Rumor What's going on in Portland?

nice try with your typical spin too. But im not minimizing shit.
But if you could only be honest with yourself you would then see its just you who is actually minimizing whats happening downtown.
But i have not known you to post very honest takes so.... continue with your spin. you Re good at that.
You should go list that as a super power. Ill vouch. Its legit!

 

I didn't say that they all invaded the building. Only the ones that battered the outside or entered the inside are guilty and then there will be a sliding scale of punishment. I suppose you could make a case for some who may have incited the riot like Trump, jr. and Hawley.

 

so then whats your point?

you should be telling sly they arent all copkillers. Hes the one who called them all cop killers. but called people who light buildings on fire with people inside mere trespassers.

 

All summer long it was minimize downtowns extremists as part of the fall out and deal with it.
Then shit hits the fan at the capital and they are all cop killers now.

Downtowm has had several government buildings lit on fire with at least one incident with people trapped inside.

But some of you trivialize that and then say im the one minimizing jan6th?

Some backasswards logic there. But hey. Yall got a little echo chamber validifying your assbackwards logic so it must be right, right?

lol.

 

My point is just what I said. The two activities are different in magnitude. People who participate in illegal activity are responsible for the actions of others in that illegal activity. Bank robbers who don't fire their weapons are responsible for the bank robber, participating with the same group who are also robbing the bank, who fires his weapon and kills someone. That's the law. When you see the situation getting out of hand, you need to leave. But even then, only the ones actively participating will probably get charged with a crime, to answer one of your questions.

 

so in what world is setting a state judicial building on fire or a police precinct on fire with people inside, not the equivalent or in excess of of trespassing and vandalizing the capital?

 

what happens when many not breaking the law provide cover for those that do to prevent convicting evidence to be had for a just prosecution?

 

I have no idea who you're addressing this to unless it's you.
I just don't understand how you can not see the difference in magnitude. Do you consider the Capitol as just another one of many federal buildings? And do you consider the intent of disrupting Congress from doing it's Constitutionally required duty as just disrupting federal employees from doing their business from any of thousands of other federal buildings? Or do you consider lighting fires in the streets or in buildings that are by building code relatively fireproof with sprinklers and fire resistant materials to be the same as searching for U.S. Congressional legislators to kill or beat up? Please tell me you see a difference.

 

I never said it was. Please stop putting words in my mouth.

 

i consider lighting a police precinct with people trespassing inside attempted murder.
Do you not?

 

Could you simplify that statement a little better?
I'll make an attempt to answer it. Not breaking the law means they're not providing cover for those breaking the law. I hope this answers your question.

 

when did i put words in your mouth? Thats a false accusation. I never said you said that. I asked a question. Here is another question. Will you answer the original question or deflect again?

 

How? They are peacefully protesting en mass. Peaceful protest in mass is not breaking the law. Do you mean to say that those peaceful protestors who do not report those around them breaking the law are then also breaking the law?

 

Depends on the fire of course but the Fire Protective code, which is essentially the building code, provides for non combustible materials and a good sprinkler system in order for the fire department to declare the building habitable. I'm professionally acquainted with those codes. You're going to have a tough time killing someone by building a fire in a modern or updated building and all federal buildings are either new or updated to the latest standards. It's some of the older commercial buildings that you have to worry about.

 

oh yeah? Read above. You certainly implied it.
You denying you typed that?

if not, then maybe you should clarify yourself with a bit more of an up and up conversation?

when you accused me of stating they are the same i clarified my point and stance.

 

So because one building has better fire protection than the other its a lesser crime? To attempt to light a building on fire with people inside with better protection than a building without is a lesser crime?
In what law book may i ask?

 

This is too easy. Next? Lol

 

Several places but I'll start with one:
"You are wrong to generalize." I answered this one in the many many retorts that you trap me into answering.
This is getting beyond ridiculous. If you can't see it now then I predict that you will never get it.