Extreme Protesters

[yossarian22c]

https://www.npr.org/sections/biden-transition-updates/2020/12/07/943820889/michigan-secretary-of-state-says-armed-protesters-descended-on-her-home-saturday

Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson says "dozens" of armed protesters descended on her home Saturday night ...
As my four-year-old son and I were finishing up decorating the house for Christmas on Saturday night, and he was about to sit down to watch How the Grinch Stole Christmas, dozens of armed individuals stood outside my home shouting obscenities and chanting into bullhorns in the dark of night

From the protesters:

Late in the video, Peters seemed to promise more protests.

"We will not stand down, we will not stop, we will continue to rise up, we will continue to take this election back for the president that actually won it by a landslide," she said. "This is not over. It is far from over – in fact, it's just beginning."

I find this type of protesting abhorrent. It was also likewise bad judgement for Maxine Waters to encourage people to confront people in the Trump cabinet in public as a protest method.

This is on top of many of the protests around the election counting facilities that required police to escort workers to their cars for safety. Along with the two men arrested in Philly on gun charges outside the vote counting facility. The right is becoming more aggressive and their history of protesting while heavily armed makes all of these situations fraught with danger.

[Fenring]

I've never liked the notion of harassing individuals out of rage, whether online or anywhere else. That they were armed in this case is aggravating, although in an oblique way any time harassing someone comes with a threat it's also 'armed' in the sense that there is a scary reality to it. Is a guy yelling while armed worse than an email death threat? I guess maybe. Although I wonder whether armed means brandishing, or just holstered but it was clear they were packing heat.

[yossarian22c]

I'm guessing not brandishing since no one was arrested. But 20 people carrying long rifles or even holstered pistols showing up at your house and shouting obscenities is much more threatening than an email death threat.

[Fenring]

But 20 people carrying long rifles or even holstered pistols showing up at your house and shouting obscenities is much more threatening than an email death threat.

I guess. But it's a different kind of threat. The armed threat is relatively fleeting, and I can only suppose that they'll move on after their little stint. Some of these online harassment situations with doxxing and all the rest result in people being afraid to go home, or having to relocate, and stuff like that. It can be an ongoing situation that doesn't go away the day after the protesters have had their adrenaline rush. Not saying either is good but I don't really know which is worse than the other. They are both pretty damn threatening.

[Grant]

I find this type of protesting abhorrent. It was also likewise bad judgement for Maxine Waters to encourage people to confront people in the Trump cabinet in public as a protest method.

I'm not a big fan of this kind of thing either.  But I'm the wrong person to talk to.  I find most protest to be political masturbation.  Though I will admit that this is something more like intimidation. 

All that being said, I don't believe that any property was damaged or anyone shot.  Personally, I'd be happy to see the Michigan National Guard out around the Governor's house, but I'd call them out for lots of protests.  There are some really good peaceful protest groups out there, but they don't really get any print or attention these days. 

[TheDrake]

I wonder how many in that group were also ones that denounced left leaning groups who went to someone's house to protest them. I personally find it disgusting no matter who does it. You want to protest officials? Fine. Leave their family alone.

[Wayward Son]

Coming to a protest armed means you are not expecting it to be a peaceful protest.

The only question is who you expect to turn violent first.

[wmLambert]

Actually threats from people who are armed is the opposite of a threat. It is gun-free zones that attract criminals to cause trouble, knowing they have nothing to fear. When they know the people are armed, that disappear.

We should remake the dime novels that said the wild west was constant gun battles. Because so many were armed for snakes, varmints, and other dangers that there was far less violence than with almost any society in history. These protestors should not behave as they did, but being armed is not any big deal. Maxine Waters would be proud of the tactics here. I am not.

[Grant]

Because so many were armed for snakes, varmints, and other dangers that there was far less violence than with almost any society in history.

