What? I admitted that the isolated incident you mentioned(that I haven't heard about) should be prosecuted to the fullest extent.

Don't put words in my mouth. How has Portland been looking since the election?

 

Does the Boston Tea Party ring a bell?

Does the American Revolution ring a bell?

Does the Civil War ring a bell?

Our history is replete with examples of the fact that meaningful change of a bad/ broken system only came about after violent protests, or armed conflict.

I MYSELF AM NOT FOR VIOLENT PROTESTS. I don't condone it, BUT I UNDERSTAND. Sometimes after years of oppression, or being ignored, or being told to be patient, and nothing changes, or the more they change, the more they stay the same, violent protest becomes the pressure relief valve.

By the way, which is more sinister, people rioting, breaking a few windows, injuring a few policemen, and then dispersing after a few days, OR, militia group members, or white supremacists plotting to kidnap and murder State governors, and blow up a Federal buildings and other targets?

Let's not kid ourselves; outside of the damage, the REAL reason why some of you have a problem with the rioters is because you don't care that racial injustice and inequality is an oppressive burden, that some in our country have had to be dealing with, and they are tired of it. You do not see them as being deserving of being treated with the same respect, and having the same privilege as you do. That is the reason why some look down at the rioters with scorn, because there exists prejudice and no empathy for the plight of those "people".

 

You are deflecting. I asked about right wing riots. Where are they?

Which is worse? Doing nothing or burning cities to the ground?

 

Here's the big problem. Whatever the right does to the left sets a precedent. Something like 9% of the country protested after Floyd in every population center.

So, the next time the right cares about something enough to protest it, what leg is there to stand on? Hypothetically if we have a Dem controlled POTUS and Senate that wants to make all firearms except single shot rifles illegal, and 9% of the country protests nationwide, why should the Dems care? Just ignore it, until it goes away and if they get violent, it justifies a disproportionate response. That's what the GOP did with Floyd.

I'm very unhappy about the kack if poluce accountability that was brought to the surface, but I'm more concerned that if 9% of the country protesting can't actually achieve anything, then we, the people, have lost a lot of power.

As a side note, I love my guns but I can recognize when either side is taking my freedoms.

 

The 3 of you are complete whack jobs. I don't know why I engaged in the first place.

The most reasonable people I have talked with are in the middle and can see both sides. You 3 do not belong to that group.

 

I answered you very clearly. There are no protests, no riots, no new legislation, no anything. The group, as a whole, doesn't care.

They showed up to state capitals with guns over masks, so they're not above protesting, but they don't care about police accountability.

 

Whatever Tucker. Sorry your arguments don't hold water outside your echo chamber.

 

The right wing does not represent a constituent that is being discriminated solely based on something they can't change... their race, so they have nothing to riot about.

The (far) right don't riot, but they do conspire in secret and have engaged in violence against the state, and they do so not because they are being oppressed, but simply from a position of hatred.

That is the distinction.

 

Here’s the answer you’re looking for: there have been no riots in the aftermath of the election.

 

I recommend you read Jason Whitlock’s article about love versus hate in this election.