Guilt by association.

[Phys251]

Calling me a nazi which is absolutely not true, as always indicates you are admitting losing the argument, because you have no facts to back up your position.

No, he didn't. It's your fault that you couldn't see Cardinal's obvious sarcasm.

 

[trouble13]

Ok, so let's apply that logic to the government, if the head of a Department commits a crime while the person that sent them there to do that crime sits in an office elsewhere, are both guilty of the crime. This should get real interesting...

If the gov head directs someone to commit a crime that head is guility of the same crime. If the head did not direct it but intentionally helped the person from being caught, they are guility after the fact. That goes for everyone. Its not really that complicated.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

 

[Logical1]

To be fair, Black Lives Matter spokespersons did officially condon rioting and looting last week in Chicago. It was a bold stand for their organization and their eponymous movement. I'm grateful they took the time to explain their actions and views.

BLM a marxist organization trying to justify criminal activity on their part. But the fact is they are common criminals that should serve long prison sentences.

 

[Logical1]

Depends on the turd to water ratio.

Go right ahead then have a big drink.

 

[Triton]

Go right ahead then have a big drink.

There are threshold for pollutants in almost everything as 100% purity is unfeasible. You do know that judging a group from its best or worst members are well known fallacies, right?

 

[Logical1]

Why is it always with the poop analogies from the far right

Ok------------how about this one-----------I just got off the commode after giving birth to a democrat brain.

 

[Logical1]

Do you identify with the Charlottesville protesters who were marching against the removal of Confederate statues?

I am with the group of people that think all art and historical monuments should be preserved.

 

[Metric Mouse]

BLM a marxist organization trying to justify criminal activity on their part. But the fact is they are common criminals that should serve long prison sentences.

I would disagree with parts of that, and not particularly care about the rest even if it were true.

 

[Xilnik]

I like that logic. Going by your argument, every single protester marching against the removal of Confederate statues in the Charlottesville protest in 2017 is a full blown Nazi. And since Republicans identified with those protesters, all Republicans are full blown Nazis.

It's a deal!

Sadly, there are quite a few on the far left who do think that way, so your joke has a ring of truth to it. Logical1 provides yet another example that it also happens frequently on the right. I cannot say "far right" instead of "right" since so many here claim to be "Slightly Conservative" while parroting similar rhetoric to "Very Conservative" members.

 

[Cardinal]

I am with the group of people that think all art and historical monuments should be preserved.

I'll mark you down as "Yes, I identify with the Charlottesville protesters who were marching against the removal of Confederate statues."

So, let's use your guilt by association rule.

Confederate statue protesters marched with Nazis, therefore they are also Nazis.

You agree with Confederate statue protesters, therefore you are also a Nazi.

On the upside, your clothing is probably very clean and well-ironed.

 

[Logical1]

Of course, Ill-Logical1's logic does not apply because what he describes under homicide law is not the case in the situation described. It would even be difficult to argue that a peaceful protester is an enabler of a violent one, let alone that it is a crime. They may not even be protesting about the same thing. Ill-Logical1 sure is good for entertainment, though.

Totally untrue. If a group of protesters call for a march and THEN the violent criminal join in, they are definitely enablers. If the protester haddnt organizes a march, the criminal element would have been too cowardly to do their looting and burning without the cover.

 

[Logical1]

I'll mark you down as "Yes, I identify with the Charlottesville protesters who were marching against the removal of Confederate statues."

So, let's use your guilt by association rule.

Confederate statue protesters marched with Nazis, therefore they are also Nazis.

You agree with Confederate statue protesters, therefore you are also a Nazi.

On the upside, your clothing is probably very clean and well-ironed.

Post a picture of nazi flags being flown in that group.

 

[Cardinal]

Post a picture of nazi flags being flown in that group.

Multiple people arrested over 2017 white nationalist rally in Charlottesville - The Boston Globe

Oh, and I'm sorry to report that you're also a member of the Ku Klux Klan now.

 

[Casper]

Sounds like you are talking about the whole Obama regime that spied on the Trump campaign in 2016!!!!!!!

Nope, a bit more recent, so yes or no, guilty?

 

[Casper]

If the gov head directs someone to commit a crime that head is guility of the same crime. If the head did not direct it but intentionally helped the person from being caught, they are guility after the fact. That goes for everyone. Its not really that complicated.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

Cool. I will keep that bookmarked.

 

[Logical1]

Multiple people arrested over 2017 white nationalist rally in Charlottesville - The Boston Globe

Oh, and I'm sorry to report that you're also a member of the Ku Klux Klan now.

And can you assure all of us that the Boston Globe didnt put some ringer in that picture to discredit the rest?????????

 

[Cardinal]

And can you assure all of us that the Boston Globe didnt put some ringer in that picture to discredit the rest?????????

You think the Boston Globe inserted ku klux klan members, nazis, and an entire crowd of people using the Nazi salute and Nazi slogans? Is that what you're going with here?

 

[iguanaman]

Everyone knows that when two thugs decide to hold up an quick shop, and one is in the get away car, and the other goes in, holds up the clerk and kills him, both are charged with murder.

