Off Topic > Off Topic
[NEWS] Riots, general insanity at Berkeley #March4Annoying Orange rally
beachbum111111:
--- Quote from: SeventhSandwich on March 07, 2017, 05:42:26 PM --->boohoo people are making memes about national socialists getting punched
>lol sev you're such a liberal shill, someone should beat you with a club
we're actually supposed to be on the same side on this - the one that's against random violent idiots. but it looks like even the conservatives have regressed to the same kind of primitive bullstuff as a lot of the young liberals at berkeley.
it's disappointing.
--- End quote ---
I would be on your side if he was attacking random ass people for no reason. Self defense =/= attacking a guy talking into a camera.
And for the record I didn't give a stuff about people making memes about Spencer getting punched, hell I posted some myself. I was against idiots like Leisure and Kimon who promoted it and thought it was fine. But thanks for strawmaning my argument you loving prick. Shows that I don't have to waste my time on you.
SeventhSandwich:
--- Quote from: beachbum111111 on March 07, 2017, 05:46:14 PM ---I would be on your side if he was attacking random ass people for no reason. Self defense =/= attacking a guy talking into a camera
--- End quote ---
Even if he didn't hit anyone, brandishing a weapon at bystanders is illegal. Likewise, threateningly pointing it at unarmed protestors is also illegal.
We don't know if every person he hit was a violent protestor because he was swinging wildly into a dense crowd of people. This is why vigilantism is illegal - because non-officers don't actually know how to discriminate between who is doing something illegal and who isn't.
--- Quote from: beachbum111111 on March 07, 2017, 05:46:14 PM ---And for the record I didn't give a stuff about people making memes about Spencer getting punched, hell I posted some myself. I was against idiots like Leisure and Kimon who promoted it and thought it was fine. But thanks for strawmaning my argument you loving prick. Shows that I don't have to waste my time on you.
--- End quote ---
Could have fooled me. The collective squeal was so loud that individual voices may have been unclear.
Tactical Nuke:
--- Quote from: SeventhSandwich on March 07, 2017, 04:24:12 PM ---Indiscriminately waving around a weapon in a crowded public space is illegal for a reason. I thought you guys were all about maintaining order in society at all cost? Idiot vigilantes hunting out idiot antifas is contrary to the order of society. Random violence does not suddenly become okay just because it's coming from your side.
It is absolutely indiscriminate though. Watch the video.
--- End quote ---
can you actually find any footage where he acts offensively from the getgo or are you going to keep trying to pass off defensive behavior as "wild unchecked rage!1!1!1!!!1!!!111!!"
--- Quote from: SeventhSandwich on March 07, 2017, 04:24:12 PM ---At 1:53 he literally attempts to stab a woman for approaching him, and the only reason he doesn't hit her is because her boyfriend/brother/whatever pulls her away in time. This is not a person exercising their right to self-defense, it's an idiot ideologue looking to further his own political beliefs by threatening others with violence. In other words, he's literally just the Annoying Orange version of the antifa crowd.
--- End quote ---
Here is more context for that incident.
The person he was standing next to had just been knocked to the ground and the black man was approaching him threateningly. The reason the girl got shoved out of the way wasn't because the based stickman "tried to stab her" (with a blunt loving stick no less, how do you do that?) but more because the black man was about to do some loving sweet karate moves or some stupid stuff and he didn't want to hit the girl.
If you look at the distance between the two sides, there's no way that the based stickman would've "tried to stab her" without at the very least moving forward or lunging, but guess what? He's moving BACK. To protect his friends.
That, and both the girl and the guy were acting EXTREMELY provocative, which I thought you people attacking the old guy earlier said was grounds for an ass-whuppin'?
--- Quote from: SeventhSandwich on March 07, 2017, 04:24:12 PM ---Or at 3:02, where he beats someone in the head, four feet away from him, who is clearly trying to dodge him? Does that count as self-defense too?
--- End quote ---
Here is more context for that incident.
The guy in the red helmet and the kilt is his friend, who is literally being dragged away by a tidal wave of Antifa. The first person he hits is a masked man aiding in that procedure. The second guy he breaks his stick on is another masked man violently grabbing an Ancap (about to punch the guy too) who is defending a Annoying Orange supporter who was grabbed by another Antifa. Call it a massive, confusing change of liability, the attack was still justified.
Also, what the forget are you talking about "clearly trying to dodge him"? Isn't that the whole idea of fighting?
--- Quote from: SeventhSandwich on March 07, 2017, 04:24:12 PM ---"Their side started it first" is not a valid defense when it comes to felony assault. You do not get to swing around a weapon in 'self-defense' because other people at other protests have gotten violent.
Actually, you can scratch the entire 'started it first' part. Regardless of all the past antifa bullstuff, if you go out into the streets, armed and intending to start a turf war with people who disagree with your political beliefs, you are by definition a rioter. And it's hilarious that people with your sorts of beliefs are suddenly praising rioters.
--- End quote ---
Yeah, except he wasn't looking to start fights. It was a precautionary measure to dress up the way he did, because he knew Antifa was going to start the fights, not the Annoying Orange supporters, because it's a loving Annoying Orange rally. To say that he wasn't thinking rationally about what was going to happen within the context of that rally before he got ready to go to it is extremely disingenuous.
And before you come back at me saying "self-defense" is only defending yourself, defending other people falls into the same category as self-defense. Which, by the way is not vigilantism.
--- Quote from: Definition ---vigilantism - law enforcement undertaken without legal authority by a self-appointed group of people.
--- End quote ---
Is based stickman trying to uphold the law here? Is he trying to arrest people or beat people for possessing tear gas or whatever the forget? No, he's defending his friends from deliberately malicious people trying to harm them. There is a difference.
If this were indiscriminant, unjustified behavior, you wouldn't see him acting defensively or backing down once the threat is over, and we wouldn't be having this conversation.
e-maxx:
tbh if you have to dress up in full armor just to defend your right to protest somewhere maybe you shouldn't protest there.
Tactical Nuke:
--- Quote from: e-maxx on March 07, 2017, 05:55:21 PM ---tbh if you have to dress up in full armor just to defend your right to protest somewhere maybe you shouldn't protest there.
--- End quote ---
maybe you shouldn't have to worry about expressing your opinion anywhere
can we start there