Man kills shopkeeper in US state of California after disparaging Pride flag

[KhunLA]

38 minutes ago, heybruce said:

Seriously?  You open with "Not to victim blame" then you victim blame?

 

Do you think the civil rights movement would have succeeded without confronting people about injustice?

Apples & oranges.

 

Using common sense has kept me alive, and know what fights you can win, and which you should avoid.

 

A 66 yr old woman, confronting an obviously violent 27 yr old ... nuff said

 

 

[n00dle]

On 8/21/2023 at 10:28 AM, Tug said:

who pray tell are whipping up this frenzy of hate towards this tiny minority of people

the tiny minority of people you speak of use divisive rhetoric as their stock in trade.

[placeholder]

9 minutes ago, johnnybangkok said:

That's been his common sentiment throughout this thread. A fluffy, pearl clutching version of 'she was asking for it'.

I think his position can be summarized as I'm not saying she was asking for it but she was asking for it.

[n00dle]

1 hour ago, placeholder said:

You keep on edging closer and closer to She was asking for it.

she was not asking for it. the rhetoric of the movement she supported however has been pushing the boat further and further out, For the most miltant, this is a positive result that will fuel yet more division.
 

[placeholder]

2 minutes ago, n00dle said:

she was not asking for it. the rhetoric of the movement she supported however has been pushing the boat further and further out, For the most miltant, this is a positive result that will fuel yet more division.
 

So it was the actions of the "most militant" that was responsible for her death?

[johnnybangkok]

4 hours ago, Neeranam said:

One could say its about Biden using the LGBQ issue as a political tool, when we all know his real, historical thoughts on it. 

Many Democrats believe flying that flag in the white house was wrong. 

Sadly, like other things the press are trying to polarizer the issue. 

What a nonsense statement. It's absolutely right of Biden to use 'the LGBQ issue as a political tool' when the GOP is so blatantly making it one of their main election points.   

The GOP (and only the GOP) are trying to ban drag queens and censor books that have even the smallest reference to LGBTQ. They are banning school discussions on sexual orientation and are trying to ban Pride Flags from government buildings. They are putting restrictions on gay and transgender rights and in many cases, many GOP congressmen/senators are now openly opposing same-sex marriage.

Biden 'using the LGBQ issue as a political tool' is entirely because of the GOP taking an extreme stance in it's continued effort to make identity politics in America the ONLY issue that voters should care about. They don't really care about LGBTQ rights one way or another though, they do howver care that it seems such a hot button issue for many of their supporters. 

[n00dle]

8 minutes ago, placeholder said:

So it was the actions of the "most militant" that was responsible for her death?

most definiely.

shooting her seems a rather miltant act does it not?

[placeholder]

1 minute ago, n00dle said:

most definiely.

shooting her seems a rather miltant act does it not?

So not her fault but the fault of LGBTQ militants? Anyone but the shooter and the anti LGBQT movement?

[JonnyF]

3 hours ago, heybruce said:

She didn't ram anything down anyone's throat, she publicly displayed her views, much like people wearing MAGA merchandise do.  Would you accuse a MAGA republican of ramming his/her views down the throats of others for wearing a MAGA hat in a predominantly Democrat area?

Like I said yesterday, if you attend an Antifa rally dressed as Captain America, with a Trump mask on and a MAGA hat then yes, you might get assaulted. 

 

I'm not saying you should get assaulted. I am not saying it is right. I am saying people who engage in these types of behaviours are taking an unnecessary risk. It had already been torn down several times and she put up bigger ones. It is ill advised to get into these types of "tit for tat" disputes and it happens on both sides. 

 

 

She knew it offended people. She knew it had been ripped down. She put up a bigger one in it's place then confronted the person who objected to it. What happened is not right. But I think de-escalation rather than antagonism in such situations is sometimes the best course of action. Given what has happened, it's tough to disagree with that.

[placeholder]

2 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Like I said yesterday, if you attend an Antifa rally dressed as Captain America, with a Trump mask on and a MAGA hat then yes, you might get assaulted. 

 

I'm not saying you should get assaulted. I am not saying it is right. I am saying people who engage in these types of behaviours are taking an unnecessary risk. It had already been torn down several times and she put up bigger ones. It is ill advised to get into these types of "tit for tat" disputes and it happens on both sides. 

 

 

She knew it offended people. She knew it had been ripped down. She put up a bigger one in it's place then confronted the person who objected to it. What happened is not right. But I think de-escalation rather than antagonism in such situations is sometimes the best course of action. Given what has happened, it's tough to disagree with that.

Because it was a rational expectation that she would wind up being killed? You've got 20-20 hindsight.

[JonnyF]

1 hour ago, placeholder said:

You suppose wrongly.

 

Hanging a flag of whatever size is ramming opinions down someone's throat? Did she strap viewers into a chair, prop open their eyelids and make them stare at the flags? You keep on edging closer and closer to She was asking for it.

