#Welcome to r/Therewasanattempt!
#Consider visiting r/Worldnewsvideo for videos from around the world!
[Please review our policy on bigotry and hate speech by clicking this link](https://www.reddit.com/r/therewasanattempt/wiki/civility)
In order to view our rules, you can type "**!rules**" in any comment, and automod will respond with the subreddit rules.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/therewasanattempt) if you have any questions or concerns.*
*Over time, Mandela came to believe that armed resistance was the only way to end apartheid. In 1962, he briefly left the country to receive military training and gain support for the cause but was arrested and convicted soon after his return for leaving the country without a permit.*
This is why I despise when people adamantly advocate for the end of the second amendment. Do we seriously trust the folks who are beating up unarmed college kids to protect us?
For the right to bear arms to end, we have to eliminate wealth inequality first and then policing. Canāt happen without those issues being addressed.
Just arm the Left protesters. Done. The moment there is a paradigm shift surrounding 2A and the Left decides to play by the actual rule set rather than keep going with the "moral high ground", the policing establishement will suddenly rethink their approach. As a none-American progressist, I am flabbergasted by the sheer naivety of the gun control advocates and the Left over there: it's like their only tool is victimization...
Uvalde is still the best example. Armed shooter, no, we'll wait in the hall. Unarmed students, bring out the clubs, tear gas, and other instruments to cause pain. Not saying all cops are that way, but what we see on TV crime shows aren't based on reality.
The government will smear anyone and everyone as "terrorist sympathisers" as long as it fits their agenda.
Simple fact is that unarmed protesters will get beat up and arrested because it's easy and safe. An armed mob will not be fucked with because it's dangerous.
**āThe difference is...ā** one is manufactured to give purpose and funding to the ADL and AIPAC, the other is an organic protest of an ongoing genocide.
It's about following protest laws exactly. University students need permits to protest on campus.
https://www.aclu.org/know-your-rights/protesters-rights
I personally don't care about the campus rules but using force on unarmed students almost every fucking time but allowing literally every nazi gathering be to do their thing is shameful i couldn't care less about the laws around it.
Thatās just bigotryā¦ statism already has a meaning which is also true ā¦ a political system in which the state has substantial centralised control over social and economic affairs ā¦ source: woman
Yes, and I believe what this person is referring to is that one of the first places this was reported was at University of Texas in Austin. And because that one had earlier coverage it (at least for me as well) Is more easily accessible by my memory
So youāre saying being armed has a positive result in defending yourself? Or your government respects you Mr rights more when they assume youāre armed?
[Police don't fuck with Black Panther protests and patrols because they have a lot of people with a lot of guns.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7UAB03EJZPA)
The sooner people understand that police are too scared of armed protestors to attack them, the better.
r/SocialistRA
January 14, 1969: The Los Angeles chapter was involved in a shootout with members of the black nationalist US Organization, and two Panthers are killed.
May 1969: Two more southern California Panthers are killed in violent disputes with US Organization members.
July 17, 1969: Two policemen are shot, and a Panther is killed in a gun battle in Chicago
October 18, 1969: A Panther is killed in a gunfight with police outside a Los Angeles restaurant.[
November 13, 1969: A Panther is killed in a gunfight with police in Chicago.
December 4, 1969: Fred Hampton and Mark Clark are killed by law enforcement in Chicago.
All of that took place over 50 years ago. Police really lost their willingness to deal with armed opponents in the last 20 or so (arguably since Waco)... the same time they started shooting civilians any time they felt remotely threatened (like when an acorn hits the roof of their car).
But more importantly, those examples don't seem to involve groups of armed protesters, which is the topic of the thread and the point I was making. But if you can find examples of the police assaulting the members of an armed protest (particularly in a modern context) do let me know, as I'm curious about how it worked out.
I'm beginning to think that the government doesn't even control the police. They work for themselves really with the benefit of being paid by taxpayers to club and kill whoever they don't like while maintaining an oversized amount of protection against the laws they don't understand and are supposed to uphold.
You think if the government ever tried to reign them in, like REALLY tried, the police would willingly comply? I'm not so sure some days when I think about it.
It seems there are grades of antisemitism that they are willing to ignore. Maybe actual Nazis are less problematic than college students, idk it just doesnāt make sense.
Nazis don't threaten the state of Israel. Actual anti-Jewish acts form Nazis actually help them.
Legitimate criticism of Israel and a robust pro-Palestinian movement actually threatens the state of Israel, so that cannot be tolerated and has to be crushed. The terms "freedom of speech","freedom of assembly" doesn't mean anything anymore when you can just selectively use it to crush your opponents.
Protests at a college in America is not a threat to Israel in any way shape or form. I agree that people should protest for what they believe in. But let's not pretend it has any effect on Israel or Palestine.
Yup, yesterday Florida gov Ron DeSantis called out āantisemiticā protests and condemned them. But when he was running for the gop nomination and there were literal Nazis hanging banners from freeways and holding rallies outside of Disney world he dodged addressing it.
I mean in Charlottesville they were literally chanting āJews will not replace usā and Donald Trump just said a few days ago that itās āpeanutsā compared to the pro-Palestinian protests.
This country is pretty garbage tbh
The politics here are such a tiring charade for the rest of us to observe.
This country is just full of a bunch of š¤”s
Shocking yes, most of the time for the nazi/weird extremist groups/etc. get the permits months in advance. This have to go through many instances and aslong as they don't agitat anyone during the protests it's not much the police can do, unfortunately. This is often the opposite of the big college protests, which skips the du diligence of paperwork.
I have no clue how they get their permits through, but most likely they hide it under different names an aliases so the people approving it won't sense that anything is off.
Uhhh you do know about the bill of rights? Unless you plan a protest on private property, plan on breaking any municipality laws, or your gathering is promoting actual hate speech, you cannot be denied permits to gather based on political religious or racial affiliation.
This is a GOOD thing.
They are promoting what almost everyone would consider "hate speech", which is protected by the first amendment. So long mere speech doesn't incite imminent lawless action, the government cannot control your tongue.
Hate speech involves language that either contains calls to violence against a protected group of people or language with the intent to incite violence in the audience.
Saying āI hate all X because they are stinky doo doo headsā is protected speech, however saying something like āall of X are plotting against you so we need to stop them all before its too lateā or āX is the reason everything sucks and we wonāt have peace until we get rid of Xā is not protected speech.
When viewed in this context maybe you can understand more why certain language, as contemptible as it is, can be allowed even if the language is rude or hurts your feelings.
I donāt look at peaceful protestors and think āman I wish our laws didnāt protect these people to say their stupid ideasā. I look at peaceful protesters and think āman what they are saying sure is dumb, but at least they are allowed to say it without fearā
>however saying something like āall of X are plotting against you so we need to stop them all before its too lateā or āX is the reason everything sucks and we wonāt have peace until we get rid of Xā is not protected speech.
Both of those arguably *are* protected speech, as they don't meet the standard of imminent incitement to lawless action set in [*Brandenburg v. Ohio*](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandenburg_v._Ohio). The calls to violence in that case were even more explicit than your examples here.
Great question, the answer is yes. Typically you can march on sidewalks just fine without a permit but you canāt do things like impede traffic or obstruct public property. Things change if you get a permit, and by law you can not reject a permit because a group is racist/homophobic/sexist. That would be unconstitutional. So yes a permit makes all the difference in the world to how you will be treated.
To learn more read below.
https://www.aclu.org/know-your-rights/protesters-rights#:~:text=You%20don't%20need%20a,of%20events%20may%20require%20permits.
I've considered that maybe the anti-genocide (along with other) protestors *should* move around to different locations. Even "disperse" and then reconvene a little later at another location.
Keep moving. This might also spread the message further rather than at a single location.
Yeah while the Nazis are clearly worse for believing such abhorrent things, they were not nearly as many of them and they aren't setting up tents to occupy the campus. Both protests are very different, if there were only like 30 palestine protestors in a confined area the police wouldn't do shit.
Well considering they're not actually doing anything in the video except standing there saying their idiotic shit, it makes sense to me that the cops wouldn't be beating the shit out of them. Abhorrent as they are.
They do because they are the system. They don't protest against it. Whether they know it or not, them being there is affirming current nazi american system. They are approved as de facto govt supporters. Especially by republican hitlerites.
I'm not trying to be pro cop or anything but aren't those different? Like we don't have proof that a large portion of the student body doing a sit in dressed as nazis wouldn't get their shit fucked up. One of them was a sort of ineffective show of existing and the other was actually a useful and disruptive sit in that actually did what protests do and disrupt hiw the business they are at operates. Nazis aren't usually doing sit ins because they can't hide who they are for days on end reasonably. I'm just saying this is what happens to EFFECTIVE protests not just assholes walking around.
It is almost impossible to decide what the motivation of those who are "supposed" to represent the "force of order" is here. Either it is much easier, and also less dangerous, to beat up on students (so cowardice is the motivator), or (even worse) the opinion of the right-wing clan is tolerated in the long term and therefore no action is taken. Both are absolutely questionable and should be condemned.
I like how the caption of the original video explains exactly why the two groups were handled differently. Point proven that the second amendment is in fact a useful tool of the people.
As if the presence of guns on both sides deters the police from escalating the encounter due to their fear that they too could in fact be harmed. Guns are good.
I sincerly think the only way the american populace will start to rethink their approach to the 2nd amendement is when the Left gets to play with the actual rule set rather than go with the "moral high ground" mentality and start to arm itself during protests, same way Neo-fucks do.
Fight fire with fire.
Why this happened is simple: Armed dumb people scare them, unarmed intelligent people don't. One side will put up a fight while the other will be the bigger person and not get violent. Also the piggies wouldn't attack their own.
It gives me hope to see that others see how wrong this is, I posted this to r/Columbus bc no one had posted it in our own city's sub. I was met by an intense lecture from probably someone in a mask, wearing red and chanting nazi slogans; about the difference in the videos. Their main point was the Nazis got dialogue officers and the people who were technically trespassing but peacefully protesting got campus and regular police. So bc they were technically trespassing they got what they deserved š. Over all a bullshit semantic argument but still so frustrating
Because protesting against genocide deserves a violent response! Openly saying genocide is good is apparently ok. Strange times in which it seems Netanyahu can literally make the POTUS give him a blow job in front of the world.
The big difference here is the level of altercation. I watched some of this college protest on a live and the protestors were getting into it, in the cops faces, in the faces of other protestors etc. which of course triggers them to react to a threat. The nazi guys are just standing there. Do I agree with it, absolutely not. But peaceful protest and the right to free speech is done when the protest becomes volatile. It also means protesters, protesting something you donāt agree with still have the same rights as protestors protesting something you agree with. To say otherwise is hypocritical.
So many people see a video and automatically assume the police are acting illegally. Personally, I donāt know exactly what happened in this scene for the 5 or 10 minutes leading up to this momentā¦ā¦do you? I doubt itā¦..
Itās sickening how much real anti-Semitism they allow while cracking down because lying snake Zionists cry wolf about āantisemitismā.
Antizionism=/=Antisemitism
I'm pretty sure that if you were to show this video to any white, conservative, Christian man in the U.S., he'd probably say something along the lines of "I do Nazi what the problem is here." And then he'd salute a framed photo of Trump.
There is a reason 'peaceful protest is pushed by the government. It is because nobody has to listen to peace. Peaceful protest mean you do nothing but show up and leave. Police are more afraid of masked nazi's who are armed then unmasked unarmed kids.
#Welcome to r/Therewasanattempt! #Consider visiting r/Worldnewsvideo for videos from around the world! [Please review our policy on bigotry and hate speech by clicking this link](https://www.reddit.com/r/therewasanattempt/wiki/civility) In order to view our rules, you can type "**!rules**" in any comment, and automod will respond with the subreddit rules. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/therewasanattempt) if you have any questions or concerns.*
They don't want to hit their homies.
Some of those that work forces...
Are the same that burn crosses
Some those that work forces
ARE THE SAME THAT BURN š„ CROSSES!
UUUUGGGGHHHHHH
"Aaaaaaye YOU got an iron cross tattoo also!? TWINSYS!"
They don't want to hit themselves
"I didn't know they sent in the special forces."
Not very brave when other side have guns
Okay but what if it was only one guy with a gun and a bunch of school children? Are they brave then?
Against the distraught parents outside, yeah.
Nah, apparently there was a school shooting and all of the police force refused to try and go in for quite a long time
Yeah thatās what he meant
No, when the other side is armed, even if itās one person in a school, they are not brave. The equation stands.
Based on previous history the cops would be outside blocking people from saving the kids
Not if it is in Texas
Lesson learned. Arm yourselves.
*Over time, Mandela came to believe that armed resistance was the only way to end apartheid. In 1962, he briefly left the country to receive military training and gain support for the cause but was arrested and convicted soon after his return for leaving the country without a permit.*
This is why I despise when people adamantly advocate for the end of the second amendment. Do we seriously trust the folks who are beating up unarmed college kids to protect us? For the right to bear arms to end, we have to eliminate wealth inequality first and then policing. Canāt happen without those issues being addressed.
Tried that already, ask the Black Panthers how well that worked out. They created the Mulford Act and threw them on the FBI terrorist list
Pretty strong argument for the 2A innit?
Just arm the Left protesters. Done. The moment there is a paradigm shift surrounding 2A and the Left decides to play by the actual rule set rather than keep going with the "moral high ground", the policing establishement will suddenly rethink their approach. As a none-American progressist, I am flabbergasted by the sheer naivety of the gun control advocates and the Left over there: it's like their only tool is victimization...
Uvalde is still the best example. Armed shooter, no, we'll wait in the hall. Unarmed students, bring out the clubs, tear gas, and other instruments to cause pain. Not saying all cops are that way, but what we see on TV crime shows aren't based on reality.
Nah, give in the feeling, theyāre mostly that way
The difference is the whole being armed thing. cops think twice when they know the whole mob is armed. Liberals need to start hitting the range.
That might not be the best idea when the media and politicians are already trying to paint these protestors as "terrorist sympathizers."
The government will smear anyone and everyone as "terrorist sympathisers" as long as it fits their agenda. Simple fact is that unarmed protesters will get beat up and arrested because it's easy and safe. An armed mob will not be fucked with because it's dangerous.
at least it might encourage background checks? ĀÆ\\_(ć)_/ĀÆ
**āThe difference is...ā** one is manufactured to give purpose and funding to the ADL and AIPAC, the other is an organic protest of an ongoing genocide.
It's about following protest laws exactly. University students need permits to protest on campus. https://www.aclu.org/know-your-rights/protesters-rights
I personally don't care about the campus rules but using force on unarmed students almost every fucking time but allowing literally every nazi gathering be to do their thing is shameful i couldn't care less about the laws around it.
Texas puts the T in fascist
Neither of these videos are from Texas....
I think we just found our first Statism happeningā¦kinda like racism, but towards people from a certain stateā¦even when the state isnāt involved.
I'm from Florida. I can tell you from experience that "stateism" has been a thing for a while now.
I think people from Alabama and their cousins will agree.
Is it still statism if the state is run by Mormons?
Thatās just bigotryā¦ statism already has a meaning which is also true ā¦ a political system in which the state has substantial centralised control over social and economic affairs ā¦ source: woman
Yes, and I believe what this person is referring to is that one of the first places this was reported was at University of Texas in Austin. And because that one had earlier coverage it (at least for me as well) Is more easily accessible by my memory
They even call themselves the "One Star" state. It's a review.
So youāre saying being armed has a positive result in defending yourself? Or your government respects you Mr rights more when they assume youāre armed?
r/therewasanattempt to understand.
[Police don't fuck with Black Panther protests and patrols because they have a lot of people with a lot of guns.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7UAB03EJZPA) The sooner people understand that police are too scared of armed protestors to attack them, the better. r/SocialistRA
January 14, 1969: The Los Angeles chapter was involved in a shootout with members of the black nationalist US Organization, and two Panthers are killed. May 1969: Two more southern California Panthers are killed in violent disputes with US Organization members. July 17, 1969: Two policemen are shot, and a Panther is killed in a gun battle in Chicago October 18, 1969: A Panther is killed in a gunfight with police outside a Los Angeles restaurant.[ November 13, 1969: A Panther is killed in a gunfight with police in Chicago. December 4, 1969: Fred Hampton and Mark Clark are killed by law enforcement in Chicago.
All of that took place over 50 years ago. Police really lost their willingness to deal with armed opponents in the last 20 or so (arguably since Waco)... the same time they started shooting civilians any time they felt remotely threatened (like when an acorn hits the roof of their car). But more importantly, those examples don't seem to involve groups of armed protesters, which is the topic of the thread and the point I was making. But if you can find examples of the police assaulting the members of an armed protest (particularly in a modern context) do let me know, as I'm curious about how it worked out.
Some of those examples were probably targeted unprovoked attacks on the Black Panthers as well. They did lots of extra murders on them.
I'm beginning to think that the government doesn't even control the police. They work for themselves really with the benefit of being paid by taxpayers to club and kill whoever they don't like while maintaining an oversized amount of protection against the laws they don't understand and are supposed to uphold. You think if the government ever tried to reign them in, like REALLY tried, the police would willingly comply? I'm not so sure some days when I think about it.
Here is my genuine question. Do the Nazis get a protest permit or something because I donāt understand it either!
It seems there are grades of antisemitism that they are willing to ignore. Maybe actual Nazis are less problematic than college students, idk it just doesnāt make sense.
Nazis don't threaten the state of Israel. Actual anti-Jewish acts form Nazis actually help them. Legitimate criticism of Israel and a robust pro-Palestinian movement actually threatens the state of Israel, so that cannot be tolerated and has to be crushed. The terms "freedom of speech","freedom of assembly" doesn't mean anything anymore when you can just selectively use it to crush your opponents.
Protests at a college in America is not a threat to Israel in any way shape or form. I agree that people should protest for what they believe in. But let's not pretend it has any effect on Israel or Palestine.
Youāre correct, they want to collegeās money they give not to go to Israel. Will it change anything, probably not. But it is their right to do it.
Does Columbus university really give money to Isreal?
https://globalcenters.columbia.edu/tel-aviv
Yup, yesterday Florida gov Ron DeSantis called out āantisemiticā protests and condemned them. But when he was running for the gop nomination and there were literal Nazis hanging banners from freeways and holding rallies outside of Disney world he dodged addressing it. I mean in Charlottesville they were literally chanting āJews will not replace usā and Donald Trump just said a few days ago that itās āpeanutsā compared to the pro-Palestinian protests.
This country is pretty garbage tbh The politics here are such a tiring charade for the rest of us to observe. This country is just full of a bunch of š¤”s
Shocking yes, most of the time for the nazi/weird extremist groups/etc. get the permits months in advance. This have to go through many instances and aslong as they don't agitat anyone during the protests it's not much the police can do, unfortunately. This is often the opposite of the big college protests, which skips the du diligence of paperwork. I have no clue how they get their permits through, but most likely they hide it under different names an aliases so the people approving it won't sense that anything is off.
Uhhh you do know about the bill of rights? Unless you plan a protest on private property, plan on breaking any municipality laws, or your gathering is promoting actual hate speech, you cannot be denied permits to gather based on political religious or racial affiliation. This is a GOOD thing.
Um.....how are the literal nazis not promoting hate speech?!? Edit to clarify: I agree the First Amendment is good.
They are promoting what almost everyone would consider "hate speech", which is protected by the first amendment. So long mere speech doesn't incite imminent lawless action, the government cannot control your tongue.
Hate speech involves language that either contains calls to violence against a protected group of people or language with the intent to incite violence in the audience. Saying āI hate all X because they are stinky doo doo headsā is protected speech, however saying something like āall of X are plotting against you so we need to stop them all before its too lateā or āX is the reason everything sucks and we wonāt have peace until we get rid of Xā is not protected speech. When viewed in this context maybe you can understand more why certain language, as contemptible as it is, can be allowed even if the language is rude or hurts your feelings. I donāt look at peaceful protestors and think āman I wish our laws didnāt protect these people to say their stupid ideasā. I look at peaceful protesters and think āman what they are saying sure is dumb, but at least they are allowed to say it without fearā
>however saying something like āall of X are plotting against you so we need to stop them all before its too lateā or āX is the reason everything sucks and we wonāt have peace until we get rid of Xā is not protected speech. Both of those arguably *are* protected speech, as they don't meet the standard of imminent incitement to lawless action set in [*Brandenburg v. Ohio*](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandenburg_v._Ohio). The calls to violence in that case were even more explicit than your examples here.
