have those laws changed and tolerating them is making that more likely to happen.

The existing laws don't cut it, if you don't do something then Trump is just the beginning.


----------



## CallmeBerto (Dec 10, 2018)

smf said:


> These are people who are campaigning to have those laws changed and tolerating them is making that more likely to happen.
> 
> The existing laws don't cut it, if you don't do something then Trump is just the beginning.



What they are doing isn't illegal. I mean they are shitty people but who cares. You basically want laws in place to ban speech that you don't like.


----------



## smf (Dec 10, 2018)

CallmeBerto said:


> What they are doing isn't illegal.



So, nothing is illegal until it is made illegal.



CallmeBerto said:


> I mean they are shitty people but who cares. You basically want laws in place to ban speech that you don't like.



All laws are put in place to stop behaviour that people don't like, that isn't an argument against it.

Whether behaviour is made illegal is based on the pros and cons. They obviously think that by organising rallies they can overturn the constitutions guarantee of rights no matter what race you are. Whether you think that is an advantage or disadvantage comes down to whether you're racist or not.

If you think that no matter what they say that their rights should be protected, then you've created a race to the bottom. Appeasement never works.


----------



## FAST6191 (Dec 10, 2018)

smf said:


> These are people who are campaigning to have those laws changed and tolerating them is making that more likely to happen.


Is that not why we have, or are supposed to have, fairly robust sets of foundational laws and aspects of law making to prevent the egregious stuff in the event of public opinion (or public opinion within an area) departing from those such that laws could go through? Even leaving aside them being a minor fringe element with no real chance of numbers on their side to pull such a thing off I don't see that happening by virtue of those foundational things.

I am more worried about things going the other way and us getting laws enforcing quotas for increasingly convoluted and fuzzy lines of division, ones I was always taught were things that did not matter and remains a sentiment I fully agree with, rather than doing the whole meritocracy bit. Indeed such things are already happening https://www.theguardian.com/us-news...en-board-directors-companies-law-jerry-brown-



smf said:


> The existing laws don't cut it


In what way? Things are pretty sweet out there these days if you go by historical standards.

I am still also failing to see the harms being done that warrant my having to give up something of a fundamental right, one which has served the world exceptionally well since its advent and adoption. So some oxygen thieves with some strange ideas about how the world should work wandered around and shouted a bit, before going home. Some bellend that was variously associated with them killed some people for reasons that could not be justified, nor be called a directed attack, and has been striped up for it. I would say the system works.

Edit.


smf said:


> If you think that no matter what they say that their rights should be protected, then you've created a race to the bottom. Appeasement never works.



I can't speak for the one you quoted, though I suspect I have company, but I am happy with the status quo. Say whatever you like until it counts as an incitement, fraud, perjury, directed attack, libel/slander, infringement of intellectual property or the "fire in a crowded theatre" thing, at which point prepare to be slapped. Some of those, looking mainly at intellectual property as far as matters US go, could use a bit of a tune up and clarification but that is a different discussion. I see no need to add any isms to that, even more so given their rather fluid/variable definitions these days, and indeed every reason not to.


----------



## smf (Dec 10, 2018)

FAST6191 said:


> Is that not why we have, or are supposed to have, fairly robust sets of foundational laws and aspects of law making to prevent the egregious stuff in the event of public opinion (or public opinion within an area) departing from those such that laws could go through?



Those underpinnings aren't magic, they are only there because a relatively small group of people keep them there. Replace those people (like Trump is doing) and things can change.

By normalising white supremacy by tolerating it (and by the president saying they are "good people"), you run the risk that enough people will stop overriding their racist tendencies that removing the underpinnings are also tolerated. It will be sold as a way that is seen as a benefit to the voters.

Look how "good people" tolerated segregation.



FAST6191 said:


> Even leaving aside them being a minor fringe element with no real chance of numbers on their side to pull such a thing off I don't see that happening by virtue of those foundational things.



Not many people thought Trump would get elected either, being complacent has just as many dangers as being over restrictive.



FAST6191 said:


> I am more worried about things going the other way and us getting laws enforcing quotas for increasingly convoluted and fuzzy lines of division, ones I was always taught were things that did not matter and remains a sentiment I fully agree with, rather than doing the whole meritocracy bit.



Sure & you should be worried that it's implemented correctly & if it can't be implemented correctly then that should open further debate.

The reason why things normally go wrong is because they only get passed when nobody noticed the implications, this is because if they were debated openly and honestly then people would panic & shut it down. If the people with a vested interest in blocking a good law always block them, then the people trying to pass good laws will make bad laws. The voters don't have enough insight to notice this


----------



## FAST6191 (Dec 10, 2018)

smf said:


> Those underpinnings aren't magic, they are only there because a relatively small group of people keep them there.
> 
> By normalising white supremacy by tolerating it (and by the president saying they are "good people"), you run the risk that enough people will stop overriding their racist tendencies that the underpinnings are removed.
> 
> ...



Until they look like they are going away or not being enforced I am OK.

If you reckon they are so very dangerous then by all means do something about it. I can't see a reason to be any more worried about them than I am about an ant nest three countries (and a sea) away. Anybody that really lends their ideas that much credence has far bigger problems that can be sorted other ways -- such groups attempt to offer belonging, meaning and purpose, very alluring concepts to most people and for many of their typical recruits quite hard to come by. Find a way to provide that and deprogram/rehabilitate those that were already caught up in things (. Far more effective in the long run, far easier to manage (if it is not the racists then criminal enterprises proper, or maybe just gangs, tend to step in and they require a whole other set of laws*) and no need to step on any free speech in the process.

Does that speak to reality or the models of it "most" people were using? The former almost by definition can't be flawed.

