Huffington Post Writer Pro-Violence

I wrote about this a few weeks ago, but here we go again.  Loser McSucksALot, better known as Jesse Benn wrote an article about how Anti-Trump protesters are justified in their violence.  He sites several historial examples of how violence has changed things for the better, and that we’ve been fed lies about non-violent movements.

Violence has one legitimate purpose- as a defense against those who have directly initiated violence against you.  It has several qualifications:

  1.  As a defense against an IMMEDIATE threat to life, liberty or property.
  2. As a defense against a SPECIFIC threat to life, liberty and property.
  3. As a stop-gap until law enforcement arrives.

Violence as such is immoral, as it is the violation of the individual rights of the person who is being attacked.  Self-defense is moral, as, the attacker has already demonstrated that he or she is willing to violate individual rights, and thus has none him or herself.  Therefore, in preservation of your life (or family/friend/etc.) you are justified in self-defense.

However, self-defense is constrained in time. It is only for the immediate threat, and only until the police, who hold a legal monopoly of force, arrive.  It is never pre-emptive, and is never retaliatory, the former being the judgment of a person before he or she has done anything immoral, and the latter being the purpose of the courts.

Self-defense is also against a specific threat.  Joe Biden’s mindless dribbling about shooting shotguns through doors aside, a criminal in your home is self-defense, as he or she has already violated your right to property by being in there uninvited.  Shooting randomly into a crowd of people who may have taken your wallet is not, as the threat is non-specific, and you are violating the rights of those who did not take your wallet.

Back to Loser McSucksALot.  He advocates violence against people speaking. Really, that’s all that is happening at a presidential candidate’s speech.  Regardless of how you feel about Trump, Sanders or Clinton, that’s all that really happens.  This author calls for violence at any time one of these candidates speaks (not time-limited), and towards ANYONE at the rally (non-specific).

There is no case for self-defense, which is the only time violence is justified.

So then, what kind of person calls for random violence against non-specific targets (those people over there that disagree with me), at non-specific times (any time someone speaks freely)?  I think you know.

Throughout his blog post, he refers to Trump as a fascist.  Yet, when I check   the Merriam-Webster Dictionary for the definition of fascism, I see that it is a government in which, “the people are not allowed to disagree with the government.”  And yet, Loser McSucksALot advocates violence to silence the voices of those who disagree with him.

I guess it’s true that you are the angriest at what you can’t be with in yourself.


Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: