comment: >
  
  Let the message to all potential domestic terrorists be loud and clear:  no one gets away with shooting at elected officials’ homes six times.  
  Five is the maximum and you need to respect that.
context: We're worried and concerned that these are connected and possibly politically motivated
  
  Oh you think it might be? >
  
  "The suspect was spouting anti-Asian remarks while beating the Asian man... Not sure if it was a hate crime" - Police >
  
  That's some fine work there Lou.
  Bake em away toys. >
  
  What did you say, chief? >
  
  Do what the kid says. >
  
  Expect to see more shootings and killings of democratic members going forward from the angry right as the white population begins to diminish and voters swing to the left. >
  
  Reminds me of Sundown Towns back in the day >
  
  Back in the day? >
  
  Yeah, Mon-day. >
  
  Yester-day. To-day. Tomorrow-day. >
  
  Let the message to all potential domestic terrorists be loud and clear:  no one gets away with shooting at elected officials’ homes six times.  
  Five is the maximum and you need to respect that. >
  
  
  According to Albuquerque police, the other shootings happened Dec. 10 at the former campaign office of Raúl Torrez, who was elected New Mexico's attorney general; Dec. 11 when more than a dozen gunshots hit the home of former County Commissioner Debbie O’Malley; Jan. 3 when eight shots were fired in the direction of the home of New Mexico Sen. Linda Lopez; and Jan. 5 when shots fired outside the downtown law offices of newly appointed state Sen. Moe Maestas.
  
  I just can't with this stuff anymore... >
  
  It's almost like demonizing and dehumanizing rhetoric about your political rivals has consequences. >
  
  True, but to be clear, there's only one side demonizing and dehumanizing to the point of shooting up restaurants, politicians' homes, plotting kidnapping, and attempting to overthrow the government. Demonizing them for condoning and encouraging that behavior isn't hypocritical. The gtepublican party is a mortal threat to the country. >
  
  you forgot shooting power stations too >
  
  They prove that one and catch anyone yet?
  Edit: Legit asking as I just dont know and am wondering cause the reporting was all over the place with speculation. >
  
  There was really only one thing going on at that time, and when police checked with the lady who said she knew who did it she said it was God. I'm not sure who's actually behind it, but at least one person is fanatically approving of it. >
  
  “We are domestic terrorists”   
  That motto was emblazoned on the stage at  CPAC >
  
  I believe it was 'We are ALL domestic terrorists', just to remove any potential ambiguity. >
  
  Fair enough... I would take " all" in that situation to mean..all attendees or those of like minded philosophy >
  
  Should be charged with Terrorism... I am sick of the soft gloves approach to right wing terrorism. Take the gloves off and stick it to these people and make an example. >
  
  its the direct definition of terrorism. its politically motivated hate-motivated attempted murder >
  
  wonder how long until the suspect gets a spot at cpac >
  
  They are all domestic terrorists >
  
  How dare you quote them, verbatim! >
  
  No, no. What are you guys doing? White men can't commit acts of terror
  
  The suspect, whose name was not released
  
  Now, I wonder if that would have been the case if this guy's name was Mohammad? >
  
  
  The number of terrorist attacks by far-right perpetrators rose over the past decade, more than quadrupling between 2016 and 2017
  In both 2018 and 2019, right-wing attackers caused more than 90 percent of the terrorism-related deaths in the United States
  One thing is certain: if the United States does not treat right-wing terrorism as a real threat and react appropriately, there is no chance of lessening the danger posed by violent right-wing extremists >
  
  We need to figure out the proper place to draw the line at what constitutes incitement to violence, because our current standard is not cutting it. We all know why these right wing terrorist attacks are happening. It's because Trump, Tucker, Charlie Kirk, Alex Jones, Ron Watkins and their ilk tell people to go out and commit them, but with just enough deniability to not be legally responsible. 
  But if you knowingly tell a lie which if true would justify violence, you should be held responsible when someone inevitably believes it. >
  
  
  if you knowingly tell a lie which if true would justify violence, you should be held responsible when someone inevitably believes it.
  
  If we tried to encode this into law we would then have to define what constitutes "justified violence," which gets a yikes from me. That would be even more problematic than the existing legal term "reasonable person."
  Something definitely needs to change but I think that might not be the best way to go about it. >
  
  I'm just spitballing on reddit, not writing legislation, but I'm just trying to get the point across that there right wing infotainment complex regularly tells lies of such magnitude that there's no other possible outcome than inciting people to violence and we have to find a way to hold then accountable for that. 
  If it were true that the government had indeed been hijacked through voter fraud by people who literally rape and kill babies for their blood and are planning to commit genocide against your race, how could you not take up arms against them? January 6 and Trump's attempted coup would all be justified. Hell, I'd be right there with them. But in reality, every word of it is a lie. 
  And yet a significant chunk of right wing commentators say this (or some version of it) with impunity, despite there being not a shred of truth to it. And we just cannot let that continue. >
  
  
  A suspect was in custody Monday in a string of shootings that may have targeted Democratic leaders in Albuquerque, officials said Monday.
  
  Huh. It’s almost like if you rile people up by telling them that Democrats are eating babies, trying to replace them with the entire continent of South America and give them free everything on their dime, replace Christianity with Islam, and eventually put them in camps… the gullible and stupid ones among us might believe it and lash out.
  But that was the point, right? Any blood spilled by these people is on their hands. >
  
  No, the point is that the blood isn't on their hands, because they're 'just asking questions'. 
  Anyone who chooses to act on those questions is a mentally unstable lone wolf gunman. Or an antifa false-flag operative. Or a patriot. I'm not sure which it is this week, but Tucker probably knows. >
  
  Amazing. Seems like they did a video canvasssing the way they did for the Idaho murders. If the suspect drove his car to these locations, there is a high likelihood that he was captured on Ring cameras and dashcams and gas station CCTV all the way back to his house. Naturally this takes a long time, first to gather the footage, plotting each camera on a map, then to go through it IDing vehicles. Likely they traced the vehicle back to a specific neighbourhood, then they sent a patrol car through the area, looking for a specific make. Then with that data, they can investigate the registration, and see if this owner has social medias and the like. They can quietly check to see if they had an alibi at the time of the shootings - were they, say, out of town, or at a job? Does this person post far right grievance articles on their social medias, say. They might talk to co-workers. Has this person ever expressed any anti-Democrat sentiment? Does this person own a firearm? Once they have enough evidence, they can go to a judge for a search warrant and find the gun itself. If the ballistics match, the guy is done. >
  
  Friendly reminder that Amazon gives police access to your video without your permission >
  
  Those agreements you just click "agree" on actually matter. >
  
  Agreed.
  And I think it's also important to say that if 99.9% of people are clicking agree on things that they haven't read or understood, that's not a problem with the people, it's a deliberate problem with the system.
  If you designed a printer and 99.9% of people clicked past an important menu that fucked things up for them later on, you'd say the printer's designed wrong. Doesn't matter that the menu technically existed, it matters that it wasn't designed in a way that caused actual real-life humans to use it correctly. >
  
  Absolutely. We need laws that require plain english for agreements, lay terms, etc.. We need agreements that the purchased product will function as expected by a reasonable consumer, and not do something funky like, I dunno, give all of your videos to law enforcement. And so on and so forth. >
  
  Plain English and to the point/reasonably concise.  It’s possible to write plain English and still explain a simple concept in ten times more words than necessary.
  The agreements/contracts are definitely a lot harder to read due to legalese, but the length is also a major factor.   Nobody wants to read 20 pages of anything when presented with a  newly-updated Windows EULA…for the third time that year.  Hell, for updates to EULAs, it would be nice if they highlighted the changes so you don’t have to re-read all 20 pages. 
  At any rate, many people truly don’t have time to read 20 pages of EULA whenever presented with an EULA, regardless of how comprehensible the language—so we ought to make sure that that is addressed if at all possible.
  Companies and their legal teams have been doing everything they can to dissuade consumers from reading the contracts for at least a century, probably much longer.  There’s a reason “fine print” is an expression in the English language—fine print is a pain in the arse to read, especially for the visually-impaired.  My point is that companies will find any way they can to prevent us from being able to give informed consent (not in the medical sense) when we sign their forms. >
  
  Yup. This is what the CFPB is supposed to be working on (among other things), but of course Republicans defunded it, then put a clown in charge of it for four years who is on the record stating he didn't think it should even exist, and are now trying to sue them to take away what little funding they do have. >
  
  This is domestic terrorism. >
  
  100%.  And this guy must be made an example in order to discourage others from doing the same. >
  
  So, like, 30 days of probation? 90 days? >
  
  That's ridiculous.
  Six months of house arrest in their mansion ought to teach them. >
  
  Hilarious that the man in the bow tie is the thumbnail - it makes it look like he’s the perpetrator. Turns out it’s one of the NM reps >
  
  I came here to nickname the suspect as the unibrower but now that's ruined. >
  
  This is good, if true, but never forget cops have an incentive to solve high-profile cases in any way they can. There is something about, “The suspect was detained on unrelated charges” that I don’t trust. Maybe it’s true tho, and that’s good. But there’s always the possibility the cops just found someone they can pin the charges on, and get the politicians/media off their backs.
  it’s happened before…. all the time. >
  
  Really what happens all the time is dumbass criminals get caught because they had warrants out for them already, they're speeding, or something petty like shoplifting because they've become emboldened by not getting caught.  Sometimes the cops have identified them and are looking for them.  Sometimes something on the person or in their home or car tips them off.
  In this case, it seems like the suspect had the weapon from at least one of the shootings, so maybe they held him on illegal gun possession charges until they can charge him with the shootings >
  
  I'm convinced that in order to evade capture, all a criminal has to do is follow basic common sense procedures like "don't roll stop signs" and "keep your vehicle registered and inspected" and "don't drive around with a 'METH 4 SALE CHEEP' sign on your car". >
  
  Yah cops have never made up a reason to pull people over... >
  
  I mean, of course they do, but that's outside your control.  If you're going to commit a crime, don't do things inside your control to increase your chances of getting nabbed by the fuzz. >
  
  Yup like speeding when running felony amounts of drugs across state lines. Like bro WTF! >
  
  Right?  Like, just cruise control it man. >
  
  Time to learn from Brazil, my friends. Find the balls to go after these people >
  
  That photo of Rep. Javier Martinez looks like Jon Cryer portraying Lex Luthor from CW's Supergirl. >
  
  These people can't be fixed, they are too ignorant. >
  
  Oh look, the domestic terrorist party is at it again... >
  
  
  may have targeted
  
  May have?  
  6 shootings at the houses of democrat officials in a month…they may possibly perhaps be a bit linked. >
  
  Woah there, can't start jumping to any conclusions! >
  
  Have New Mexico Republicans made a statement yet? >
  
  "The suspect is a liberal gay antifa joe biden supporter who wanted to do a false flag attack to hurt conservatives." 
  or something like that. >
  
  They would also add that the suspect was here illegally. >
  
  And had overdue library books from the mid 2000's >
  
  Also he is the poly gay lover of all these politicians and this is just vandalism >
  
  This is terrorism. There is a wave of right wing terrorism, sponsored by members of the state, active in America right now. >
  
  Bets that it's a far right QAnon MAGA guy? >
  
  Hey no infinite money glitch allowed >
  
  Jokes on you, they opened console and typed IDDQD! >
  
  IDCLIP will come in handy for evading arrest. >
  
  Let’s call it what it is: Domestic terrorism.
  The unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims. >
  
  These tough guys. Woohoo let’s go shoot up some houses ! That’ll learn ‘em !! Tragic. >
  
  So are we just going to keep ignoring the radical white wing terrorism or nah >
  
  What are you talking about. He’s a good guy, a nice neighbor, and always helped out in church. Nothing to see here people, he was just stressed out because his wife left him…not because of the hate in his heart though. 
  🙈🙊🙉 >
  
  "He had economic anxiety." >
  
  Smells like a little bit a domestic terrorism >
  
  And now we wait to find out which Republicans inspired this man into violence. >
  
  Im still waiting on them to condemn political violence >
  
  Surely you mean " legitimate political discourse" ,right? >
  
  Let that be a lesson: nobody shoots at six politicians’ homes and gets away with it! >
  
  They’re trying to carry out extrajudicial killings for the crime of Rep Martinez’s bow tie being too fabulous. >
  
  Fox News: “whaaaa? Our hateful saber rattling against everyone who isn’t a straight white Christian male republican doesn’t cause violence!” >
  
  Jeez I wonder which party he's in.... >
  
  White nationalists. I wish they’d go after them with the same gusto they had for other terrorists. >
  
  imagine having a day without shootings >
  
  after a 6 year old shot a teacher on purpose, that day is no more >
  
  See the issue there was that the teacher wasn't armed.... >
  
  "Looks like we should arm 6 year olds!" - NRA probably >
  
  Texans: "Welp if they had armed security guards..." >
  
  Is his MAGA hat red like the others? >
  
  He opted for the special edition camo Maga hat >
  
  Ahhh the party of uneducated gun loving domestic terrorists at it again. Wonder how they’ll blame aNtiFA. >
  
  hope that when he gets out of prison (in a few decades) they deport his ass to texas. >
  
  “The incident took place in early December, when Martinez heard gunfire but did not report it, police said.”
  That’s the most Albuquerque thing I’ve ever read >
  
  How long until one of these people goes full Timothy McVeigh? >
  
  McVeigh would be lionized by these lowlifes… and the lawmakers that represent them. >
  
  Yet some how these domestic terrorists remain off the fly list. I wonder why that is... >
  
  Now, make such an example out of them so bad, that other copycats will be too scared of the consequences to follow through with it. Same with the people sabotaging power substations >
  
  I bet it was antifa!!! (/s <- this should be obvious but isn’t always) >
  
  It seems like " crisis actors " has fallen out of favour with that crowd. >
  
  We are literally in a civil war and nobody wants to admit it. >
  
  It’s also a one-sided civil war. Only one side is doing violence. >
  
  Say the words:
  Radical Republican Terrorism >
  
  //Sarcasm alert//
  Warning:  Sarcasm
  ​
  They aren't a cult and definitely not terrorists.  /s
  ​
  / fark style
  // double sarcasm
  /// most 3 sarcasms >
  
  Surprised Pikachu Face >
  
  Thank our lucky stars the asshole is a terrible shot. >
  
  6th shooting??  wtf bro.  You'd think on the 2nd time, people would start to investigate.  This is 1000000000% political bullshit. >
  
  If you get "picked up on unrelated charges", doesn't that arrest info become public automatically?
  I get that you don't want to release a wrong name, but I thought all arrests were public info? I'm pretty sure that's the case here in Maryland at least. >
  
  If it's the same person who did this six times they're the dumbest fucking criminal of all time. Like you got away with it a few times give it up. >
  
  Nra lifetime achievement award recipient. >
  
  Send him to Guantonamo with the rest of the terrorists. >
  
  Domestic terrorists go to leavenworth I think >
  
  That’s an affirmative…… unless your really really bad then you go to Git-Mo.. but  for real if I remember correctly, something about bad publicity and allied forces leading torture sessions there that got Uncle Sam to the point of making radical decisions to “minimize their footprint” at Guantanamo >
  
  Please don't think I'm trying to stir the pot or be an asshole with this question. I'm honestly curious because nothing comes to mind.
  Does anyone know of cases of democrat/liberal leaning people shooting at Republicans and their houses?
  This feels very one sided and I want to know if I'm being biased. >
  
  So why is it that Conservative politicians never have their homes shot up, their families threatened and …… oh ….. >
  
  They do!  In fact one got caught doing that to his own home a while back.... >
  
  Trump is gonna put this asshole at the head of the table >
  
  Call the guy what he is - terrorist. >
  
  For a second I thought it was that James Lipton guy from Inside the Actors Studio. >
  
  At a quick glance I sort of see it. 
  James Lipton was a fabulous interviewer and neat guy. I was very sad when he died. >
  
  I fear it's a stochastic sleeper cell. Catching them is like playing whack a mole when Fox News continues to operate. >
  
  Casual assassination attempts, or threats. Just your usual USA today >
  
  Every republican is a terrorist.
  Fuck them all. >
  
  oooh oohh, Let me  guess!   A white male Christian !!! >
  
  Wait wait! Wait you can just arrest these domestic terrorists after they're done crime-ing? >
  
  “Oh yeah? You have a suspect in those shootings in custody?”
  “Yup, we sure do”
  “Who is it?”
  “Not telling”
  “Are they charged with all 6 shootings”
  “They’re not charged with any of the shootings”
  “…what did you charge them with?”
  “We’ll never tell, but we for sure got them” >
  
  Why do Republicans inspire so many domestic terrorists? >
  
  I am literally tired of seeing mass shooting news about usa . Isn't like 9/11 every month in America now? What's up these guns guys? What are you overcompensating for? >
  
  Smol pp and a lack of education. >
  
  A serious answer: to do more investigation and grab evidence before it disappears/is destroyed. >
  
  Guys he’s just getting his campaign for a GOP position started! They’re gonna love him!
  Sorry should have said MAGA GOP position as I still believe there are members of the GOP who don’t want to kill their opposition, they just don’t say anything because they are power hungry cowards! >
  
  The only way to solve all this mass murder and gun crime is with more guns.
  Everyone should be carrying an M4. Then no criminal would dare to commit a crime.
  I forsee no problems with this solution. >
  
  Wasn’t that guy yellow in Sin City? >
  
  Cool. More right wing terrorism. This on top of the multiple power plant attacks in the northwest being investigated as ‘burglaries’ >
  
  The police are afraid to investigate one of their own. >
  
  Thought Experiment:
  This happens in Texas, and it's the sixth shooting at Republican politician's homes.
  What's the response? >
  
  More interesting is what do you think that would change? >
  
  If it was conservatives being attacked the police would've given a shit and launched a massive manhunt. >
  
  
  We're worried and concerned that these are connected and possibly politically motivated
  
  Oh you think it might be? >
  
  "The suspect was spouting anti-Asian remarks while beating the Asian man... Not sure if it was a hate crime" - Police >
  
  That's some fine work there Lou.
  Bake em away toys. >
  
  What did you say, chief? >
  
  Do what the kid says. >
  
  Expect to see more shootings and killings of democratic members going forward from the angry right as the white population begins to diminish and voters swing to the left. >
  
  Reminds me of Sundown Towns back in the day >
  
  Back in the day? >
  
  Yeah, Mon-day. >
  
  Yester-day. To-day. Tomorrow-day.