• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

'When the looting starts, the shooting starts': Trump outraged by Minnesota protests

Logophile said:
Okay, so you are qualifying your opinion.



Assuming that people are "calling for violence," but that's quite an assumption. If I say in my opinion "looters should be shot," does that mean I'm calling for violence?? I guess it's a matter of interpretation, and that's where it gets tricky with regard to free speech. And by the way, Trump did not actually say that. If I say, this person deserves to be hung, does that mean I'm inciting violence or it is just an opinion?? Because I've heard it a lot about Trump but not too many objections!! Still I do agree, that if the owner of a private forum deemed somebody's speech as unacceptable, the owner has a right to bar that individual, even if it's because of the forum owner has an opposing political point of view or some other bias. So, we do agree there!!


Jezcoe said:
You have a right to Freedom of Speech. You do not have a right to someone else's private platform.

As far as the handling of Covid. The deflection and blaming of China has little to do with the President all but ignoring it in February, having a clown show response from March into April and now making the simple act of wearing a mask during a pandemic as part of identity politics.

All the President had to do was halfway competently handle the pandemic with seriousness and with the advise of his councilors and he would have 100% won the Presidency in Nov. But that takes hard work... so he didn't do that. Now excuses have to be made as to why he failed so hard and distractions have to made... thus the Stupid Twitter beef with Twitter.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Sorry about incorporating your quote in my response without properly identifying it. Hope this works!!
 
Ahlevah said:
Trump will be raked over the coals for this, but looters SHOULD be shot on sight.
Click to expand...

im ok with shooting rioters in defense of people

and even property but i think you should get a warning before some one kills you over a threat to property alone

and of course if weer going to kill people for braking the law when it comes to theft and destruction of property it seems like killing cops who have done so would be only fair and that killing cops who have committed more serious crimes like murder or assault would be justified in the defense of are fellow man and his rights

attacking police stations would be more tricky you should wait to see if the offending officers are charged or not 1st and only if they are not sentenced for their crimes would the police and the property and gear they use become a legitimate target

but destroying and steeling uninvolved property both private and public is definitely wrong
 
Logophile said:
Okay, so you are qualifying your opinion.



Assuming that people are "calling for violence," but that's quite an assumption. If I say in my opinion "looters should be shot," does that mean I'm calling for violence?? I guess it's a matter of interpretation, and that's where it gets tricky with regard to free speech. And by the way, Trump did not actually say that. If I say, this person deserves to be hung, does that mean I'm inciting violence or it is just an opinion?? Because I've heard it a lot about Trump but not too many objections!! Still I do agree, that if the owner of a private forum deemed somebody's speech as unacceptable, the owner has a right to bar that individual, even if it's because of the forum owner has an opposing political point of view or some other bias. So, we do agree there!!


You have a right to Freedom of Speech. You do not have a right to someone else's private platform.

As far as the handling of Covid. The deflection and blaming of China has little to do with the President all but ignoring it in February, having a clown show response from March into April and now making the simple act of wearing a mask during a pandemic as part of identity politics.

All the President had to do was halfway competently handle the pandemic with seriousness and with the advise of his councilors and he would have 100% won the Presidency in Nov. But that takes hard work... so he didn't do that. Now excuses have to be made as to why he failed so hard and distractions have to made... thus the Stupid Twitter beef with Twitter.
Click to expand...
[/QUOTE]

Saying people should be shot is advocating violence. In this case it is treating property crime and theft as a capital offense.

We are all adults here... well I am assuming that.. and when adults have to play out a game of parsing out words to say that they didn't really say what was said.. the jig is up. We know what the context is, we know what the connotation is and we know the historical pedigree of the President's tweet that got a warning slapped on it.

But I am glad that we can agree that a private platform has a right to police it's platform however they wish. Them doing so is not an infringement of Free Speech.
 
ecofarm said:
Trumpers are racist.
Click to expand...

Well, that seems like a gross generalization and probably not true but for a small percent, but that could be said of any group. Have you conversed with a majority of "Trumpers or even a minority?? I worry about statements like yours: vitriolic in my opinion and to a certain degree, inflammatory, also without credibility at least for me unless you could back up your statement with some substantive evidence. Can you??
 
Logophile said:
Well, that seems like a gross generalization and probably not true but for a small percent, but that could be said of any group. Have you conversed with a majority of "Trumpers or even a minority?? I worry about statements like yours: vitriolic in my opinion and to a certain degree, inflammatory, also without credibility at least for me unless you could back up your statement with some substantive evidence. Can you??
Click to expand...

How long you been here?
 
Puigb said:
Demographics were way different in 1988, as was the overall political environment. GOP tried in 2012 to scare white voters into voting for Romney and against Obama with talks of "race riots" and "the knockout game" videos, and failed miserably.
But yeah, try again in 2020 to see if it works.
Click to expand...


Yeah; I remember. O'Biden in 2012 scaring black voters into voting against Republicans: "They're gonna put y'all back in chains,"
 
Jezcoe said:
It's crazy what merits the death penalty these days.
Click to expand...


The only one who could legally use lethal force on looters would be the owners of the store as people broke in.

Randomly shooting unarmed people in the street for running with a flat screen is not legal...
 
Barnacle said:
Yeah; I remember. O'Biden in 2012 scaring black voters into voting against Republicans: "They're gonna put y'all back in chains,"
Click to expand...


Since trump they sure as **** have tried, so what's your point?!?
 
Barnacle said:
Yeah; I remember. O'Biden in 2012 scaring black voters into voting against Republicans: "They're gonna put y'all back in chains,"
Click to expand...

When all they did was strip the Voting Rights Act of its enforcement provisions. Well, one step at a time.
 
Trump promoting more violence as violent protests seem to be increasing around the country, is probably not a great re-election strategy. Those college educated suburban (white) women voters, upon which the fate of so many swing states hinge, will want a more calming leadership.

But its all he's got.
 
Looks like MN will be going red in November after this mismanagement. Who stands by and lets rioters burn down your police station. LOL. JFC.
 
ecofarm said:
How long you been here?
Click to expand...

Just long enough to want affirmation for some of the "facts" reported. I keenly sense that the claim of racism is often used as a weapon wielded very unfairly against certain conservative leaning folks or businessmen or women or just people that people don't like. And the charge of racism is serious, so I don't think it should be thrown out there without some kind of credible evidence. If, for example, you had stated that some "Trumpers" are racist or may be racist or that in your opinion, "Trumpers are racist" and gave reasons as to why you think that, I could respect your claim a little more, I suppose. Anyway, thank you for responding!!
 
j brown's body said:
Why isn't it?
Click to expand...

It's criminal activity. Standing outside a police station with signs and shouting (aka expressing freedom of speech) are protests. The people doing that are protesters.

People burning a police station are not expressing freedom of speech. They are not protesting, but committing a crime. They are not protesters, but arsonists and criminals.
 
Logophile said:
Just long enough to want affirmation for some of the "facts" reported. I keenly sense that the claim of racism is often used as a weapon wielded very unfairly against certain conservative leaning folks or businessmen or women or just people that people don't like. And the charge of racism is serious, so I don't think it should be thrown out there without some kind of credible evidence. If, for example, you had stated that some "Trumpers" are racist or may be racist or that in your opinion, "Trumpers are racist" and gave reasons as to why you think that, I could respect your claim a little more, I suppose. Anyway, thank you for responding!!
Click to expand...

You're welcome.
 
TobyOne said:
Looks like MN will be going red in November after this mismanagement. Who stands by and lets rioters burn down your police station. LOL. JFC.
Click to expand...

Haha, totally agreed! Trump almost won Minnesota in 2016. I don’t see how this helps the Democrats this time around.
 
j brown's body said:
Trump promoting more violence as violent protests seem to be increasing around the country, is probably not a great re-election strategy. Those college educated suburban (white) women voters, upon which the fate of so many swing states hinge, will want a more calming leadership.

But its all he's got.
Click to expand...

How is Trump promoting these "violent protests"?
 
Puigb said:
Trump will be raked over the coals because he made it political. But his reaction is no surprise to anyone. Trump will use these riots in campaign commercials to rile up his idiot base.
Click to expand...

The violence and riots associated with the BLM movement helped elect him in 2016. He's got to be hoping he gets a repeat.
 
j brown's body said:
When all they did was strip the Voting Rights Act of its enforcement provisions. Well, one step at a time.
Click to expand...

When did that happen?

And please don't make reference to striking down the pre-clearance requirements imposed on states based on outdated requirements.
 
Ban him from Twitter.
 
I don't see the issue. Looters are thugs. When the looting starts, the shooting does start.

The bad apples in the African American community are their own worst enemy. Protesting a violent and lawless cop by violence and lawlessness of your own dilutes your message and contributes to the endless cycle of prejudice and justification for it.
 
tres borrachos said:
Why am I not surprised about a Trump supporter publicly expressing delight at the idea of shooting black people on sight?

Hey, can you cite the code that says looting is punishable by death? And the next time we have white people rioting over the loss of their sports team, do you plan to pick up your gun and go randomly shooting them on sight?
Click to expand...


Well when Dallas stole the north stars (a d then used them to win a Stanley cup) I wanted to pick up arms and attack that theiving city.

Color was irrelevant I just wanted the north stars back and I was willing to fight for them!!!
 
Puigb said:
Trump will be raked over the coals because he made it political. But his reaction is no surprise to anyone. Trump will use these riots in campaign commercials to rile up his idiot base.
Click to expand...
I believe people will bend to the pressure, whether Trump is President or not. The democrat run cities will continue to cower the PD, the PD will “give the rioters room to riot”, as they did here in Baltimore, and allow thugs to throw garbage at the as they do in NY, and run from rioters throwing rocks and explosives at them while burning down their police station. They will loose revenue as business and hard working citizens flee, to places that are more livable. Wittiness the exodus from places like California. Right here in Baltimore, used to be a bustling city of one million. Now, a carcass of a once vibrant city, with half the people of last century. Very sad. I have my sights set on West Va.
 
Airyaman said:
Yeah, let's go 3rd world on their asses!
Click to expand...

We take our country and its relative stability for granted. There is a fine line between order and chaos. History has presented plenty of examples of how leftists ruin once great countries with their "progress." I suppose it will take innocent people being burned to death or shot by criminals taking advantage of the rioting before they get a clue, but then probably not. Our police stations and other public buildings aren't just "bricks and mortar." They're symbols of what stands between civilization and the law of the jungle.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom