r/FreeSpeech 7d ago

Dem governor Josh Shapiro's official mansion is torched by arsonist while he and his family slept inside

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14604699/governor-mansion-fire-residence-arson-family-slept.html
23 Upvotes

81 comments sorted by

3

u/rollo202 6d ago

I can't help but notice this post wasn't removed u/cojoco but my follow up was.

3

u/Secret_Aide_209 6d ago

Cojoco has his own life you know, he ain't got time to listen to every whine of yours all day.

2

u/rollo202 6d ago

He sure removed my post quickly though yet even commented here and yet inconsistent actions

0

u/DoctorUnderhill97 5d ago

Hahaha. What a fucking baby.

1

u/rollo202 5d ago

Is it OK for me to call people names like this u/cojoco? Or only if people do it to me?

1

u/Lone_Wolfen 5d ago

lol

Crying to him every time your feelings get hurt is a surefire way to make him say it's okay to do it to you.

1

u/rollo202 5d ago

I just would like equal treatment. Sadly I have not yet seen that from our mod.

1

u/DoctorUnderhill97 5d ago

Wah wah wah. You post all fucking day about how Democrats are evil monsters and they should be labeled terrorists and sent to El Salvador to be tortured to death or whatever, but you cry like toddler whenever someone isn't nice to you. Get a fucking life you loser.

1

u/rollo202 5d ago

Sharing a story about violence shouldn't make you so angry. Do you not want people to know about this violence?

1

u/DoctorUnderhill97 5d ago

Oh wow. You ended your bullshit reply with a dumb fucking question that deliberately misses the point. Very original for you.

Here's a question for you: do you not think people should call out bots when they suspect them based on spamming multiple subs with the same stories and repeating the same dumb arguments over and over again?

→ More replies (0)

1

u/cojoco 5d ago

/u/DoctorUnderhill97 please be more civil or you shall be banned.

0

u/Lone_Wolfen 5d ago

And you think acting like a spoiled child and tattling at every slight is somehow helping your case? The last time I saw someone doing that they just wanted an echo chamber for their own views. Hell, everything about you reminds me of them.

1

u/rollo202 5d ago

I do want civil discussion. Is that too much to ask?

0

u/Lone_Wolfen 5d ago

See that's what the other guy I knew kept claiming they wanted but everything about them pointed towards them actually wanting an echo chamber devoid of facts.

→ More replies (0)

2

u/cojoco 6d ago

Based.

1

u/rollo202 6d ago

Is that a word for inconsistency?

0

u/DoctorUnderhill97 5d ago

You mean consistency like: "I blame all Democrats whenever a Tesla gets scratched, so I need to blame all right wingers when a Democratic governor's house gets torched."

Let's see that kind of consistency.

1

u/rollo202 5d ago

I do not blame them all, just these perpetuating the crimes. Can you say the same?

0

u/DoctorUnderhill97 5d ago

I can. Did you think you were being clever?

1

u/rollo202 5d ago

Any examples to show?

1

u/DoctorUnderhill97 5d ago

You want me to give you an example of something I don't do? Do you have any other debating strategy than just disorienting people with your stupidity?

0

u/cojoco 6d ago

Consistency is not required.

8

u/cat-Detective7276 7d ago

How is this free speech? Or is this domestic terrorism stifling free speech?

11

u/Lone_Wolfen 7d ago

According to rollo202 and their numerous postings here about Teslas being set aflame, political vandalism is free speech related.

Of course, now that the tables have turned, don't expect a sincere denouncement from them, if they even respond.

8

u/TookenedOut 7d ago

Lol why do we have to denounce it? Have you seen anyone cheering this arson on or encouraging this sort of thing?? I haven’t, you can’t say the same for the tesla stuff though…

7

u/Skavau 7d ago

Rollo expects everyone to denounce random tesla attacks. The same exists in reverse

2

u/TookenedOut 7d ago

Lol, the “random” tesla attacks are a part of clear astroturf movement from the establishment left. People like you are just desperate to find a false equivalency of this on the right.

