You're viewing a single thread.
My running theory is he is a moderate republican who, after January 6th, realized Trump is going to kill democracy. He donated shortly after, but with the recent uncertainty decided solve the problem with his own hands. Unfortunately, he made a rookie mistake and held his breath instead of breathing out before taking the shot, didn't properly sight in his scope, and / or just choked.
I'm not in anyway supporting any form of violence let alone an assassination attempt on a former president. This is not the way to conduct democracy, there are much better ways to address the current issues. I am merely trying to point out why he was so close but still missed his target as if it were a paper target not a living being who, regardless of transgressions, doesn't deserve to have their life taken from them.
Criticism is welcome and appreciated
Edit: Criticism is welcome and appreciated
Everyone is assuming it was political, but imo he's just a run of the mill loner incel mass shooter suicide by gun guy. Picked the rally cause it was the most impactful thing nearby.
Hard agree. Incel shooter looking to go out in a blaze of glory. I'm guessing there will be copycats.
Maybe he really liked catcher in the rye.
Or Jodie Foster.
Maybe he thought Trump should have offered him a job. Maybe he's a fascist and thinks Trump isn't quite fascist enough. Maybe he was just a disillusioned anarchist.
Yes, there are totally better ways to address current issues.
Yea I'm not gunna lie that was a punch to the gut, fucking bull shit
I think most of us have known from day one nothing would ever happen to the guy. Hoping is cool, sure, but I never in a million years actually thought anything would actually anything.
If he’s a gun nut, he may have just believed that he was using his 2A rights to remove a tyrant as the founding fathers intended. This assassination attempt very clearly shows why gun rights are antithetical to democracy.
Antithetical? If anything the last few years have shown that we cannot rely on precedent and good-faith to sustain a democracy.
I'm of the opinion he is just a Republican and just like every other Republican he is mentally ill and too proud to admit to it. They have guns and fantasize about violence. He may have been ostracized and this was his "I'll show them" moment.
That's unfair to mentally ill people.
Mental illness is kind of a broad brush here. It would make more sense to say this is probably somebody with violent tendencies or unaddressed anger issues.
I understand the want to paint things in black and white, especially in these kind of extreme circumstances. However, the "two party" system has an insane variety of greys. I'd love to be able to say "Republican = Bad" "Democrats = good" but that's not how the world works. There are as many 'good' Republicans as 'bad' Democrats. You're good if you work for the people your bad if you don't. I generally disagree with blanket statements but everyones opion matters
wait... i agree that being a democrat doesn't make you good at all, in fact if you identify with the party you're more likely to be bad. but if you're a republican you're absolutely, one hundred percent bad. what the fuck kind of redeeming qualities does the republican party even pretend to have anymore? it's an openly fascist party.
I generally try to give the benefit of the doubt, being in Nebraska I know quite a few true Republicans who regret voting for Trump the first time, voted for biden begrudgingly and can't believe what's happened to their party. Obviously they haven't been paying attention for years and Trump and the MAGAts finally woke them up.
That being said I completely agree with your overall view of our current political catastrophe.
I knew someone like that, you know what he did after voting for trump the first time? He stopped being a republican and found another party that had his value. No excuses, if you choose to keep calling yourself a Nazi after Hitler said he would gas the undesirable then you're a pos.
Your not wrong I'm just bringing my personal experience to the table. If you call yourself a Nazi or a Confederate ext. you really can't call yourself an American in my opinion. Politics and the 24 hour news cycle has turned otherwise reasonable people into completely unhinged uninformed morons. Unfortunately those just across the aisle are to chicken shit to argue with the loudest 10%. To them it's that or they loes which apparently more important than democracy. Honestly the more I type the more I agree with you
I'm not painting him other than Republican with a mental illness. It fits the mold for many other shooters. It is "bad" as you put it, if they keep shooting people.
Oh no matter what side, if you're shooting people you are bad people
If you're shooting billionaires, that's just self defense. They started the class war, have been winning the class war, and have the blood of millions on their hands.
Valid, still prefer the guillotine
How about a compromise, Trebuchets aren't federally regulated, require no permits.to own and can fling the fattest of fat cats at least 100 yards.
#YeetTheRich
#PumpkinChuckinWithBillionaires
If you can get me a seat in the splash zone then I'm in
You've got my vote!
There is reports he was rushed as police were peeking up on the roof but were scared away. That or the person who was interviewed lied
Just a quick question on the topic of not wishing him dead. This is more a curiosity on my end in context of the legal death penalty.
