That is why many downplay when you kill each other. When you maim each other. When you commit endless crimes against teach other. When you commit arson against each other. And more. We do bring it up as showing you the civil ways of your lives. Antifa and BLM and others with their violence is pure insurrection. Just not charged with the crimes. Of course, those who live outside the periphery live like royalty and are frauds. The damage they have done over decades is dangerous in the excesses and stupidity of politics gone extreme.
Does Anyone Still Not Understand There is No Such Thing as an Unarmed "Insurrection" Like They Tell You J6 Was?
- Thread starter munkle
- Start date
What's SILLY is the leftards claiming it's tantamount to overthrowing the government.
What a load of hogwash. It's beyond silly. It's downright brain dead.
Lesh
Diamond Member
- Dec 21, 2016
- 83,248
- 41,647
- 2,615
It was most definitely an attempt to overturn a legal election
***There is no legal requirement that insurrectionists be armed for an act to qualify as an insurrection under U.S. law.Dictionary Definition
According to Merriam-Webster:
Synonyms: uprising, rebellion, revolt, mutiny, sedition.
So, at its core, it’s about a violent or active resistance against authority, especially the state or its institutions.
Legal Definition
Under 18 U.S. Code § 2383 – Rebellion or insurrection:
Key legal elements:
This statute is part of the broader framework of federal sedition and rebellion laws, which include:
- It involves organized or purposeful action against the U.S. government’s authority or law.
- Includes those who incite, assist, or give aid to such efforts—not just those who physically act.
- Punishment includes fines, imprisonment, and disqualification from public office.
- Sedition (18 U.S.C. § 2384)
- Advocating the overthrow of the government (18 U.S.C. § 2385)
Summary:
***There is no legal requirement that insurrectionists be armed for an act to qualify as an insurrection under U.S. law.
- In general usage, insurrection means a revolt or violent resistance against authority.
- Legally, it’s a defined federal crime involving action or support of a rebellion against the U.S. government.
Looking at the Law Again (18 U.S.C. § 2383):
- The statute does not mention weapons, arms, or armed conflict as a required element.
- What matters is the intent and action to oppose or overthrow lawful authority.
- Courts look at things like:
- Organization and planning
- Use of force or violence (armed or not)
- Targeting of government institutions
- Interference with the execution of law
Historical Context Confirms This:
In U.S. history, not all insurrections were armed in the traditional military sense:
Examples of actions that could qualify:
- Storming a federal building to prevent the certification of an election (even if only a subset were armed).
- Overpowering law enforcement to disrupt government proceedings.
- Coordinated occupation of government facilities.
Legal Nuance:
The presence of weapons may escalate the severity of the charges (e.g., adding weapons charges or terrorism enhancements), but they are not required to classify the event as an insurrection under 18 U.S.C. § 2383.
Legally, maybe not. But using common sense and rational thought would tell you that any innseruction without weapons is doomed to failure.
The law is written to ensure the government always has control.
- Mar 11, 2015
- 102,034
- 113,545
- 3,645
We saw what happened. Common sense and rational thought tell us that you lie to yourself about this.
NewsVine_Mariyam
Diamond Member
Being successful in the attempt is not a requirement either apparently.
First you have to attempt it.
- Sep 16, 2012
- 67,390
- 63,303
- 3,605
The point here is, if the government had done something during the BLM riots rather than just gas-lighting America?
The establishment told America for six months, they needed to stay indoors, keep out of groups of more than three or four maximum number in gatherings, told them they could not gather for religious services & family holiday celebrations, and everyone was required to wear a mask.
. . but then they allowed those BLM protests and riots, told the public those were just fine, and none of the rules that had been in effect since the beginning of the so called national emergency in regards to COVID, no longer applied.
It made thinking people see through both the BLM riots and the scamdemic rules.
While most moderates and independents not only knew there was going to be trouble on Jan. 6th because the MAGA crowd was clearly telegraphing their intentions for massive protests, they were shocked about how utterly unprepared for the protests that the government appeared to be.
A suspicious or paranoid person that doesn't trust corporations or government would say, it almost appeared to be a planned controversy by the establishment.
Now, when the MSM then went on to tell the public that one riot was acceptable, but the other is an. . .
Folks that appear to have those double standards just appear to be idiots.
This is precisely the type of establishment nonsense that enabled Trump to win again TBH.
The establishment told America for six months, they needed to stay indoors, keep out of groups of more than three or four maximum number in gatherings, told them they could not gather for religious services & family holiday celebrations, and everyone was required to wear a mask.
. . but then they allowed those BLM protests and riots, told the public those were just fine, and none of the rules that had been in effect since the beginning of the so called national emergency in regards to COVID, no longer applied.
It made thinking people see through both the BLM riots and the scamdemic rules.
While most moderates and independents not only knew there was going to be trouble on Jan. 6th because the MAGA crowd was clearly telegraphing their intentions for massive protests, they were shocked about how utterly unprepared for the protests that the government appeared to be.