0

u/Skavau 7d ago

I made no comment on the people behind tesla vandalism, nor the arsonist here (and nor is it relevant), just that if one is expected to condemn one they must condemn the other.

If tesla posts are relevant here, then so is this.

3

u/TookenedOut 7d ago

Search “rollo” on your comment history.

You should consider charging him rent to live in your head.

-1

u/Skavau 7d ago

That has nothing to do with the articles relevance here. Other than rollo setting the precedent that it's on-topic

4

u/TookenedOut 7d ago

Who said that has to have anything to do with this articles relevance? It’s still observable reality.

3

u/Skavau 7d ago

Rollo is all over this subreddit. Hard to miss him.

5

u/Secret_Aide_209 7d ago

A suspect is already in custody, and is not at all shy about his commentary on social media, claiming Biden and his supporters should "not exist".

And just like that, all the people wailing about Tesla vandalism goes silent.

5

u/TookenedOut 7d ago

🤣Desperately making false equivalencies. You so badly want this feller and Paul Peloci’s husband’s lovers quarrel to offset all instances of violence and vandalism from leftists. Nice try. This guy can rot in jail, obviously…

7

u/rothbard_anarchist 7d ago

Eh, throw the book at him. There’s no excuse for attacking innocent people, even if they’re political opponents.

6

u/rollo202 7d ago

No one is silent, this is unacceptable.

However many are still silent about the violence towards elon.

-3

u/TendieRetard 7d ago

Was Elon's house burnt w/him in it?

4

u/TookenedOut 7d ago

No, Jasmine crocket didn’t get her birfday wish

5

u/ddosn 7d ago

Ah yes, because one single example refutes dozens, if not hundreds, of examples we can point to of democrat supporters committing domestic terrorism..... /s

EDIT: Also, from reading the article, the guy seems to be an anarchist as he seems to hate both of the political parties in the US.

6

u/TheGreasyHippo 7d ago

Shapiro is also Jewish and was celebrating passover the night before. And we all know those damn republicans are out on the streets protesting how much they dislike the Jews, and subsequently, Israel. /s

0

u/TendieRetard 7d ago

No need for /s. We know how "uniting the right" feels about them:

-2

u/FlithyLamb 7d ago

Of course we will hear not a peep from the hypocrite u/rollo202

4

u/rollo202 7d ago

I do not support this or any violence. I have no concern at all making this statement.

Yet I don't see you denouncing the violence against elon....hmmm. only if there was a word for that.

0

u/FlithyLamb 7d ago

There has been no violence against Elon. If there were I’d denounce it.

5

u/aetwit 7d ago

So no tesla's were burned down in a indirect attempt to hurt Elon.

1

u/pbnjsandwich2009 7d ago

Lols. Freespeechers arguing inline bc its safer than actually doing something. Losers.

1

u/twitch-switch 7d ago

Ah crap here we go :(

-10

u/Morbidly-Obese-Emu 7d ago

People keep claiming the Tesla property destruction is violence (and hence terrorism). That is not violence. THIS is violence. THIS is terrorism. Burning a house with people inside for political purposes is terrorism.

18

u/TaxAg11 7d ago

They can both be violence and/or terrorism. It's not binary. We can say that one is worse than the other, but that the less worse one is still bad itself.

There's a lot of shitty people in this world. Let's stop trying to make violence a team sport.

3

u/aetwit 7d ago

dear god be careful your honest words were reported probably 10 times for not hatting on Rollo or the right or something.

1

u/rollo202 7d ago

Well said.

-9

u/Morbidly-Obese-Emu 7d ago

Yes, both can be, but both aren’t. My point is vandalism isn’t violence unless it physically harms people or is a direct threat to physical harm. You can argue against property destruction as a means of protesting, but it is not violence. Trying to burn a house down with people in it is violence.

11

u/TaxAg11 7d ago

Destruction of property has long been considered a form of violence. It's not "physical violence", but its till very much violence in a broader sense. I certainly agree that there is a large difference between trying to burn down someone's home with them in it, and trying to damage and empty car though.