I think there may be an argument for the rate of homicides per gun owner in the old west, but not sure about going as far as saying it was "far less violent that almost any society in history".  And your rate per gun owner in the west is going to be somewhat skewed outside of urban areas.  I mean, there are not a lot of people for you to shoot at when you live out on the hacienda in the middle of nowhere, where your nearest neighbor is 5 miles away. 

According to some scholarship, old west towns had some pretty steep homicide rates. 

https://cjrc.osu.edu/research/interdisciplinary/hvd/homicide-rates-american-west#:~:text=For%20instance%2C%20the%20adult%20residents,a%20tenth%20of%20a%20percent.

Los Angeles between 1850 and 1865 had an average homicide rate of 198. 

Dodge City between 1876 and 1885 had a homicide rate of 165. 

Bannack, Montana between 1862 and 1864 had a homicide rate of 367. 

All these rates are far above the 2019 homicide rate for Tijuana, Mexico, which was 134.24, the highest current homicide rate of any city on earth. 

St Louis has the highest homicide rate of any American city at only 64.54 in 2019. 

So I don't think I'd go as far as saying that the old west urban areas were super peaceful.  When your murder rate is higher than Tijuana, chances are that you got plenty of bang bang going on.  Of course, you could argue that a bunch of those homicides are not gun homicides.  I don't know. 

Nevertheless, places like Dodge City attempted to curb their out of control murder rates by restricting gun possession in public areas and bringing in some pretty tough hombres to make sure these gun laws were adhered to. 

[oldbrian]

Fenring:

... all the rest result in people being afraid to go home...

Yeah, afraid because they think people with guns might show up.

How is the possiblilty of armed protesters worse than the actuality?

[yossarian22c]

Actually threats from people who are armed is the opposite of a threat.

You been reading 1984?

[Fenring]

Fenring:

... all the rest result in people being afraid to go home...

Yeah, afraid because they think people with guns might show up.

Not really. The kind of Twitter mob that threaten people in the way I described (for instance in gamer-gate) are not the type to pack heat. There is a very specific subset of the American population that will ostentatiously arrive at protests packing heat (especially assault-style weapons), and there is probably zero overlap between them and the kind of hassle people online for their political views and doxx them. In fact - and I can't be sure of this - I would wager that the term doxxing itself has almost no overlap with people like that. I guess they might show up with molotov cocktail or something, but not with assault weapons.

[oldbrian]

If a person is doxxed and therefor afraid to return home, what exactly are they afraid of?

I assume people showing up with weapons.  Otherwise, why be afraid?

[Fenring]

I assume people showing up with weapons.  Otherwise, why be afraid?

Are you suggesting that the only thing to fear in the world is a gun?

[Wayward Son]

Of course guns are not the only deadly weapons out there.  But they are the weapons of choice.  The ones that people use when they are serious about inflicting harm on others.

So while a person with a Molotov cocktail or a baseball bat is a threat, they are usually less of a threat than a person with a gun.  Who would you seriously prefer to go up against: a person trained with a gun, or a person trained with a knife?

You know, you don't see police officers with sabers in their holsters, do you?

[TheDeamon]

If a person is doxxed and therefor afraid to return home, what exactly are they afraid of?

I assume people showing up with weapons.  Otherwise, why be afraid?

Maybe their employers getting threatening phone calls as a consequence of their being doxed?

This applies to the left and the right when it comes to people being doxed. The threatening phone calls, never mind anything that actually becomes physical, are endemic, and they don't just constrain themselves to the person in question, they often go after the person's entire social circle to the extent they're able to identify it. "Cut ties with Bill and denounce what he did or we're going to come for you as well."

I mean really, with how many doxed people end up fired from their jobs, you have to be crazed to not believe at least some of the time it wasn't just bad PR they were avoiding, it was threats to their business extending beyond simple boycott threats.

[Fenring]

Of course guns are not the only deadly weapons out there.  But they are the weapons of choice.  The ones that people use when they are serious about inflicting harm on others.