A suspicious or paranoid person that doesn't trust corporations or government would say, it almost appeared to be a planned controversy by the establishment.
Now, when the MSM then went on to tell the public that one riot was acceptable, but the other is an. . .
Folks that appear to have those double standards just appear to be idiots.
This is precisely the type of establishment nonsense that enabled Trump to win again TBH.
Doc7505
Diamond Member
- Feb 16, 2016
- 20,117
- 36,419
- 2,430
~~~~~~
"An insurrection typically involves armed conflict or violence against authority, so by definition, an unarmed insurrection is uncommon. However, there have been protests and movements that sought to challenge authority without weapons, but they are usually classified differently, such as civil disobedience or peaceful protests."
Read more:
What's real and not three years after the Jan. 6 Capitol riot | Fact check roundup
A roundup of our fact-checks about the Jan. 6 Capitol riot and the resulting committee hearings three years later.
www.usatoday.com
Mac1958
Diamond Member
You Trumpsters can call it a "banana" for all I care.
But if you don't like it called The Insurrection by others, you'll just have to get over it.
Sorry!
But if you don't like it called The Insurrection by others, you'll just have to get over it.
Sorry!
- Mar 11, 2015
- 102,034
- 113,545
- 3,645
I saw a violent insurrection. And I'm tired of you assholes and your trying to use plausible deniability to lie about what went on.
- Mar 11, 2015
- 102,034
- 113,545
- 3,645
What's real was the fact that a bunch of idiots tried to overthrow the government.~~~~~~
"An insurrection typically involves armed conflict or violence against authority, so by definition, an unarmed insurrection is uncommon. However, there have been protests and movements that sought to challenge authority without weapons, but they are usually classified differently, such as civil disobedience or peaceful protests."
Read more:
What's real and not three years after the Jan. 6 Capitol riot | Fact check roundup
A roundup of our fact-checks about the Jan. 6 Capitol riot and the resulting committee hearings three years later.www.usatoday.com
- Mar 11, 2015
- 102,034
- 113,545
- 3,645
Trump was president during the imaginary BLM riots you racists have misnamed. They are more accurately described as the accelerationist and right-wing paramilitary counterprotest riots.The point here is, if the government had done something during the BLM riots rather than just gas-lighting America?
The establishment told America for six months, they needed to stay indoors, keep out of groups of more than three or four maximum number in gatherings, told them they could not gather for religious services & family holiday celebrations, and everyone was required to wear a mask.
. . but then they allowed those BLM protests and riots, told the public those were just fine, and none of the rules that had been in effect since the beginning of the so called national emergency in regards to COVID, no longer applied.
It made thinking people see through both the BLM riots and the scamdemic rules.
While most moderates and independents not only knew there was going to be trouble on Jan. 6th because the MAGA crowd was clearly telegraphing their intentions for massive protests, they were shocked about how utterly unprepared for the protests that the government appeared to be.
A suspicious or paranoid person that doesn't trust corporations or government would say, it almost appeared to be a planned controversy by the establishment.
Now, when the MSM then went on to tell the public that one riot was acceptable, but the other is an. . .
Folks that appear to have those double standards just appear to be idiots.
This is precisely the type of establishment nonsense that enabled Trump to win again TBH.
Over 1 million people ended up dying because of what you idiots call the establishment forcing people to do. Trump won because you asshles want to be free to be racists. All this garbage you are posting is a lie. There were no BLM protests and riots. There were protests because a cop murdered an unarmed citizen who had complied with orders. There were over 2500 protests, fewer than 250 had any violence, and most of those weren't caused by anyone associated with BLM, This is what police reports say, as well as data from organizations that tracked the protests. So gain you're lying, and the people who decided to commit the insurrection were misled, but were willing to believe the lies. Period.
- Sep 16, 2012
- 67,390
- 63,303
- 3,605
COVID was not much worse than the worst influenza epidemics the nation has suffered.
Nor was it worse the the small pox that ravaged the nation while the revolution was being fought and the constitution was being written. And yet? Nothing was put into the Constitution to nullify civil rights and civil liberties in case of an epidemic.
. . . and as soon as you resort to calling PoV you don't like, "racist," folks on here just see you as ridiculous.
- Sep 16, 2012
- 67,390
- 63,303
- 3,605
Zafira Cherry
Diamond Member
I guess a fire extinguisher does not count 
Similar threads
New Topics
-
-
Trump Job Cuts Hobble NOAA Team That Reopens Ports After Hurricanes- Started by C_Clayton_Jones
- Replies: 0
-
Trump signs order to double steel and aluminum tariffs at midnight- Started by shockedcanadian
- Replies: 5
-
Navy set to rename USNS Harvey Milk, mulls new names for other ships named for civil rights leaders- Started by Scoutster
- Replies: 14
-
Jim Marshall Viking DE on the Purple People eaters passes away at 87
- Started by eagle7-31
- Replies: 4
