Informing you that a right wing idiot tried to assassinate an ultra-right wing idiot isn’t a “no true scotsman” argument. You keep pointing to right-wing violence as evidence of left-wing violence.

Dude. No.

The idiot that committed the political violence that you tried to hold up as a “BoTh SidEs” was on the same side as the idiot he tried to kill.

90+% of the political violence in this country has been committed by the same party.

Whatever you think you’re trying to do is only helping the fascist idiots.

ETA: also, “No true Scotsman” is a MASSIVE stretch for this. Again, statistically violence is almost entirely owned by the Republican party. You’re 100% trying to “both-sides” this.

Actually, second edit: The fact that you completely shifted you goalposts after I pointed out that it wasn’t the left that tried to assassinate Trump tells me everything I need to know about you. That was your whole point - and it’s completely false.

The guy that “shot” him in 2024 was a Republican. Not sure how that makes this a “both sides” thing.

I’m well aware the plural of “anecdote” isn’t “data”, but literally no dev I know (senior or otherwise) thinks this. Give me a junior work with - most of them at least actually learn.

Agreed.

Literally the comment that was removed. Weird how the modlog has your edited comment as your comment instead of your original one.

100% same. Over 40. US based. No one says “thick” here.

At this point, I’m being redundant, but:

To “send money to hamas” you need to actively do so. To “alllow her money to be sent to a corp that chooses to kill people” - that’s literally retirement in the US?

I’m literally not saying it’s a good thing but - not understanding the difference between these two is an impressive level of cognitive dissonance.

stop being thick.

Take your own advice. Most people do not look at the fucking stocks in their retirement portfolio.

Also, “stop being thick” - you’re not from the US, are you? Literally no one here uses that phrase. Maybe stop advocating violence like you did a few comments ago?

No. No you didn’t. NO ONE picks the damn stocks in their retirement account - not 100%.

You either don’t understand how retirement accounts work in the US or you don’t care.

You 100% ignored my response.

I said initially said to jail the fucks fueling this. You then said we should penalize the people with 401(k)s. I tried to shift the blame back to the people actually picking the damn stocks.

Not, you know, the fund advisor that actually understands what she’s investing in.

No. You want to punish someone? Punish the people choosing the investments.

Yep, grandma, who had maybe a base level of knowledge of where her retirement was invested, should serve time for the fact that the funds her advisor picked happened to contain a share of this company.

Not, you know, the fund advisor that actually understands what she’s investing in.

You’re actively advocating for citizens to be punished for decisions made by people in the ruling/investment class, while also advocating they commit violence that they will be jailed for. That’s honestly kind of impressive.

Maybe try fining the people that pick the investments instead?

Absolutely agree.

Don’t get me wrong - this is absolute bullshit, but no, that’s a bad take.

The people that regulate this don’t give a shit if the average person is prosecuted because it doesn’t affect them. The only actual way the system gets changed is if the obscenely wealthy/regulators/lawmakers who profit over this go to jail. Not some schmuck with a 401(k).

You penalize folks that happen to have a single share of this in their retirement portfolio, all you’re doing is screwing over the chunk of the populace that is already overworked and just trying to survive by shoving what they can into recommended retirement funds.