- Jul 22, 2009
- Reaction score
Uh huh....i don't threaten.....Oh dear...will you threaten to shoot HappyJoy now?it wasn't an insurrection by definition, shit 4 brains...you lie, and twist shit to suit your delusional head.....I'm not defending the rioters. I'm defending the insurrection charge.Compare those "weapons" to guns. You are lying saying that they were armed.They were armed. Bear spray, flag poles, knives and other hand held weapons. They also took tasers from the police and used them.The 1/6 protesters were unarmed, i.e. no guns.
Ashli Babbitt was unarmed when she was shot in the neck by a black guy wearing a mask.
As soon as the SWAT teams showed up with ARs the party was over. No contest. No insurrection.
What did I lie about?
Sure, the insurrectionists had only been ripping up and shitting (literally) in the Capital for hours and yeah, their courage came in crowd form and when finally challenged by a deadly force they left.
Why are you defending them?
You claimed they weren't armed. They were, you just don't like the definition. You're downplaying how dangerous a mob they were.
It was NOT an insurrection, which by definition requires the insurrectionists to be armed.
Nope, that's not true. The definition of an insurrection has nothing to do with being armed or not.
The lie I'm saying you made is saying that the rioters were "armed".
They were. Carrying weapons is called being armed. bear mace, knives, clubs, flagpoles, stolen tasers. They were armed.
They did not all have guns. as would be needed to have a real insurrection.
Some did, they were caught outside but being armed simply means carrying weapons. That's more than just firearms.
They trespassed, they got arrested, they were NOT charged with insurrection, QED.
Almost no one in our history has ever been charged with insurrection, even during insurrections.