POLITICS & DONALD Annoying Orange MEGATHREAD

[Master Matthew²]

I'm not saying we should let people vandalize public property, I'm saying giving precedent that allows citizens to shoot and kill people with no due process is a very bad loving idea and you're drop-dead handicapped for supporting it.

There's is no justification for jumping on someone elses property with intent to destroy it.
While death is a bit severe, forget 'em, they took a risk to make a political move that was illegal, and all they got for their troubles was dead.

Solution: Don't break the law, don't break other people's stuff. Just because you don't believe you have a right to own private property, doesn't mean everyone else doesn't have that right.

[Ad Bot]

[Corderlain]

So why is the organizer of the Charlottesville Unite the Right also previously a writer for CNN?

[Master Matthew²]

So why is the organizer of the Charlottesville Unite the Right also previously a writer for CNN?

Holy stuff, what?
Source?

Also, random topic switch?

[Corderlain]

[Køtt]

While death is a bit severe, forget 'em,

do you realize what kind of wording you're using here

[beachbum111111]

i'd beat the stuff out of a vandal but killing them is a little far

If you don't kill them they end up trying to sue you. Better to finish a job so it doesn't bite you in the ass later

[IkeTheGeneric]

There's is no justification for jumping on someone elses property with intent to destroy it.
While death is a bit severe, forget 'em, they took a risk to make a political move that was illegal, and all they got for their troubles was dead.

Solution: Don't break the law, don't break other people's stuff. Just because you don't believe you have a right to own private property, doesn't mean everyone else doesn't.

Violent vigilantism is in no way proper retribution for vandalism. Again, allowing this to happen without due process is not only a REALLY BAD IDEA, once could argue it even violates the 8th amendment.

I don't care about the statues enough to think that people should die over them. Like, what the forget, man? This is some downright sociopathic line of thought.

[Master Matthew²]

I don't care about the statues enough to think that people should die over them. Like, what the forget, man? This is some downright sociopathic line of thought.

Well then, this line of thought will keep them away from the statues.

The point of this law is that it should be used scarcely if at all. Most people won't commit a crime if they know they would possibly or even likely die.

[Køtt]

Violent vigilantism is in no way proper retribution for vandalism.

i agree about violent vigilantism but what do you think should be a better way to solve the problem with vandals being vandals? if it's like a really bad riot for example and police force is really trying it's best and hardest to keep things under control and some starfish decides to vandalize stuff what would you do in the situation? i'm not justifying vandalism i just want to hear your thoughts of what we should do.

Well then, this line of thought will keep them away from the statues.

yes yes being a complete sociopath and being worse than a vandal will totally keep them away from the statues, it'll probably get you to jail too or even executed but hey i mean at least you're proving a point right? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

i mean forget human lives completely as long as it proves a point right

[IkeTheGeneric]

The point of this law is that it should be used scarcely if at all. Most people won't commit a crime if they know they would possibly or even likely die.

This is some totalitarian bullstuff. You aren't even trying to hide the fact that you're a fascist now

i agree about violent vigilantism but what do you think should be a better way to solve the problem with vandals being vandals? if it's like a really bad riot for example and police force is really trying it's best and hardest to keep things under control and some starfish decides to vandalize stuff what would you do in the situation? i'm not justifying vandalism i just want to hear your thoughts of what we should do.

Let our law enforcement handle it like they're trained to. Anything more than that is stupid and unnecessary.

[Master Matthew²]

yes yes being a complete sociopath and being worse than a vandal will totally keep them away from the statues, it'll probably get you to jail too or even executed but hey i mean at least you're proving a point right? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

A. It's a LAW.
The Law is a deterrent, it's meant to keep people away from defacing these statues.

Extreme Consequences will keep these crimes scarce.

[IkeTheGeneric]

A. It's a LAW.
The Law is a deterrent, it's meant to keep people away from defacing these statues.

Extreme Consequences will keep these crimes scarce.

Yeah, threaten to kill citizens if they break the law to keep them in line, that's a good loving idea, right? Dumbass.

[Køtt]

A. It's a LAW.
The Law is a deterrent, it's meant to keep people away from defacing these statues.

yes it makes a lot of sense that the law obviously kills people and death threatens them because they tore down a statue so yeah i'll have to be forced to agree with the law

[Master Matthew²]

This is some totalitarian bullstuff. You aren't even trying to hide the fact that you're a fascist now

oH BoY, Oh bOY! It's finally happened.
I've been hit with the "you're a fascist" line!

Alright so listen, it's not totalitarian because it's not enforcing a law that's unfair, it's quite fair to not go around destroying public or private property for any reason, if you want it down start a petition, idk do the american thing have a vote, I can't argue against a statue being taken down via vote, but if your going around pulling stuff down illegally, get forgeted.

Maybe the whole giving everyone a gun and telling them to play cop is a bit dangerous of a line of thought, but like i said, It's unlikely this law will come up again for anything other than an argument. If it does come up again because someone actually killed someone over a statue, you can laugh and tell me I'm wrong, because at that point, all is lost and we're forgeted, but it doesn't change the fact that it is because the theoretical victim was a criminal willing defacing public property.

[Deus Ex]

"I value statue more than I value human life" - texas

How hard is it to just not destroy property? Far as I'm concerned if you can't respect public or private property and refrain from intentionally defacing it then you're actively making a decision to get shot in the face if someone catches you. Breaking stuff on purpose that isn't yours shows a lack of respect for other people, their time, and their money, all of which goes into maintaining statues and whatever other property these idiots may feel like defacing.

The only change I'd make to this law is state that lethal force is only authorized if there's reason to believe they'll cause irreparable harm to something. People shouldn't be getting shot for graffiti on anything but if you somehow manage to topple a statue and it breaks then you got what's coming to you

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1iPIfLzP900

holy stuff lmao

sargon is getting sued

Unless the law is different over there I don't see how she expects to win that case