I would go with another approach. There are laws everybody agrees will be the stuff for hundreds of years/until a fundamental shift in society. There are laws that will do for now. There are laws that need to be made in reaction to big changes. There are laws that are kneejerk reactions, kneecapped by various interests, or fail to encompass things. The job of the legal and political system is to sort them out.

*to say nothing of I am not sure how you are supposed to draw a ring around these people, not trouble those with similar but untroubling views, not drive things underground and make them sexy, not have them immediately do something to classify themselves outside the circle you drew and all the stuff I mentioned before.


----------



## smf (Dec 10, 2018)

FAST6191 said:


> Until they look like they are going away or not being enforced I am OK.



By the time that happens there will be enough wide spread support that maybe even you will have been brainwashed into thinking it's a good idea.



FAST6191 said:


> Find a way to provide that and deprogram/rehabilitate those that were already caught up in things



It's kinda hard to justify spending money doing that when what it's "good people" exercising their right to free speech, especially when so many people resent giving money to the government to do good things in the first place.


----------



## FAST6191 (Dec 10, 2018)

smf said:


> By the time that happens there will be enough wide spread support that maybe even you will have been brainwashed into thinking it's a good idea.
> 
> 
> 
> It's kinda hard to justify spending money doing that when what it's "good people" exercising their right to free speech, especially when so many people resent giving money to the government to do good things in the first place.



The snarky response would surely be like you into thinking giving up free speech in some capacity is a good plan? I will actually go with that as well. That said I am worried it might happen either so slowly or too quickly (this article 13 lark in Europe for one). I can only try my best, try to improve and hope those that play this game even better do the same.

If the US is doing the whole "can't compete with free enterprise" thing they like to do for reasons I never figured out then make it a charity, indeed there are already plenty for ex gang, ex religion, ex groups like those under discussion. Also if we are to go down the government path it would not be against the current bogeyman but all of them (fat and happy people with a job and a purpose don't typically blow stuff up and kill other people, be it for colour, creed, crime or similar), and able to be done under the, for want of a better term, guise of improving schools, infrastructure, transportation, access to jobs... nothing anybody but the most hardcore of a few different groups would object to if you are able to demonstrate results (as opposed to a wasteful slush fund like so many other things).


----------



## DCG (Dec 10, 2018)

I'll just post this one here, seems the judge either prohibited the use of this information or it didn't got used.



IMO gaming sites shouldn't mingle with politics... Not on the forum, not anywhere, it only causes unneeded discussions...


----------



## smf (Dec 10, 2018)

FAST6191 said:


> The snarky response would surely be like you into thinking giving up free speech in some capacity is a good plan?



Sure, it's like if you have cancer. If you don't do anything you'll die of it & if you try to treat it then you could die sooner or later. Nobody knows up front what result you'll get.

If you have an alternative way of dealing with the neo nazis other than tolerating them and letting them gain greater support, then I'd love to hear it.



DCG said:


> I'll just post this one here, seems the judge either prohibited the use of this information or it didn't got used.



I think it's lunacy that anyone is allowed to carry guns in public, but you allow people to do it and that is what happens.


----------



## guicrith (Dec 10, 2018)

smf said:


> If you have an alternative way of dealing with the neo nazis other than tolerating them and letting them gain greater support, then I'd love to hear it.



They arnt "gaining support" because of those rallys, all those nazis where nazis before the rally, there not missionarys knocking on your door to convert you to naziism.
They are just now more open about there already existing beliefs.
The only thing at risk of creating new nazis is the "diversity above equality and freedom" mentality everyone is pushing.
Even Hillary Clinton acknowledged this with her statement on European migration.
Modern naziism is just a misguided overreaction to a legitimate issue.

Your argument the same bizarre argument that the gays are converting our children by not hiding there gayness.


----------



## FAST6191 (Dec 10, 2018)

DCG said:


> IMO gaming sites shouldn't mingle with politics... Not on the forum, not anywhere, it only causes unneeded discussions...


Such discussions have been happening as long I have been here, and as best I can tell as long as the forums have as well.
As long as you attempt to enforce the "bring reasons" part of things then it works out OK.



smf said:


> Sure, it's like if you have cancer. If you don't do anything you'll die of it & if you try to treat it then you could die sooner or later. Nobody knows up front what result you'll get.
> 
> If you have an alternative way of dealing with the neo nazis other than tolerating them and letting them gain greater support, then I'd love to hear it.



Except this is not cancer as much as a minor skin irritation that will mostly fade away if left as is. Start cutting away good things and you will do more damage than you ever might heal.

Solution wise then even ignoring my massive misgivings with your proposed one I already went. Most people in such groups are either brought in by the allure of a group and a place to be, occasionally also having been a victim of "others" (said others often also being broke kids brought in by the allure of a group to have your back and a place to be). Prevent that from happening (decent schools, decent transport, chance of a half decent job, possibly intervention at family level*...) and the rest will pretty much solve itself -- I would probably go so far as to say a 1940's/1950s (or older iterations) version of the racist movements could not really take hold today by virtue of society being the way it is, deny them the few recruits they could still get, keep the social pressure aspects and you are good. Keep it up for a couple of generations and you will be laughing at the notion like you might be laughing at the original luddites today. You will probably want to be doing that anyway for other reasons (the luddites might not have been right then but the rate of automation today is going to lead to some interesting things).

*I don't know for certain (I do for crime and other such things, and would wager serious money here) but I would say no small amount of their main recruitment pool are poor, single parent homes, with just plain poor being a close runner up.

Choice videos, good stuff but the stories behind them are ones I have heard time and time again for gangs and people that went off the rails.


----------

