Do you understand that when a government does not enforce the law equally and fairly and in fact enforces the law as a political weapon and with favoritism for their preferred political causes and to murder those they disagree with is a sign of that government not being legitimate?

Spoiler: show

Alpine wrote:

Pvanderzee wrote:

Alpine wrote:

MadPick wrote:

Alpine wrote:

MadPick wrote:

I don’t understand why y’all think it was so wrong. Wouldn’t you do exactly the same thing if someone was climbing into your workplace or home?

I’m not trying to differentiate this from the many other riots. I think it was the same thing, just right vs left. Should many of the other rioters have met the same fate as they harmed and threatened other citizens? Hell yeah.

But don’t make special rules just because we are talking about folks on the right.

We watched the CHAZ go down and sitting Dem congresswomen from SeattHell and elsewhere in WA praise it despite CHAZ being an actual armed rebellion and secession from the USA that lasted weeks and resulted in multiple murders and the Jan 6 incident was unarmed and had almost no direct deaths related to it except for the civilian murdered when leftist armed rebels don't get killed.

The double standard is intolerable.

I agree 100%.

But what I see in this thread is more double standard -- this time from OUR side.

If that had been an antifa riot at the Capitol, and they had breached those doors and started climbing through, and one of them had been shot by those inside . . . nearly every single one of us would have said, "good shoot."

Let's not stoop to the left's level. Our position is a good one (riots aren't ok, and if you break in and threaten people you could get shot), and it works for January 6th as well.

None of us were in a position to legally stop CHAZ.

The demonrats praising and facilitating the actual armed rebellion and secession from the USA known as CHAZ were.

If we're in a society where CHAZ can happen without being stopped then Ashley should not have been shot, period.

So what's the argument here? That CHAZ was OK, therefore Babbit shouldn't have been shot? They didn't do anything then, so they shouldn't have done anything to Babbit? Because I don't think anybody here actually believes either incident was ok. CHAZ should've been squashed very quickly, and nobody except authorized personnel should've been let inside the capital. Protest outside, fine, but this is a secure (allegedly) government building.

I agree with the bull. I see a double-standard being employed here. I have no idea what it really looked like inside the building, what Babbit was doing that made her seem like a threat to the shooter, etc., but it isn't out of the realm of possibility that the shooting was, if not justified, at least understandable from the shooter's point of view. Unknown, unauthorized parties are entering the building, and you see somebody coming through a window that shouldn't be.

I don't know if it's justified or not. But it sure seems like we ought to take a serious look before we condemn anybody as a murderer. As always, innocent until proven guilty. Anything less and we're no better than the anti-cop protesters like those in Kenosha.

WA's justifiable homicide statutes have been gutted by the courts here to require fear of harm or injury. If people committing felonies and brandishing long guns in downtown Seattle and even eventually result in multiple murders don't meet that qualification then tell me how Pramilla Jayapal and Suzanne DelBene who control the DC police and capitol security and are also from here and representing this area can effectively have an unarmed civilian shot for less?

The 14th Amendment says we're supposed to be equal under the law. Where's the equality for Ashley?

So again, what's the argument here? Are you arguing that, even though both events were wrong and justified some use of force, nothing should've happened to Babbit because a different police force in a different city on the literal other side of the continent were ordered to do nothing in regards to the CHAZ/CHOP incident? It seems like you're using the low standards of the other side to condemn Babbit's death, even though those low standards shouldn't have been used in the first place. You obviously think that the CHAZ/CHOP incident was an unjust incident that was handled improperly, as you should. Are you using that event as an analogy because Babbit's actions were comparable? If not, steer me in the right direction, but if so, then Babbit should have been handled in the same way that CHAZ/CHOP rioters should have been handled, but weren't.

In other words, it seems like you're sinking to their level. Tell me if I'm missing something. I am genuinely perplexed at what point you and others are trying to get at.

"It's ok for them, why not for us?"

If two people each murder somebody, in totally unrelated events, and one is prosecuted very enthusiastically while the other is ignored, I don't think the solution is to release both murderers because one is treated unfairly. The solution is to prosecute them both, and ensure both are carried out in a similar, and therefore equal, fashion.

The CHAZ isn't the first time police and liberal-controlled security have allowed leftists to take over city blocks, government buildings, etc.

We have been conditioned over the last half century since the civil rights movement that "sit ins" in ALL TYPES OF government buildings (federal state local, etc.) are "ok" and should not be responded to with violence.

So explain why Jan 6 warranted a different response given that people were not armed and the "insurrectionists" did not kill anyone?

if it was OK for Obama's attorney general, why wasn't it OK for Ashley Babbit?

Don't dismiss this as a one-off example of whataboutism, this is about such a huge pattern of behavior that it has in fact become recognized law due to precedent of response after decades.

I thought it was Trump's attorney general in office during chaz? Is that not correct?

Obama's attorney general seized and occupied an ROTC facility in the 1970s. He was not shot. There are so many other leftists that have been allowed to seize and occupy government buildings of all types for decades that it has basically become enshrined in law. And then comes Jan 6.

Do you really think that if BLM had done the same thing as happened on Jan 6th, that they would get away with it? I certainly don't.
This is apples and oranges, not all apples.

They did worse to federal buildings in Portland and did not get murdered. Did you forget that?
QED.

apples and oranges. If it was BLM on jan 6th, I guarantee they would not have gotten away with it.

I think the chaz and portland crap should have been put down as well. But the local crap governments gave in.