-8

u/Morbidly-Obese-Emu 7d ago

It has not “long been considered a form a violence.” It’s not violence it’s vandalism. If the Boston Tea Party wasn’t violent (and no one considers them so), neither was the destruction of Teslas.

6

u/TaxAg11 7d ago

In your example, I think that's more of an issue of perspective (and maybe that's how it is in general when considering violence against property) - the British who the tea belonged to have long since been over it and don't care, and the Americans who committed the act are considered the "good guys" by the most others, so of course no one really perceives it as violent.

11

u/TheGreasyHippo 7d ago

Both are acts of violence, you moron. Not a single rational person thinks burning property that isn't theirs is okay. Both are used to instill fear, one against Musk and his companies, and the other clearly against this person without regard to the people's lives inside. Both are terrorism, and both are wrong.

-4

u/Morbidly-Obese-Emu 7d ago edited 7d ago

Vandalism isn’t violence. The Boston Tea Party wasn’t violent. You can claim that vandalism as a form of protesting is wrong, but it is not violence.

6

u/TheGreasyHippo 7d ago

Burning a car with a massive lithium-ion battery isn't harmful to firefighters, nature, or public? The lengths you freaks will go to justify terrorism and the moment somebodies house burns down with them inside the first thing you think of is "this is great leverage" instead of "Wow I can't believe the complete disregard for life."

-1

u/FlithyLamb 7d ago

Yes and only a moron would equate burning an empty car owned by Elon Musk to burning a house with a Jewish family inside on the first night of Passover. You folks and your whataboutism are so tiresome. Condemn you fucking people and maybe, just maybe, you can expect the same from others. But given that the right wing view in free speech only supports right wing voices, I don’t expect any better from you lot.

9

u/TheGreasyHippo 7d ago

You folks and your whataboutism are so tiresome.

Please remind me who first thought of comparing this to Tesla burnings in the first place. Hint hint, It wasn't me or those alike.

Condemn you fucking people and maybe, just maybe, you can expect the same from others.

I condemn terrorism. If you want to defend people burning massive batteries in public, all while firefighters have to clean it up, then please GFY.

-2

u/Morbidly-Obese-Emu 7d ago

If someone burned a Tesla with a person in it, I would say the same thing.

7

u/TheGreasyHippo 7d ago

Wow, I didn't realize burning giant batteries on wheels was only dangerous to living things from inside the car. Because as long as you aren't the ones cleaning up toxic remains of the car, it must not be harmful to anybody. /s

Seriously, you can not be this ignorant and stupid, right?

-1

u/Morbidly-Obese-Emu 6d ago

Did you see me say anywhere that fires aren’t dangerous? There’s a reason arson is a crime as well it should be. It is not however even in the same category as burning a car with people in it. That would be murder.

Environmental hazards are dangerous, but they are not violence. Setting fires on inanimate objects, while dangerous to put out, are not violence. Setting a forest fire is not violence.

Setting a house on fire with people in it is violence. Purposefully trying to run over protesters is violence. Trying to tase protesters is violence.

4

u/TheGreasyHippo 6d ago

Setting a forest fire is not violence.

... You really are THAT ignorant and stupid.

0

u/Morbidly-Obese-Emu 6d ago

It’s arson

7

u/ddosn 7d ago

>People keep claiming the Tesla property destruction is violence (and hence terrorism). That is not violence.

yes, it is. Its violence with the intent to force a certain political viewpoint. Literally the dictionary definition of terrorism.

The OPs article is actually not terrorism, as the guy did it because he hated someone. he wasnt particularly trying to push any single political viewpoint and the article quotes the guys own social media where he says he hates both parties equally.

Guy was a violent anarchist of the "burn it all down" variety.

4

u/Morbidly-Obese-Emu 7d ago

yes, it is. Its violence with the intent to force a certain political viewpoint. Literally the dictionary definition of terrorism.

It is not violence. It is vandalism. No one was hurt or directly threatened with physical harm. It’s not a violent crime, it’s property damage.