349
Minnesota House speaker, her husband shot and killed in 'assassination'
(www.thecentersquare.com)
this post was submitted on 14 Jun 2025
349 points (99.2% liked)
politics
24148 readers
3845 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
No, I'm not. I'm advocating non-violence and pointing out how senseless this is. What the shooter did is wrong. And it would be wrong if he shot republicans as well, and i hope no one wants to retaliate with targeting other politicians now.
Let's say, hypothetically, there's a mass shooting in progress. Literally a gunman shooting people in the street. How are you going to solve that situation with non-violence?
Another hypothetical. There's someone with the detonator to a bomb that's planted in a full stadium. You have a gun. If you don't shoot them, they will detonate the bomb. Are you still advocating for pacifism?
You can't make a statement like 'Violence is never the answer' if you're not willing to apply it to these situations, too, so is your position that it's better to let tens, hundreds or thousands of people die if the only way to prevent it is with violence?
The alternative, of course, is to acknowledge that sometimes, though regrettable, violence is the answer, and once we've established that, we can start examining where the line is where it becomes justified.
You live how you choose to, I'll live the way I choose to. Violence is never the answer. There is no scenario where that will change for me. Not Hitler. Not babies. Not family. etc. And definitely not because of silly downvotes by 26-year old pokemon collecting, gaming-chair warriors on Lemmy.
I gave my opinion. Many disagree. Ok, but I'm still of my same opinion. My life choice. You get to make yours.
Just so you know, I'm not the only pacifist in existence. There are many others like me in the world. Just not on Lemmy! lol
That's well and fine, but if your honest opinion is that violence isn't justified in even the above scenarios, I think you're living in a fantasy world of idealism. If violence is being done, and you have the power to stop it (even through violence) but choose not to, you're complicit in that violence.
I'll also point out that this wasn't a case where you were minding your own business and people started calling you out; you were the first one to reply in this comment chain. You opened the debate, and you seem very willing to criticize other peoples' views, but when yours start to be examined critically, you seem to shy away.
I get to live how I want to. You get to live how you want to. Good luck on your journey.
I've never inferred anything different. I gave my opinion. People disagree. I'm fine with that. They haven't changed my mind. I haven't changed their mind. According to the modlog, some people went a bit too far and had comments removed for advocating violence. That's how these things go. Lemmy crowdthink has never been subtle about their extremism. Makes no difference in my life whatsoever and doesn't upset me.
I also take comfort in the fact that most here aren't going to do anything violent anyway, regardless of what they say they are going to do or what they'd like to see be done.
Opinions have been made known. I'll stay on my same path. All good.
The real problem I have with this entire discussion is that (as you've been called out for here already), you're basing it on a straw man. You're taking statements like "Violence is sometimes the answer" and twisting that to mean "Violence is [often / always] the answer" or "Violence is the solution to the problem in this article", and trying to paint your view as the moral high ground based on that misrepresentation. In fact, that's the whole reason we're even having this discussion, now - you did that to [i]my[/i] first comment in this chain. You're trying to position other people as unreasonable and violent by misrepresenting their viewpoints.
No, I'm stating that my opinion is that it is never the answer. People have have had comments here removed by the mods for "advocating violence." So obviously some things about violence have been said that others have felt the need to remove.
No, I gave my opinion.
Let me wrap this up, so we can move on. I don't care if every single Lemmy poster on the planet earth replies that they think violence is the answer or it's sometimes the answer or it's rarely the answer, and then downvotes me to oblivion. I don't think violence is ever the answer.
No matter the hitler, knife, nuke bomb, dinosaur time machine, black hole travels to every bad time period etc scenario. I'm not going to change my mind. You aren't either. That's fine. You're free to your opinion, as I am to mine.
I'm not upset about this conversation at all and I don't think anyone should be. But it's getting boring because it's just going in circles now. It's Lemmy, it's not real life.
I've made my point very clear several times, so I won't be answering any more questions or replying to direct replies in this thread any longer. It's just going in circles now. Plenty of other things I wanna talk about. Good luck on your journey.