So while a person with a Molotov cocktail or a baseball bat is a threat, they are usually less of a threat than a person with a gun.  Who would you seriously prefer to go up against: a person trained with a gun, or a person trained with a knife?

You know, you don't see police officers with sabers in their holsters, do you?

Not sure what argument you're trying to have. I didn't make any statement about which weapon is the most convenient for killing people. I was specifically responding to oldbrian's comment above:

... all the rest result in people being afraid to go home...

Yeah, afraid because they think people with guns might show up.

How is the possiblilty of armed protesters worse than the actuality?

He was directly equating people afraid to go home because of online harassment with being afraid of guns, and there is simply no way there is a direct correspondence between a lot of the online bullying and people showing up with guns. It is simply a no-go as far as equivalence goes. Maybe it has occurred at some point or other that a dox-mob or whatever has resulted in someone showing up with a gun, but that's not the point. The crowd doing online bullying is not the militia type that shows up packing heat just to make a point. There is probably close to zero overlap there. This started because I was comparing the right-wing gun nut types with online bullying, and calling both a scary problem, just of a somewhat different presentation. Not even sure what there is to win in an argument about that...

[oldbrian]

Fenring, you started this by saying that armed protesters showing up outside your home is not as bad as being doxxed.
As support for that statement, you said that people who have been doxxed are even afraid to go back home.

I'm trying to figure out what exactly, other than armed protesters, you think they are afraid of at their home.

The original comparison was between people with guns outside your door, and being doxxed.
I also later said weapons.  You responded with 'guns are the only thing people are afraid of?'  Please enlighten us as to what people are afraid will happen at their home that doesn't involve weapons. Please.

That is my entire question.

TheDeamon: Absolutely.  I agree.  Fenring apparently does not.  I'm trying to figure out why.

[oldbrian]

Specifically, I was responding to this:

The armed threat is relatively fleeting, and I can only suppose that they'll move on after their little stint. Some of these online harassment situations with doxxing and all the rest result in people being afraid to go home

...and was trying to nail down what he was referring to.

[Fenring]

Fenring, you started this by saying that armed protesters showing up outside your home is not as bad as being doxxed.
As support for that statement, you said that people who have been doxxed are even afraid to go back home.

You seem to be neglecting the reason I gave for that: because the online harassment and doxing create a prolonged problem that will not go away in the same way it would in the gun-nut case when they're done by the next day. The duration and ongoing threat is why I said they might be equivalent long-term. In the short term obviously being threatened by a gun is momentarily scarier than seeing a nasty email.

I'm trying to figure out what exactly, other than armed protesters, you think they are afraid of at their home.

If the only thing in life you fear is guns then I'm actually happy for you. But there is plenty else to be scared of for most people, including and maybe especially the unknown. Why you are turning fear of persecution into something so prosaic as gun-fear I don't know.

Fenring apparently does not.  I'm trying to figure out why.

Not sure what's so complicated about what I said. TheDeamon already listed certain professional considerations people would fear, and this can also include personal censuring, the feeling of being watched and hated, the notion of being an outcast or target of ire; and these are all psychic effects (other than the actual being fired). If a dude came to your house and stood in front doing nothing but staring at you (John Carpenter style), that would probably be terrifying. Even if there was no evidence of a weapon, it would be totally messed up. Maybe you just never watched horror movies; or maybe have never been subjected to personal harassment or persecution of any kind. There is plenty that can be done to a person other than shooting them with a gun.

I feel ridiculous even having to spell this out; I'm not really sure why you're trying so strongly to put forward that only guns are threatening.

[DonaldD]

You seem to be neglecting the reason I gave for that: because the online harassment and doxing create a prolonged problem that will not go away in the same way it would in the gun-nut case when they're done by the next day. The duration and ongoing threat is why I said they might be equivalent long-term. In the short term obviously being threatened by a gun is momentarily scarier than seeing a nasty email.