Are you firmly against the idea of taking a life even if they are abhorrent. Or is the issue with the lawlessness of a public assassination?
Would it make a difference if someone gets a legal death penalty but then get murdered illegally.
Does it make it justice if the assassin was on paper technically legal and in line of that, what makes the death penalty objectively just?
Does “your” moral reasoning of murder always come down to individual cases and subjective gut feelings.
You dont have to answer all or any of these, someone else may give their opinion. But a philosophical one not a political one if possible.
I truly believe that spending your life in solitary confinement with no access to anything but your thoughts would be FAR worse than putting them to death. Let them stew in what they have done for as long as possible. It cost less than execution thanks to the ridiculous appeal process afforded to death row inmates.
In an attempt to answer your questions: 1.a. see above 1.b. regardless of reason, assassination has generally turned out badly. I love the time travel joke about killing Hitler but a different guy does the same thing. 2. The one to be executed losses their right to appeal and prove their innocence, as we know there have been many people wrongfully executed. They murderer of said death row inmate just becomes one. Loes loes 3.a.currently the president can legally have his political rival assassinated, or so I'm told, and this is far too much power for anyone to weild. 3.b. I don't really see the death penalty as just 4. Yes every case needs to be evaluated separately. Assassinating a brutal dictator to bring people democracy, probably could have been done without murder. A woman being assaulted who accidentally shoots and kills her attacker, totally justified, panic reaction, give them therapy. A psycho who totrues, kills and eats babies, death by 1000 cuts.
I hope this helps, I hope my answers are sufficient and understandable. I'm happy to clarify if needed
I don't think that there is a line we can draw, short of saying "no killing whatsoever," that can't be abused. If we say, "No killing unless they're judged guilty," then we leave it up to fallible lawmakers to make just laws, and fallible police and prosecutors to be honest and decent, and fallible jurors to try and turn this into a decision.
Or let's say we make the rule, "Only fascists can be murdered." But who decides if someone is a fascist? Is it someone who believes the ideology, or do they need power or authority to act on it as well?
Basically I don't think there is a system of rules that could be implemented that would not kill innocent people as a byproduct, unless the rule is just "no killing."
The simple philosophical answer for me is: if you murder someone because of a past deed, or threats of a future deed, you're denying human capacity to change. I personally feel, given the right circumstances, everyone has capacity to change, learn, grow, evolve. Pretty much every bad deed can be put down to humans being opportunistic, selfish, manipulative or backed into a corner. I imagine things would be very different if their needs were met and they were well educated. Most countries (at least in Europe) at least attempt to use the prison system for rehabilitation rather than expensive punitive measures and/or slavery.
Political answer: Trump should be in jail for many, many crimes, not dead.
And when the Justice system does nothing, then what? Let him round up the immigrants into camps and give trans people the death penalty? Let him install himself as a dictator and refuse to leave power? Let him kill a million in a pandemic, destroy the planet, and gut the education system robbing millions of their future?
Because he "might" change? Tell that to trans people.
I mean that's the problem. I'm saying he should already be deep in jail. I'm not saying that because the justice system is failing/corrupt that everyone should just let it slide.
You've gone down the "if we can go back in time, do we kill baby Hitler" route, which I wasn't really exploring.
Very much incorrect on one point. Humans are terrible because other humans are terrible to them at an early point in their life. It isn't a flaw of being sentient.
Yes, childhood trauma can be the cause of a lot of mental health issues in adult life, but attributing it to all human shitty behaviour is a wide sweeping brushstroke.
More so than the prior comment? Hurt people hurting people has a whole lot of research supporting it?
More what than which comment? I don't really understand your comment. I didn't dismiss the concept of childhood trauma.
Ask those terrible pressure in the world didn't just appear by coincidence. Being terrible isn't all of human nature, but it's clearly an inextricable part of it.
My personal opinion used to be "those who are beyond change, those who are so cruel, vindictive, undeniably atrocious, evil, maniacal ect. should be put to death, removed from the world they clearly shouldn't be in". After many long discussions with my closest friend I have come to believe that death is too light a punishment. Those who truly deserve the harshest judgment should live a long life, in complete isolation, devoid of all pleasure, entertainment, contact, ect. Take away all that humans crave besides basic human needs, let them truly suffer for their crimes.
Obviously, every individual instance of any crime should be dealt with by a fair and balanced jury, judge, defense, and prosecution, with as much fact and evidence as can be attained without prejudice or predetermined judgment based on personal biases.
I'm obviously long winded but am super happy with the engagement on my comment. I don't like arguing but I love hearing others opinions! Thank you all!
