this post was submitted on 10 Jun 2025
-8 points (30.0% liked)

Conservatives

112 readers
23 users here now

Pro-conservative discussions

Rules

  1. Pro-conservative or crazy liberal post.
  2. We are a discussion forum. No low effort, trolling comments.
  3. Everyone is welcome to opine, but be civil.
  4. Attack the topic, not the person
  5. Report violations of the rules
  6. Downvotes are disabled

founded 3 months ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] rah@hilariouschaos.com 7 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

They hit him because he’s behind the line.

I don't understand what line you're referring to.

By law they can use force to compel him to move.

But he got up and started to move and then yet another police officer forcefully pulled him back on to the ground. What you're saying doesn't make sense.

In layman’s terms, they can hit you until you leave the area.

Having the right to hit someone isn't a reason to hit someone. The police officer who hit the citizen with a long stick had no apparent reason to hit him.

[–] Chucklestheclown@hilariouschaos.com -4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

They had given a dispersal order. The police line means he should be moving forward and away from the police. Umm.. have the right is a reason to hit someone.
THey hit him because he wouldn't leave. People don't understand, once you are told to leave, leave or you will be hit. Now they should have given him a chance to walk away again but that isn't a requirement. They can keep hitting him till he leaves. The police are not your parents. If they have the to use force, they can and will.

[–] rah@hilariouschaos.com 4 points 1 day ago* (last edited 23 hours ago) (1 children)

have the right is a reason to hit someone

Why is having a right to hit someone a reason to hit them? I have the right to smash my own hand to pulp with a hammer but the fact that I have that right isn't a reason for me to do it.

Now they should have given him a chance to walk away again but that isn't a requirement. They can keep hitting him till he leaves.

So you're saying the police have the right to hit whoever they like for as long as they like, all they have to do is prevent them from leaving the area? That's crazy.

[–] Chucklestheclown@hilariouschaos.com 1 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

That isn’t what I said at all. They didn’t prevent him from leaving. He didn’t leave.

[–] rah@hilariouschaos.com 3 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

They didn’t prevent him from leaving.

As I already pointed out, they did prevent him from leaving. He got up and started to move and then a police officer forcefully pulled him back on to the ground.

[–] Chucklestheclown@hilariouschaos.com 1 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

And what was his fate? Arrested ?

[–] rah@hilariouschaos.com 2 points 21 hours ago* (last edited 19 hours ago) (1 children)

LOL WTF are you talking about?

[–] Chucklestheclown@hilariouschaos.com 1 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

I think it is clear. Which word confused you?

[–] rah@hilariouschaos.com 2 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago) (1 children)

No word confused me, I was confused by you changing the subject away from you being wrong.

[–] Chucklestheclown@hilariouschaos.com 1 points 17 hours ago (2 children)

I wasn't wrong. I explained to you what the law allows.

[–] rah@hilariouschaos.com 1 points 2 hours ago

I wasn’t wrong

You said they didn't prevent him from leaving when they did prevent him from leaving. You were wrong.

[–] SkyezOpen@lemmy.world 2 points 17 hours ago

The law allows rioting and burning, but only if you do it for trump.