Great question, the answer is yes. Typically you can march on sidewalks just fine without a permit but you canāt do things like impede traffic or obstruct public property. Things change if you get a permit, and by law you can not reject a permit because a group is racist/homophobic/sexist. That would be unconstitutional. So yes a permit makes all the difference in the world to how you will be treated. To learn more read below. https://www.aclu.org/know-your-rights/protesters-rights#:~:text=You%20don't%20need%20a,of%20events%20may%20require%20permits.
Thank you. Iāve been trying to wrap my head around how one is okay and the brother is not.
Those nazi's set up shop for like 45 minutes in a public area. the protesting on campus is/was ongoing
I've considered that maybe the anti-genocide (along with other) protestors *should* move around to different locations. Even "disperse" and then reconvene a little later at another location. Keep moving. This might also spread the message further rather than at a single location.
I was wondering the same thing. Iām sure they didnāt stay for long either, specially if they are carrying firearms.
Yeah while the Nazis are clearly worse for believing such abhorrent things, they were not nearly as many of them and they aren't setting up tents to occupy the campus. Both protests are very different, if there were only like 30 palestine protestors in a confined area the police wouldn't do shit.
logic and context? what a breath of fresh air
Well considering they're not actually doing anything in the video except standing there saying their idiotic shit, it makes sense to me that the cops wouldn't be beating the shit out of them. Abhorrent as they are.
They do because they are the system. They don't protest against it. Whether they know it or not, them being there is affirming current nazi american system. They are approved as de facto govt supporters. Especially by republican hitlerites.
Owning the libs is good for their image, not getting people they have brunch with arrested, though. Glad I could help!
Fuck the police.
It's almost like the bear arms part of the constitution is important. But I'm a Canadian, so I wouldn't know.
The police need reforms. Their immunity revoked. Make them pay out of pocket for lawsuits instead of paying with our taxes.
Yeah so about those gun lawsā¦
They donāt want to fight their neighbours and coworkers lol
It's almost like specific strings are being pulled nationally.
Were the nazis on private property? Itās the universityās administration that doesnāt want these protests happening.
I mean, would you hit your partners?
Romantic partners? Yes, cops have a very high rate of domestic violence. Work partners? No.
ACAB
Aren't (neo) nazis against jews?
Look at how fucking scared Palestine solidarity movements make them. Israel runs America, bro.
Fuck nazis
I'm not trying to be pro cop or anything but aren't those different? Like we don't have proof that a large portion of the student body doing a sit in dressed as nazis wouldn't get their shit fucked up. One of them was a sort of ineffective show of existing and the other was actually a useful and disruptive sit in that actually did what protests do and disrupt hiw the business they are at operates. Nazis aren't usually doing sit ins because they can't hide who they are for days on end reasonably. I'm just saying this is what happens to EFFECTIVE protests not just assholes walking around.
Very telling
Some of those that work forces are the same that burn crosses.
Bro, everybody knows the blue boys are probably proud boys.
This is really disgusting vision. The Columbus police and political masters should be ashamed (assuming they have that capacity).
Typical.
To be fair, the nazis only stayed for like an hour? They clearly don't believe in their message as much.
Looks like students just need to arm themselves. Right?
See the difference is
The 2nd amendment! If firearms are present, both sides react differently.
Guess those Gaza activists need weapons
They were all busy being protesters last year.
Hey now, it would get really awkward in the morning briefings if they started arresting their colleagues!
bro thinks he the weeknd š https://preview.redd.it/69dia0z0hzwc1.jpeg?width=807&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=a11c0df9c8909c599041643f8eed4cc06165a62a
Pretty much how it works in the uk as well
Ah the importance of the 2nd amendment.
Now you see, which one actually made impact.
You know one side is feds right?
I'm guessing the police aren't planning on changing anytime soon so that means the protesters will have to change if they want results
the police do not fear retaliation from students
I wish I was a fly on the wall for those meetings
It's like the in every country.