Putting up flags that you know offend people, then putting up even bigger flags that offend people when someone removes it, then confronting the person who objects to it is antagonistic behaviour.

 

Did she deserve to be shot? Of course not, that's ridiculous to assume I think that. Could she have de-escalated it and stopped antagonizing people with opposing beliefs to her own? Absolutely. 

 

Do you think it's fine if someone hung Nazi flags outside their shop in a Jewish area? Every time someone pulled it down they hung a larger Nazi flag? Again, it's antagonistic and unnecessary.

 

My point? Maybe people can start being a bit more considerate of others with different views to themselves. I know it's not a trait of the left but maybe they could at least consider others for once.

[KhunLA]

18 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Like I said yesterday, if you attend an Antifa rally dressed as Captain America, with a Trump mask on and a MAGA hat then yes, you might get assaulted. 

 

I'm not saying you should get assaulted. I am not saying it is right. I am saying people who engage in these types of behaviours are taking an unnecessary risk. It had already been torn down several times and she put up bigger ones. It is ill advised to get into these types of "tit for tat" disputes and it happens on both sides. 

 

 

She knew it offended people. She knew it had been ripped down. She put up a bigger one in it's place then confronted the person who objected to it. What happened is not right. But I think de-escalation rather than antagonism in such situations is sometimes the best course of action. Given what has happened, it's tough to disagree with that.

That's a reverse scenario of you 'shouldn't confront people you don't know.'

 

If watching the vid till the end, states the 'flag waver' had a legal concealed weapon on him, but didn't think the need to use, and pepper spray was enough to keep the aggressor away.

Edited August 22, 2023 by KhunLA

[Bkk Brian]

13 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Like I said yesterday, if you attend an Antifa rally dressed as Captain America, with a Trump mask on and a MAGA hat then yes, you might get assaulted. 

 

I'm not saying you should get assaulted. I am not saying it is right. I am saying people who engage in these types of behaviours are taking an unnecessary risk. It had already been torn down several times and she put up bigger ones. It is ill advised to get into these types of "tit for tat" disputes and it happens on both sides. 

 

 

She knew it offended people. She knew it had been ripped down. She put up a bigger one in it's place then confronted the person who objected to it. What happened is not right. But I think de-escalation rather than antagonism in such situations is sometimes the best course of action. Given what has happened, it's tough to disagree with that.

So all pride flags should be hidden even though they are on your own property, cause you know it reduces the risk of getting murdered. This nutter was also homophobic, perhaps all gays should keep their sexuality hidden to. You know, no holding hands in public as you may get murdered.

[placeholder]

1 minute ago, JonnyF said:

Putting up flags that you know offend people, then putting up even bigger flags that offend people when someone removes it, then confronting the person who objects to it is antagonistic behaviour.

 

Did she deserve to be shot? Of course not, that's ridiculous to assume I think that. Could she have de-escalated it and stopped antagonizing people with opposing beliefs to her own? Absolutely. 

 

Do you think it's fine if someone hung Nazi flags outside their shop in a Jewish area? Every time someone pulled it down they hung a larger Nazi flag? Again, it's antagonistic and unnecessary.

 

My point? Maybe people can start being a bit more considerate of others with different views to themselves. I know it's not a trait of the left but maybe they could at least consider others for once.

Ah, the truth about the source of your nonsense comes out at last. 

"I know it's not a trait of the left but maybe they could at least consider others for once."

So, all those folks plastering their cars with confederate flags are leftists?

[JonnyF]

10 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Because it was a rational expectation that she would wind up being killed? You've got 20-20 hindsight.

Where did I say it was a rational expectation? Oh that's right, I didn't. You made it up (again).

 

I said it was an unnecessary risk. She could have offended someone and angered them without even knowing. Could have been a verbal altercation. Could have ripped it down (they did several times apparently and she put up bigger ones). Could have been a brick through the window. Could have been a punch in the face. That's the point. It's an un-necessary risk, you never know what some loon is capable of.  

[placeholder]

1 minute ago, JonnyF said:

Where did I say it was a rational expectation? Oh that's right, I didn't. You made it up (again).

 

I said it was an unnecessary risk. She could have offended someone and angered them without even knowing. Could have been a verbal altercation. Could have ripped it down (they did several times apparently and she put up bigger ones). Could have been a brick through the window. Could have been a punch in the face. That's the point. It's an un-necessary risk, you never know what some loon is capable of.  

So it was a rational expectation that she might be injured but not killed?

[JonnyF]

3 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

That's a reverse scenario of you 'shouldn't confront people you don't know.'

 

If watching the vid till the end, states the 'flag waver' had a legal concealed weapon on him, but didn't think the need to use, and pepper spray was enough to keep the aggressor away.

I think the same rule applies.

 

The guy tore down her Pride flag, she confronted him (despite not knowing anything about him). He shot her.

 

Sometimes discretion is the better part of valour. 

[Chomper Higgot]

5 hours ago, KhunLA said:

Obviously the killer was a bit unstable, and possibly a confrontational nutter.  That a flag/flags was the trigger is irrelevant.  The day before, it might have been a soda can on the walkway, but nobody to confront him.

 

Maybe the killer was planning on vandalizing all flags that day, and simply got confronted on the rainbow one before finishing the day's anti flag protest. 

 

Got to put something divisive in the headline.

 

Moral of story ... avoid nutters, call PoPo, as that's why you pay taxes.

More imaginings.

 

I suggest you too join me in waiting for the investigation to reveal his motivation.

Being unstable probably makes the killer more susceptible to being motivated by religion or politics, but I doubt being unstable in and of itself is the cause of his violence.

I look forward to hearing the investigation’s findings on his motivation.

[Bkk Brian]

1 minute ago, JonnyF said:

I think the same rule applies.

 

The guy tore down her Pride flag, she confronted him (despite not knowing anything about him). He shot her.

 

Sometimes discretion is the better part of valour. 

Back to victim blaming yet again. 

[JonnyF]

3 minutes ago, placeholder said:

So it was a rational expectation that she might be injured but not killed?

I never said it was a rational expectation she might be injured. You made that up (again).

 

I said it was an un-necessary risk. 

[JonnyF]

Just now, Bkk Brian said:

Back to victim blaming yet again. 

Simplistic. We've moved a bit beyond that now. 

[Bkk Brian]

1 minute ago, JonnyF said:

Simplistic. We've moved a bit beyond that now. 

I was hoping you had but obviously not. You talk about risk and how she could have reduced it. How do you know how she confronted this man? What was said? How do you know she did not intend to call the police before she got murdered?

[youreavinalaff]

4 hours ago, heybruce said:

She didn't ram anything down anyone's throat, she publicly displayed her views, much like people wearing MAGA merchandise do.  Would you accuse a MAGA republican of ramming his/her views down the throats of others for wearing a MAGA hat in a predominantly Democrat area?

Yes.

[heybruce]

1 hour ago, KhunLA said:

Apples & oranges.

 

Using common sense has kept me alive, and know what fights you can win, and which you should avoid.

 

A 66 yr old woman, confronting an obviously violent 27 yr old ... nuff said

Unarmed civil rights marchers confronting armed Alabama police officers on horseback....nuff said.  https://www.history.com/news/selma-bloody-sunday-attack-civil-rights-movement

[Chomper Higgot]

5 hours ago, Neeranam said:

One could say its about Biden using the LGBQ issue as a political tool, when we all know his real, historical thoughts on it. 

Many Democrats believe flying that flag in the white house was wrong. 

Sadly, like other things the press are trying to polarizer the issue. 

The first time the Pride Flag was flown at the White House was on June 26, 2015, during the Obama administration. It was displayed to commemorate the Supreme Court's ruling that legalized same-sex marriage nationwide.

 

So why all the rightwing angst in 2023?

 

 

[heybruce]

1 minute ago, youreavinalaff said:

Yes.

So you think freedom of expression should be limited to those times when expressing oneself would not offend anyone?  Talk about woke!

[KhunLA]

15 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

More imaginings.

 

I suggest you too join me in waiting for the investigation to reveal his motivation.

Being unstable probably makes the killer more susceptible to being motivated by religion or politics, but I doubt being unstable in and of itself is the cause of his violence.

I look forward to hearing the investigation’s findings on his motivation.

Killing, shooting a 66 yr old lady, immediately puts you in the 'unstable' category with me, unless it was self defense, and highly unlikely.

 

His motive, if actually reading the thread, was being of anti alphabet folks mentality, from his social media postings, supposedly.

 

Don't need to wait for investigation, as know enough, and it's all mute, they're both dead.  No matter what, the end results isn't go to change.

 

Just the divisive conversations.

With that ... Have a Nice Day.

Edited August 22, 2023 by KhunLA

[placeholder]

9 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

I never said it was a rational expectation she might be injured. You made that up (again).

 

I said it was an un-necessary risk. 

If it was an unnecessary risk that would mean that accounting for the possibility in advance would be rational. Whereas accounting for it being destroyed by a meteorite would not be.

[placeholder]

1 minute ago, heybruce said:

So you think freedom of expression should be limited to those times when expressing oneself would not offend anyone?  Talk about woke!

I wish I had said that.

[Chomper Higgot]

4 hours ago, JonnyF said:

Interesting details starting to emerge.

 

https://opoyi.com/usa/who-was-travis-ikeguchi-murder-suspect-of-laura-carleton-named/

 

It would appear she knew she was upsetting people in her community but continued to ramp up the confrontation.

 

 

A terrible tragedy, RIP Laura. Maybe time for a pause for thought, it's possible to hold views without constantly ramming them down the throats of others. 

More victim blaming.