Why would the conservatives shoot at “their own kind”? According to them, the appropriate targets are anyone unlike them, who doesn’t conform to their ideology (anyone non-white, non-Christian, non-straight, non-male, non-right-wing, etc.)
What happened after Kyle Rittenhouse’s killing spree? Nothing. Rittenhouse was made the poster boy of the alt-righters, and their so-called “appeal” hasn’t doesn’t seem to have diminished yet.
In my most humble opinion, Junior and his buddy enjoy waving their… weaponry… around in order to make themselves look like the strong, confident, macho he-men that they know very well, deep down inside themselves, that they aren’t. And that’s all there is to it, really-- it’s all about appearances. I doubt either one would actually stick their noses into a situation where someone might shoot back at them. (Unlike their supporters, some of whom will undoubtedly treat all of the posturing as a call-to-action and start killing people they’ve been instructed to hate.)
So if I see either of them anywhere near me, I’ll be legally within my rights to defend myself with the use of deadly force? I can only assume their threats of physical violence are to be taken seriously, right? I’d be a fool to think otherwise.
This is why they love that murderer in wisconsin … he said he was going to hunt liberals, went to where he knew liberals would be, and then he killed two unarmed liberals.
Yes, the classic abuser’s pattern of Deny, Attack, Reverse Victim Order (DARVO) was writ large for all to see in the outrage over that small-budget nothing of a film.
Perpetual Victimhood ™ is the brand, now. It all circles into one, maaaaaan.
I don’t think it’s really a dog whistle if they are saying the quiet parts out loud. Let’s imagine if these guys were obviously Muslim and saying “Christians beware”. I wonder how that might play out?
Perversely, for all their “small government” rhetoric that tends to go with it, they want a government put into power that will unleash them to carry out their sick fantasies on fellow citizens. Many of them say this quite openly.
Conservatives better be aware that some leftists and anarchists actually like guns. But seriously, trying this kind of nonsense is just the silliest dick waving I’ve seen.
Notice that not all of the participants were wearing eye protection, and “spashback” is a real threat with close quarters shooting. That was from the (quality of the) video.
I recently spent time with some conservative folks. The bad guys are liberals, because liberals think it’s a bad idea for everyone to be carrying Glocks. I don’t understand the allure of weaponry, but some people are really into it. I don’t know how they process the fact that people are statistically safer in places where that’s not allowed.
Unfortunately Sandy Hook showed that there is no such situation. Or rather, the “response” is just to make it easier to get guns. If there’s a clear ideology at play, then a crackdown might happen against anyone seen as sharing the ideology, but it’s more likely to happen if the attacker doesn’t use a gun (and isn’t a right-wing Christian). But the fact is, US history involves right-wing groups/individuals routinely killing groups of people on the left (of them), and the response is generally… nothing. Nothing bad for the killers, anyways - right-wing groups (e.g. law enforcement) might lionize them, if anything.
Yeah, since that happened, my state (GA) updated their law to allow concealed carry (registered) in churches and parks, then this year just tossed registration out the damn window.
I guess that means now I can carry my weapons anywhere, too.
