• pyre@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 month ago

    I mean, it’s not just that. it’s legal liability. part of the reason they charged him with terrorism is to tie any show of support to a crime as well. supporting him is like supporting al-qaeda now. so I ask you, DO YOU CONDEMN HUMMUS? DO YOU CONDOM MORDOR OF CEOS?

    • samus12345@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 month ago

      All it did was show a lot of people what bullshit a charge of “terrorism” is.

      • RedditRefugee69@lemmynsfw.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 month ago

        For the longest time, people thought “terrorism” meant “very evil,” so now that someone who isn’t evil is being labeled a terrorist, they are upset.

        In reality, if you try to change politics with violence against a civilian, you are a terrorist.

        “One man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter.”

        • WoodScientist@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 month ago

          That’s not what the law in NY actually says. It’s not merely that you’re trying to change government policy through violence. It’s that you’re trying to do it through intimidating government employees. The prosecutor screwed the pooch on this one. Luigi didn’t actually meet the terrorism modifier requirements in NY. At least that’s what I got from Legal Eagle.

            • glimse@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 month ago

              That’s an incredibly flimsy argument. People have been writing messages on ammo since ammo existed. There’s not even an established pattern of terrorists writing on ammo - they’re more likely to claim credit for an attack after the fact and include their message there.

              Those were words for him. Deny and defend this, mother fucker.

              • RedditRefugee69@lemmynsfw.com
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 month ago

                You assert my argument is flimsy, yet your argument is that someone is going to be able to read the casings popping out of a guy’s gun shooting at him from behind?

                Lol. Lmao, even.

                • glimse@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 month ago

                  Please tell me you’re trolling so I don’t think I’m talking to someone THIS obtuse.

                  Do you think this writing was to make a political message in the wreckage? Do you think really I think the soldiers who wrote it expected the victims to read it on the way down?

                  No, you moron, it’s a message to the victim that the killer knows they’ll never read. It’s a personal touch on the ammo that empowers the shooter. A more poetic version of “a bullet with your name on it”

                  Added bonus for you

        • samus12345@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          It certainly causes more terror, but mostly just with the rabble, not the ultra wealthy who actually matter.

    • aski3252@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      Also, lets not forget who will be president soon… Trump and his fellows have hinted at going after fake news media before. Going after terrorism supporting fake news media is even easier.

    • WoodScientist@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      It is perfectly legal to advocate for illegal activity. The first amendment has broad protections for this. SCOTUS has ruled on this even recently. You need to be able to advocate for illegal activity if you want people to have any chance to change the law.

      It is perfectly legal to come right out on national television and say, “Luigi did nothing wrong. The president and governor should pardon him, and the mayor of NYC should throw him a parade.”

      • pyre@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        lol… those who remember the 2000s know that’s all out the window if the government says anything is terrorism.

        • drosophila@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 month ago

          The right to free speech and the right to peaceably assemble hasn’t been respected at any point during US history.

          Not immediately after the country was formed when they signed the sedition act into law.

          Not while people were protesting for abolitionism.

          Not while people were protesting for women’s suffrage.

          Not while people held demonstrations while on strike.

          Not during the cold war and red scare.

          Not during the civil rights movement.

          Not during the George Floyd protests.

          They’re not going to start now.