BONK

I'd say, it's too mild a response, but anything within the line, I guess.

No, he deserves to be rehabilitated in a facility that can reeducate him from his backwards beliefs.

Unfortunately we are limited by our material conditions, so instead he gets hit with a baseball bat.

You know, there's a secret trick to not getting sued for assaulting them...

Once your personal beliefs start invading others personal space, we start with a firm no thank you but sometimes some folks won’t stop until you escalate to the top. Never wanted but sometimes necessary.

• Pinochet: 91
• Reagan: 93
• Thatcher: 87
• Kissinger: 100
• Mugabe: 95
• Sheldon Adelson: 87

Checks out.

This may have been sole reason to do that, so of course he did

Because the state has a monopoly on violence.

You are not allowed to do violence yourself, you must petition the government to do violence for you. And the government will decide how and when it is appropriate to do violence on your behalf.

So, for example, a white nationalist Nazi saying all women deserve to be raped is not a justifiable reason to do violence.

But a brown person living peacefully where oil is IS reason to do violence. Ok?

A group of people demanding that all LGBTQ+ people be sterilized or executed, no reason to do violence.

Those people defending themselves, now we need to do violence. Got it?

I assume you are right, but has anyone actually tried it?

goes to check wikipedia

In Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969), even speech such as "Bury the removeds" and "Send the Jews back to Israel," was held to be protected speech under the First Amendment in a per curiam decision.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fighting_words

Oh. I guess I was right to assume that you were right in saying that it's not a viable defense to things like that. Ugh. Depressing. I was so hoping to be wrong in assuming you're right.