This situation transfers to what is happening now. A bunch of "peaceful" marchers start out plugging up streets which is bad enough. But the big problem they are joined by anarchist and other criminals that start looting and burning.

The end result is the "peaceful" marchers are the ENABLERS of the criminals that loot and burn. They are JUST LIKE the thug that drove the get away car, but didnt do the actual killing. They too are just a guilty as the get away driver.

The "peaceful" marchers are guilty as sin for enabling the criminal looters and burners. And even more so when the criminals kill some one.

Yes we need to amend the Constitution and ban the right of free assembly and while we are at it who needs free speech either. Now that I think of it we don't need elections either since that only gives us tyranny of the majority. Let's just make Trump President for life because he has done such a good job bringing all these faults to the surface. Some Presidents would have listened to the protesters grievances and taken steps to address them and that might have stopped the protests. We don't want to kick the can down the road like that.

This is how a REAL leader deals with people who dare to take to the streets to fight injustice.

 

[bluesmoke]

Totally untrue. If a group of protesters call for a march and THEN the violent criminal join in, they are definitely enablers. If the protester haddnt organizes a march, the criminal element would have been too cowardly to do their looting and burning without the cover.

You didn't refute any of what I said with any evidence of fact. You don't know that those you speak of are criminals in the first place nor that they support the same as do the protesters in general nor that the protesters in general don’t care about those committing violence against property or others. You could say the courts enable what you say for upholding 1A. You don't even know how many of those committing violence are LW or RW and you can't provide any evidence to say so. There is no “enablement” law that applies to homicide that falls under your “just a guilty as the get away driver” scenario and you can’t prove so. Your claim is unfounded and as proof is your burden, I need not debate you any further. See you on another thread.

 

[Logical1]

You didn't refute any of what I said with any evidence of fact. You don't know that those you speak of are criminals in the first place nor that they support the same as do the protesters in general nor that the protesters in general don’t care about those committing violence against property or others. You could say the courts enable what you say for upholding 1A. You don't even know how many of those committing violence are LW or RW and you can't provide any evidence to say so. There is no “enablement” law that applies to homicide that falls under your “just a guilty as the get away driver” scenario and you can’t prove so. Your claim is unfounded and as proof is your burden, I need not debate you any further. See you on another thread.

It seems you are unwilling to fact the absolute fact that so called peaceful protesters are enablers of the criminals, BECAUSE THEY ARE THERE.

 

[Cardinal]

It seems you are unwilling to fact the absolute fact that so called peaceful protesters are enablers of the criminals, BECAUSE THEY ARE THERE.

Okay, then you're an enabler of Nazis.

See how that works?

 

[pinqy]

Everyone knows that when two thugs decide to hold up an quick shop, and one is in the get away car, and the other goes in, holds up the clerk and kills him, both are charged with murder.

This situation transfers to what is happening now. A bunch of "peaceful" marchers start out plugging up streets which is bad enough. But the big problem they are joined by anarchist and other criminals that start looting and burning.

The end result is the "peaceful" marchers are the ENABLERS of the criminals that loot and burn. They are JUST LIKE the thug that drove the get away car, but didnt do the actual killing. They too are just a guilty as the get away driver.

The "peaceful" marchers are guilty as sin for enabling the criminal looters and burners. And even more so when the criminals kill some one.

The reason the driver is charged is because he knew about the crime beforehand and actively supported it in full knowledge that a death might occur.

But if a robber took a city bus to the quick stop and then robbed it, would you hold the bus driver liable as an enabler. Or even a taxi or Uber driver, even if they thought the passenger looked shady?

For your analogy to work, the peaceful protestors would have to have intended and planned for violence to ensue.”

 

[Logical1]

The reason the driver is charged is because he knew about the crime beforehand and actively supported it in full knowledge that a death might occur.

But if a robber took a city bus to the quick stop and then robbed it, would you hold the bus driver liable as an enabler. Or even a taxi or Uber driver, even if they thought the passenger looked shady?

For your analogy to work, the peaceful protestors would have to have intended and planned for violence to ensue.”

If a taxi driver or a Uber driver sees the criminal running out of the quick shop with a gun in his hand and bag of loot, they should drive off.

 

[Noodlegawd]

I like that logic. Going by your argument, every single protester marching against the removal of Confederate statues in the Charlottesville protest in 2017 is a full blown Nazi. And since Republicans identified with those protesters, all Republicans are full blown Nazis.

It's a deal!

The OP is silly, but there's a shadow of a decent point in there.

Blocking streets is not "speech." It is illegal for a good reason, and people who do it and refuse to stop when told to do so should be arrested, just like I would be if I set up a barricade on 5th Avenue during rush hour to protest the soda tax. It not only deprives the rest of us from using the streets we're our hard-earned paying tax dollars for, but it contributes to dangerous situations including giving cover for rioters and looters.

 

[pinqy]

If a taxi driver or a Uber driver sees the criminal running out of the quick shop with a gun in his hand and bag of loot, they should drive off.

Yes, but that's not your analogy.