That’s a rather fresh opinion with lack of better words. I cant say i agree but i am glad i asked, thanks.
Personally i feel conflicted about the morality of taking away freedoms. This is for both criminal and state.
Obviously some people have done crimes that destroyed any notion of mental freedom in their victims and it doesn't feel just to allow those people to operate, but i acknowledge we are tapping into the same wrong “take away another freedoms” Its no avadada-Kedavra or imperio + rape, but its still an imperials curse nonetheless.
What i eventually settled on is that we have no choice then remove the freedom of clearly dangerous individuals. With those that have a path to redemption, basic human flaws are often fixable so we should go all in on those.
But for those that crossed the impossible to draw proverbial red line that redemption is no longer possible.
Our only single concern with them is their removal to keep everyone else safe. Technically that means putting them on their own self sufficient luxury island would be adequate as an ethical solution, we adress the single concern with no further harm but its not a very sensible idea in our economic context and i wouldn’t support it (give me the island instead). A walled facility providing basic needs will do as the best we can honestly offer… we should do more for homeless, partly unrelated sorry.
The easiest, most efficient way to remove them permanently is of course death. But then we do lower ourselves to take away all freedoms, knowing we could succeed the main tasks more ethically, shouldn’t we?
I absolutely understand your perspective of punishment but personally i feel nothing for a person who cannot reach or interact with anyone getting punished. Punishment to me requires reason like eventually growth.
What i eventually settled on is permanent jail, naturally being provided with just the basics we can economically spare and then provide the freedom for the detained to chose for death. And i feel many in this situation, with no hope of shortening of sentence or pardon would chose to die.
Providing the most clean/efficient way to remove monster from society. In personal theory.
Factual Practice is this is an ugly gritty topic with no easy answers.
I've heard reports stating he had no scope. This dude had no military training or anything of the like and I suspect in a moment like that your adrenaline is going through the roof. Odds are quite high he was shaking like crazy. Odds are high he knew he was going to die in seconds.
Where he stands politically I don't know, but this could be case of "suicide by cop" combined with a, "well I might as well..."
To just provide a counter-narrative, his father is a Libertarian; his mother is a Democrat according to a local canvasser. It's possible when going to the DMV he was pressured by one of his parents to pick a registration at 16 and that of course stuck with his record. Not exactly a long political history between 16 and 20. Nevertheless we shall see. His interest with Demolition Ranch and the discord channel may reveal some insights. Maybe the Epstein files sent him over the edge or something.
You have to register your political affiliation when getting a driving license?
I'm not sure if you have to, but I know it is on the form. It's just a convenient time to ask, like if you want to be an organ donor.
Why do they ask? That seems so weird to me. I have never been asked (by the government) what party I support, and would be outraged if I ever was.
It's actually a good thing in my view. Republicans are desperately trying to stop this effort because lower registration of youth yields better outcomes for Republicans.
They ask because it's a matter of convenience. State Department of Motor Vehicles routinely handle Voter Registration requests. So when you're there they ask on the forms, "Would you like to register to vote?" And if so, they ask if you want to choose a party or remain independent. Many states including Pennsylvania have closed primaries, which means if you are officially registered as as a Republican you cannot vote in any other party's primary.
Oh yeah I forgot about the whole "choosing your candidate" piece. You wouldn't want other parties messing with that....we just vote for a party and the party chooses its leader and can change it whenever they want.
No. You can get a driver's license at 16 but can't vote until 18. Would be weird to ask someone who can't vote to pick a party. When you register to vote they'll ask, but that's a separate process from getting a driver's license and even then you don't have to declare a party.
Unfortunately, he made a rookie mistake and held his breath instead of breathing out before taking the shot, didn't properly sight in his scope, and / or just choked.
I'm not in anyway supporting any form of violence let alone an assassination attempt on a former president.
Sure you aren't 🙄 some kid was radicalised and died and another innocent man died thanks to the likes of you
Excuse me if I fail to shed a tear for a front row supporter of a mass-murdering domestic terrorist and literal admitted fascist. Got a spray bottle?
Going to a rally doesn't make you an automatic supporter. Rallies are supposed to inform voters.
Let's not play dumb here, we've all seen Trump rallies and the way the crowd behaves. They are all in maga hats, they're not going there for info, they're going there to simp.
Have you seen the audience at Trump’s rallies? There’s zero undecided voters in that circus.
You opinions are yours, but I honestly don't want anyone shot, or think they have to shoot someone. I just read too much, and think too much. Theories are theories and nothing more I nearly speaking in the sense of his point of view.