Well people tried to kill Hitler loads of times. 42 times according to Wikipedia. First was in 1932, before he became dictator.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassination_attempts_on_Adolf_Hitler?wprov=sfla1

Bitchass conservatives are always pushing for political violence. I'm tired of the left always trying to by the better man.

For much of the populace, sentiment only began to shift when life got harder for them personally. For some, that was when their children were killed in the war, for others it was when food shortages started to hurt, and still others would fully support the reich until it inevitably turned against them. Most personal impact that people felt was brushed off as "patriotic sacrifice" for the greater good. It was a bunch of small things that just piled up over time. Different people had different breaking points. But some people went through the whole war remaining fully supportive of the government.

You have to remember that propaganda was also much more effective then, when the government could fully control all media. Many Nazi supporters at the time had no idea what Hitler was really like or what was going on at concentration camps. The guards for those camps and other SS soldiers were chosen because they met certain loyalty criteria and would not go against orders. But everyone else was either oblivious to the cruelty, fearful of what would happen to their families if they went against the government, or just blissfully unaware and brainwashed by propaganda.

With the Internet today, it should be harder for people to fall for propaganda. The Internet really changes things now. You can see the disinformation influence everywhere but it's much harder to silence all the dissenters now. There will always be people who refuse to seek answers or listen to opposing viewpoints and there's not much to be done about that except teach open mindedness to children when they're young. It's why the fascists try to hard to simultaneously control and hamstring the education system. Unfortunately, they've been at it so long that there's now a large portion of the population that grew up with poor education and are now easily influenced by the media sources that the fascists control. The propaganda today must focus more on convincing people that there is an existential threat in the form of a group, person, or ideology that only they can stop. They just need to convince enough people that doing evil things for "good" reasons is justified. They're beginning to reach critical mass of supporters to where they can brazenly try to seize control of the government now, laws be damned. You see them pushing on those legal boundaries much more frequently these days. If they succeed, things will get worse for everyone (including their supporters) when they decide to fully drop their facades and begin doing evil things without any justification besides "because I felt like it". Leopards will always eat faces, but for some reason people never learn that lesson.

That is a fantastic question. Pretty much everyone agrees that Hitler should have killed in the cradle given hindsight.

When is it moral to kill the motherfucker without having a crystal ball?

Earlier than most people will openly condone given the nature of their State and society.

However, what if that creates a big dumb Hitler martyr that a more effective fascist can wave as a bloody flag and things get worse due to better managed evil?

I just want to go back in history and ask at what point people would’ve considered it appropriate to use political violence against someone like Hitler, or was it never okay?

Depends on the country

In Germany:

Communists and Anarchists: Around 1920, when the SA was founded

Social democrats: Depends on the „type“ of social democrat. The Reichsbanner Schwarz-Rot-Gold, the social democratic militia, expected their leaders to start a coup in 1933

Conservatives: 1939, when the war started (at least those, that still were conservatives and didn‘t join the Nazis)

Monarchists: 1942, when it became visible, that Hitler couldn‘t win the war (at least those, that still were monarchists and didn‘t join the Nazis)

People famously tried to kill Hitler many times. Dude was like a cockroach and kept getting away.

Oh sometime between liberating the first camp and he shot himself too soon probably.

I say Wannsee at the latest. WWI would’ve been fair.

Seriously. It might not have been political at all.

When John Hinckley Jr took a shot at Reagan, he was trying to impress Jodie Foster......

https://youtu.be/ogp4o1d4p3E?si=yzTdwdadV7Qcdjy9

Or seen the Epstein stuff, and felt incredibly betrayed.

Former rightist here, I not only got my face eaten by the Fidesz leopards (gutted health-care, gutted job security, gutted disability benefits that are now also harder to get, etc), and I remember the day when I've read that Fidesz lowered the age of consent to 12 in case both parties are under 18. I thought a "conservative" party would do the opposite, and raise it to 18 with some exceptions. I remember being so angry I couldn't sleep that night at all, seen the sun rising, and my luck was that I didn't have school on that day. And after the whole cHiLd prOteCTion fiasco, one of their politician even married an 18 year old he groomed since she was 14. Many claim the low age of consent of my country is only for close-in-age relationships, but it doesn't stop much greater age differences, which are dangerously popular, because "boys at my age are stupid and don't have cars" as some of those teen girls would say, others are being groomed with "but age differences are natural" if they were skeptical and didn't want to run into such a relationship.

I took the whole "child protection" thing seriously. I knew victims. Many of them were my age. However when I had to realize some was just using it as an issue to get me to vote for them, while they themselves were doing it, often way more publicly than how Trump did it.

Damn...it sucks that I can't call that idea far fetched lol

A few things, like the shirt he was wearing, makes me wonder if it was Trump's stance on gun control that triggered this.

According to reports from classmates he failed to make the school rifle team because he was a poor shot - but also the instructor noted that he made "crass jokes" and FWIW got a poor impression of Crooks. I mention that tangentially it could apply to racism or who knows what or who he made the crass jokes about while shooting. Was he joking about shooting minorities or something?