Using the threat of violence to affect political change only works if the ordinary person is sufficiently afraid. Example A and example B aren't different, they are a functioning unit. Example A gets what he wants because of the action Example B took.
On the left, an armed man entering a government building to exercise his right to peaceful protest. On the right, an armed man entering a government building to murder people. In all sincerity, how is any ordinary person supposed to know the difference & respond appropriately?pic.twitter.com/v0hwhyKscw
-
-
-
Very good point.
- Još 5 drugih odgovora
Novi razgovor -
-
-
Honestly, I'm waiting for the test case on this one. I think some citizen can see a dude like this, grab the largest heavy object, and smash his skull. And then some lawyer will have to convince a jury that THIS doesn't create the impression of danger and imminent threat.
-
I fear the other possibility. These guys will so normalize this behavior that one of them could stroll right into a crowd and start shooting. Defense lawyers for the cops will argue their inaction wasn't negligent because there was no reason to suspect a heavily armed masked man.
- Još 1 odgovor
Novi razgovor -
-
-
Man on left is being escorted. You can see the escort's hand on the right of the image.
-
- Još 2 druga odgovora
Novi razgovor -
-
-
How are the cops supposed to distinguish between them either? This all madness.
-
Because the cops waved them around the metal detectors and gave them a sticker... https://twitter.com/joe_gerth/status/1223278777045856257?s=21 …https://twitter.com/joe_gerth/status/1223278777045856257 …
0:32 - Još 1 odgovor
Novi razgovor -
-
-
One has a Gucci belt.
- Još 2 druga odgovora
Novi razgovor -
Čini se da učitavanje traje već neko vrijeme.
Twitter je možda preopterećen ili ima kratkotrajnih poteškoća u radu. Pokušajte ponovno ili potražite dodatne informacije u odjeljku Status Twittera.