It was in direct response to this:
We absolutely want to take care that we don’t treat people too harshly. Otherwise we turn into people like Trump.
When you have an example of any aspect the response to these events being too harsh, please cite it and we can discuss it.
Meanwhile, I think the actual concern is about the fact that half the country is minimizing what happened, and most notably the fact that the instigator is still technically running the country.
I endorse both of Riemann’s posts.
The Capitol Police Chief, who had already resigned and was due to step down on the 16th, has now left early.
I suppose we’ll get the full story eventually.
He was identified as well:
You KNOW these Butthurt MAGAlosers* are going to try this again - some say next Sunday the 17th. I hope preparations are being made to shut it down quickly and/or do some serious MAGAfilth head-busting.
*(Band Name)
Excellent. All I had been hearing about was the retired military guy with zip ties.
A bartender who brought his mother with him. I’m disappointed.
Is there something special about Sunday the 17th other than some terrorists having used up all their sick days?
For those wringing their hands over whether people in this terrorist mob will be treated too harshly and overcharged, here for your consideration is a list of charges that quite clearly could be brought just for being part of the riot, even with no more evidence than the photographs and video that they provided themselves.
Yes, I remember how furious I was when, after the January 2017 marches, Trump started blathering about laws that would make anyone that attended a protest liable for any crimes committed during that protest.
I’ve always been a pretty hardcore free speech advocate. There have just been too many times when someone suggested I not view or read something because it was “nothing but hate speech”, but when I did I found that there were legitimate views being expressed. Views I disagreed with, even hated, but there was content there.
But it’s not hate speech that is the problem here. It’s the relentless, coordinated disinformation unleashed on a population that does not have the discernment required to filter and process it.
I can no longer advocate for unlimited free speech. But I have no suggestions, I’m still trying to process this.
Q is the 17th letter of the alphabet. So apparently it’s a significant day to QAnon-ers.
It’s also the super secret month. Tell them to attack on the 17th of the 17th month. Extra special on that day.
It’s also a 3 day weekend. With Monday off it gives them all time to get back home for their opening shift at Arby’s.
“People do crazy things … “like eat at Arby’s”.” -Marge Simpson
But in the case of Euphonious Polemic, it was, in fact, a dishonest interpretation of my argument. He said:
The clear implication of his post is that I was advocating simply taking the word of the insurrectionists about their actions and their intentions, and letting it go at that. But no-one with more than three functioning neurons believes that this is how criminal investigations work, and no honest person with more than three functioning neurons, especially among people who have been in numerous discussions with me over the years on this message board, would believe that this is the argument I was making.
I have absolutely no trouble with people disagreeing with me, and telling me so in clear and forceful terms. I’ve been on this board for almost 20 years, and have been involved in a lot of incredibly vigorous disagreements, often with people who share my general political outlook and worldview. I think it’s good when people are willing to disagree even with those who are generally “on their side” in a social or political discussion.
In the 20 years I’ve been here, I’ve also been an incredibly consistent voice in support of left-progressive politics, and I guess that when I make an argument on a divisive issue like this, it would be nice to have the people on my own side engage with the argument is a reasoned manner, rather than assume that I’ve suddenly and inexplicably joined the reactionaries.
My first post on this topic was to disagree with @RickJay, who said:
I disagreed with that argument, and I still disagree with it, despite the fact that it is clear to me, after years of personal interactions, that RickJay and I agree on a lot of things when it comes to politics. Furthermore, I didn’t march in and accuse him of being a law-and-order zealot or just another authoritarian Joe Arpaio clone, because I know that he’s not, and I know that the events of last week really angered a lot of people, including me.
But while some people simply expressed their disagreement, I was accused by others on my own side of politics of excusing the violence, and I was equated with one of the most egregious, reactionary, right-wing bigots on this message board. I expect that sort of thing from @Czarcasm; he’s almost the poster child around here for the “Assholes I wish weren’t on my side” brigade. I don’t know whether to expect it from you, but if you equate me to D’Anconia again, you’ll get told to go fuck yourself again.
What other people say or don’t say about the events of January 6 are not really my responsibility, and my overall position—one that I’ve maintained pretty consistently around here for much of the last two decades—is that I don’t want anyone treated too harshly by the criminal justice system. People should be punished when they break the law, and should be treated just as harshly as they deserve, but in far too many cases, historically, they have been treated far worse than that, and I’ve been pretty outspoken on the issue for quite a while.
I admit that this causes me a fair amount of internal wrangling when it comes to events like last week’s. If you had asked me, as the riot was progressing last week, what should happen to the people who invaded the Capitol, I would have answered that the cops should have locked every entrance to the building, then gone in and rounded them all up using Tasers and zip-ties, and given every one of them 20 years for treason. Also, while I think that the criminal justice system needs a lot of reform, I also think that it would be a real shame if the federal government finally and belatedly came around to the idea of treating people humanely only after a right-wing coup attempt by a bunch of traitorous white people. It would be a really bad look if the feds only now started scaling back their overcharging of crimes and their excessive sentencing recommendations, especially after the way that BLM protesters (and a whole bunch of other types of protesters) have been treated over the years.
None of this means that I’m excusing or downplaying what happened last week, and anyone who suggests otherwise will get a hearty “Fuck you” from me.
RickJay is far from the only person who has called for anyone who entered the building to be charged with accessory to murder, or felony murder. There are people making similar calls all over the web, including some in media op-eds. I just don’t agree that this would be an appropriate charge for a significant number of the people who entered the building. The seditious insurrection charge is much more debatable, and probably quite sustainable for a lot of them, but again, probably not for all. I’ll be watching to see what actually happens, and if I think that people have gotten off too lightly, you can be sure that I’ll be here to say so.
For me, what the Instigator-in-Chief is or is not doing is essentially irrelevant to my argument about how the criminal justice system should deal with the aftermath of Wednesday’s events. I’m all for impeachment, or the 25th amendment, or both. But Trump being kicked out of office, or not, before January 20 shouldn’t change how we deal with the people who invaded the Capitol.
I’m not sure what purpose you think that link serves. Do you think that I’m somehow not aware of this stuff?
If people were planning to take hostages, then those people absolutely should be charged accordingly, and you won’t find a single thing I’ve said in this thread that would suggest otherwise. The way some people are reacting here, you’d think I had suggested a 50-dollar jaywalking ticket for everyone.
Excuuuuuse me. The post I was replying to sounded like maybe you weren’t.
ETA upon reflection: if so many people are misunderstanding you, you might ask yourself why.
If you are in a crowd, and that crowd starts chanting about illegal and/or dangerous deeds, if you don’t immediately GTFO you get the privilege of being associated with that group and deservedly so.
I did not actually think that was the argument you were making. I was attempting to banter in an amusing fashion. Sorry that you were insulted.
Fair enough. Your post came just after one person had compared me to D’Anconia and another had said that I was making excuses for the rioters. I was a little steamed.