Comment by bilbo0s
5 years ago
In fairness, Trump's tweets are not about actually doing anything, they are more about getting votes. So arguing the feasibility of suggestions outlined in a Trump tweet kind of misses the point.
5 years ago
In fairness, Trump's tweets are not about actually doing anything, they are more about getting votes. So arguing the feasibility of suggestions outlined in a Trump tweet kind of misses the point.
No. This man holds the office of the POTUS. There are certain responsibilities that come with it. The officeholder cannot make deadly threats publicly and expect everyone to just shrug it off.
But does that responsibility extend to other members of Government, or just the President?
You seem to be arguing throughout this thread that the President's comment is akin to saying "red sky at morning, sailors take warning." As if he's predicting a rain storm. But he's not just some guy at the marina, he's the President. It's also useful to look at what he isn't saying. He isn't calling for an investigation into the death or the lack of prosecution or the racial divide in the country or acknowledging the rage and anger of the non-white community that keeps being treated differently from the white community. His followers will hear this statement, "when the looting starts the shooting starts" as a dog whistle call "it's OK to start shooting." Or further, "I expect you to put this slave revolt down."
1 reply →
Can you distract people by asking this?
It was a message, directly to law enforcement, that he thinks it’s okay for them to shoot protestors so long as there is looting. I can’t see how anyone would see that as anything other than a crime against humanity
No, I don't think it was. A plain reading of the quote does not direct anyone, to do, anything. It is an observation. Just like it was your observation (and opinion) that it said something different.
The questions are this: Who is right? Who decides that?
> A plain reading of the quote does not direct anyone, to do, anything.
Humans are not robots, however, and putting your fingers in your ears doesn't change the very clear nature of his message.
Honestly, I can't figure out what the tweet means. "Any difficulty and we will assume control but, when the looting starts, the shooting starts." From a plain reading I think he's saying when the feds take control they will shoot looters.
1 reply →
>A plain reading of the quote does not direct anyone, to do, anything.
Ah yes, and his followers are widely known for their highly nuanced and level-headed understanding of things he says (and politics in general) /s.
>The questions are this: Who is right? Who decides that?
On whether egregiously advocating violence is ok? Really?
Twitter. It is a private company. If he doesn't like Twitter, rather than complain about Twitter on Twitter he could move to Gab where most of his followers are.
I don't know why you're getting down voted. Trump's words are a quote of someone who believed that "... it’s okay for them to shoot protestors so long as there is looting."
Trump is very much saying he believes looter should be shot.
To be clear here: Looting is not a capital offense. It's stuff. No TV/car/stereo is worth killing a person over. You have insurance for these things (hopefully).
Though laws vary widely in the US, in CA the punishment is about a year in county jail, give or take:
https://www.shouselaw.com/california-looting-laws.html
16 replies →
I have taken down this same argument you made elsewhere on this topic and I ask that in addition to your not arguing about something that didn’t happen and how you hypothesize people you cannot name would react, that you make the argument just once and not paper all over a topic with exact copies of it.
I think it’s a threat directed at private gun-owning citizens that would be willing to take the law into their own hands. I’m old enough to remember the L.A. riots, where the police essentially peace’d out and let the resulting storm “work” itself out. It was God-awful for everyone involved, from the looters to the business owners to the innocent bystanders watching idly by.
Trump is warning the looters that they are taking their lives in their own hands, not just against the police, but against other private citizens protecting their property.
"a threat directed at" I'm not trying to be pedantic here, forgive me, but I reiterate that it was an observation. Any meaning beyond that is your own. The statement stands as it is, any interpretation by Twitter is editorializing.
1 reply →
That’s a bubble of reality distortion surrounding the public facing messaging of the man. That is not the expectation for the Office of the President. He won. He got to the top office.
This is my comment on the other HN thread about this:
> The phrase was used by Miami's police chief, Walter Headley, in 1967, when he addressed his department's "crackdown on ... slum hoodlums," according to a United Press International article from the time.
> Headley, who was chief of police in Miami for 20 years, said that law enforcement was going after “young hoodlums, from 15 to 21, who have taken advantage of the civil rights campaign. ... We don't mind being accused of police brutality."
This is where the quote comes from.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/where-does-phrase-...
Edit:
https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-quotes-cop-sparked-rac...
> The National Commission on the Causes and Prevention of Violence found that Headley's remarks and policing policies had been a significant factor in sparking the riots.
> Headley died four months after the riots. The Times in its obituary noted his policies had caused "growing resentment" among black Miami residents.
Our President fully understands the gravity of those words. This is what he wanted to say. This is what he meant. This is what he believes. This is WHO HE IS.
Not sure why you’re downvoted.
I think that you’re right about Trump’s motive. It’s all a PR game to keep him in power, even and especially when he says nasty stuff. If you try to argue with it as if it was reason then it will be like punching a cloud.
Under that mental model, it’s hard to predict how this will play out. I don’t know how this Twitter action will affect the psychology of his supporters. It will be interesting to watch!
Really? Because literally this week Trump tweeted something and then followed it up with an executive order.
He also promised to throw Hillary in prison for the emails. Still waiting on that one.
I think he would have done so if he could. In the end the US president has a lot more power then president's in other democratic counties but still he's constrained by the law.
3 replies →
I think a lot of people are still waiting, and hoping, on that one but it will never happen. Politicians at that level don't seem to go to jail much.