Oh for sure. I don't agree with those guys either. I never said I supported it? I specifically said I didn't support that either.

I'm all 2A, but I think the people out standing around rifles are just asking for a bad situation. But now this seems to be the norm so everybody will be doing it.

"well actchuallllllly one happened in 1965 and the other in 2001, so nice try, but time exists."

That's like saying a Nazi movement marching through your city with rifles shouting White Power is the same as a bunch of guys with rifles standing outside the mayors house asking for justice.

It seems like one is attempting to instill fear on the general public where the other isn't.

They both might be legal, but I don't think people would view them as the same.

This post was edited by GLYC123 on Jul 6 2020 12:09pm

I disagree that the people standing with guns outside the mayor's office aren't trying to instill fear. They are carrying guns for a reason, and I've always been told that the reason for the second amendment is to rise up against an oppressive government. Rising up requires violence after all.

This post was edited by Thor123422 on Jul 6 2020 12:12pm

Wearing black clothes/face masks to conceal your identity.
Harassing citizens.
Chanting Black Power.

And once again you're using the notion that I'm defending one and not the other. I'm not. I don't support either of them either way. Lol

But hey it is their right for both parties so whatever

This post was edited by GLYC123 on Jul 6 2020 12:14pm

in your post u mocked the idea that they are the same, then mentioned ways that they are the same.

pointing out specific similarities and differences then allowing someone to amend their comparison is good sport, "those are different so lol @ u" is dumb. the latter happens far too often.

i also detest generalities in comparisons being used just to spur conversation that then get taken literally, but that's another topic.

So wearing black conceals your identity, but camo doesn't?

I don't really accept "harassing citizens". When the right likes the protest they don't call it harassing, and when they don't they tend to call any issue "harassing citizens" even if its just blocking people for 10 seconds at a picket. The point of a protest is to be annoying and get attention.

Let's be clear. Chanting black power and chanting white power have very different historical contexts. White power was associated with specific acts of violence and groups dedicated to violence that frequently had the full support of the police and national guard, to the point where they burned down whole black neighborhoods with the police alongside. Chanting black power does not have the same history of violence associated with it. When you change a word in a phrase it doesn't automatically assume the same context but in reverse. There hasn't been a time in the United States where black people were able to perpetrate the same level of violence on whites while chanting black power.

This post was edited by Thor123422 on Jul 6 2020 12:19pm

When you demand reparations from a guy. It seems to be harassing. Lol.

Weren't you one if the users on here complaining about the phrase All Lives Matter? And assuming that means the context of Black Lives Don't Matter.

This post was edited by GLYC123 on Jul 6 2020 12:24pm

Anything can be harassing if you define harassing to be broad enough. A protest is supposed to be annoying. That's the point.

Yes, I was, because "All Lives Matter" is specifically a way to say there isn't a problem that needs to be addressed. I don't see your point here.

How so?

You're assuming the context of the phrase All Lives Matter. I don't think people saying that are supporting police brutality or discounting a black life lost. But instead being inclusive to all races.