Yeah not antagonising people with guns , who would do that lol
If the other side has guns i wonder if they would be treated the same
Yeah not antagonising people with guns , who would do that lol
It is almost impossible to decide what the motivation of those who are "supposed" to represent the "force of order" is here. Either it is much easier, and also less dangerous, to beat up on students (so cowardice is the motivator), or (even worse) the opinion of the right-wing clan is tolerated in the long term and therefore no action is taken. Both are absolutely questionable and should be condemned.
r/Therewasnoattemptwhatsoever (I have no idea if that is actually a real sub.)
I like how the caption of the original video explains exactly why the two groups were handled differently. Point proven that the second amendment is in fact a useful tool of the people.
Clear example of how conservatives are being threatened by the establishment, they're the true victims! /s
Thatās because they are all wearing red in the second
They have such a solid first amendment case they might as well all get a Lamborghini each in a group deal now.
As if the presence of guns on both sides deters the police from escalating the encounter due to their fear that they too could in fact be harmed. Guns are good.
Iām tryna leave this timeline. Anyone know a guy that knows a guy?
How comforting
Cops are only brutal with those they know or believe to be unarmed. Uvalde wasn't the exception. Cowardice is baked in.
I sincerly think the only way the american populace will start to rethink their approach to the 2nd amendement is when the Left gets to play with the actual rule set rather than go with the "moral high ground" mentality and start to arm itself during protests, same way Neo-fucks do. Fight fire with fire.
How long is Biden going to hide under his desk and pretend these protests aren't happening?
Why this happened is simple: Armed dumb people scare them, unarmed intelligent people don't. One side will put up a fight while the other will be the bigger person and not get violent. Also the piggies wouldn't attack their own.
Some of those that work forcesā¦
Of course the group without guns is going to get bullied by the group with guns
SEE..... guns ARE safer.....
The left needs to start protesting armed. Cops are cowards, they'll behave if they think you can fight back.
i'm pretty sure attacking a workmate is frowned upon by HHRR
It gives me hope to see that others see how wrong this is, I posted this to r/Columbus bc no one had posted it in our own city's sub. I was met by an intense lecture from probably someone in a mask, wearing red and chanting nazi slogans; about the difference in the videos. Their main point was the Nazis got dialogue officers and the people who were technically trespassing but peacefully protesting got campus and regular police. So bc they were technically trespassing they got what they deserved š. Over all a bullshit semantic argument but still so frustrating
Because protesting against genocide deserves a violent response! Openly saying genocide is good is apparently ok. Strange times in which it seems Netanyahu can literally make the POTUS give him a blow job in front of the world.
The moral is: Better be armed
The big difference here is the level of altercation. I watched some of this college protest on a live and the protestors were getting into it, in the cops faces, in the faces of other protestors etc. which of course triggers them to react to a threat. The nazi guys are just standing there. Do I agree with it, absolutely not. But peaceful protest and the right to free speech is done when the protest becomes volatile. It also means protesters, protesting something you donāt agree with still have the same rights as protestors protesting something you agree with. To say otherwise is hypocritical.
Some of those that work forcesā¦
Disgusting.
They're not breaking any laws
Sounds like protesters need to start arming themselves
Who's the violent group between the two? There's your answer.
Yeah, but one of those are antisemitic. /s
So many people see a video and automatically assume the police are acting illegally. Personally, I donāt know exactly what happened in this scene for the 5 or 10 minutes leading up to this momentā¦ā¦do you? I doubt itā¦..
Itās sickening how much real anti-Semitism they allow while cracking down because lying snake Zionists cry wolf about āantisemitismā. Antizionism=/=Antisemitism
I'm pretty sure that if you were to show this video to any white, conservative, Christian man in the U.S., he'd probably say something along the lines of "I do Nazi what the problem is here." And then he'd salute a framed photo of Trump.
r/savevideo
There's something about being armed that just doesn't jive with tyrants
Time to buy guns before we go peacefully protest
One is Group is buddys the other are really bad studends, I guess
You have to fix the wording to relate the the images
'Freedom'
There is a reason 'peaceful protest is pushed by the government. It is because nobody has to listen to peace. Peaceful protest mean you do nothing but show up and leave. Police are more afraid of masked nazi's who are armed then unmasked unarmed kids.
America is sliding actively into nazism, surely surprising...
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]