But is even that true?  People demonstrating outside of elected officials' homes (or even unelected bureaucrats' homes) used to be almost unheard of.  Now, each instance of armed nut jobs outside of private residences is widely publicized, via traditional media but especially on social media.  This has a number of side effects, not least of which are the normalization of such demonstrations in general, the normalization of protesting this specific person, and providing information about the coordinates of the person being demonstrated against.

I would suggest these demonstration have very similar effects with respect to the publishing of victims' personal information, with the added benefit of their general information being much more widely distributed AND the demonstrations actually being themselves instances of the specific risk associated with being doxxed in the first place (unwelcome visit by dangerous visitors to one's personal residence.)

[Fenring]

No question, DonaldD, that if these demonstrations turn into more prolonged things, and include elements of or act in concert with online bullying, prolonged harassment, and other such factors, then of course the perfect storm would make it the worst we've heard of so far.

[TheDeamon]

You seem to be neglecting the reason I gave for that: because the online harassment and doxing create a prolonged problem that will not go away in the same way it would in the gun-nut case when they're done by the next day. The duration and ongoing threat is why I said they might be equivalent long-term. In the short term obviously being threatened by a gun is momentarily scarier than seeing a nasty email.

But is even that true?  People demonstrating outside of elected officials' homes (or even unelected bureaucrats' homes) used to be almost unheard of.  Now, each instance of armed nut jobs outside of private residences is widely publicized, via traditional media but especially on social media.  This has a number of side effects, not least of which are the normalization of such demonstrations in general, the normalization of protesting this specific person, and providing information about the coordinates of the person being demonstrated against.

You do realize that Republicans legislators at the state and federal level were being subjected to busloads of protesters being dropped off in their front yards during the Obama Administration? That the practice hasn't really stopped, and in some ways has escalated to other venues as well(public restaurants, theater houses, etc) since then?

The special emphasis on the guys with guns protesting across the street is odd, when the those guys are no less scary if they're packing knives or baseball bats... Or hey, handy pieces of 1x2's for their protest signs.

[DonaldD]

Are you arguing that doxxing is worse than actual armed protesters visiting people's houses because Republican legislators have also been targetted in the past?

That doesn't really follow.

[TheDrake]

The special emphasis on the guys with guns protesting across the street is odd, when the those guys are no less scary if they're packing knives or baseball bats... Or hey, handy pieces of 1x2's for their protest signs.

The answer is right there in your own words. I can get shot from across the street, I can't get stabbed or clubbed. The only reason to be carrying a long gun in such a situation is if deep down you really want to shoot somebody.

[TheDeamon]

The answer is right there in your own words. I can get shot from across the street, I can't get stabbed or clubbed. The only reason to be carrying a long gun in such a situation is if deep down you really want to shoot somebody.

Not true. If someone is protesting Beto talking about gun confiscation, their turning up to a protest carrying said guns isn't a demonstration of intent to shoot Beto.

It's a demonstration of defiance to Beto's stated desires.

That said, I'd consider it to be a rather crass act for them to perform such a protest at this house. Campaign office? That's workable. But the homefront? That's not kosher, not matter what they're packing. Guns or poster boards with 2x1's attached.

[yossarian22c]

https://www.npr.org/2020/12/23/948828692/the-toll-of-conspiracy-theories-a-voting-security-expert-lives-in-hiding

More than a month ago, Eric Coomer went into hiding.

The voting conspiracy theories that have led millions of Republicans to feel as though the election was stolen from them, which are still spreading, have also led to calls for Coomer's head.

Coomer oversees product strategy and security for Dominion Voting System
...
"I actually am in fear for my safety," Coomer said recently, speaking by video call from an undisclosed location to Colorado Public Radio. "I'm in fear for my family's safety. These are real, tangible things coming out of these baseless accusations."
...
Coomer said in addition to his own information, the personal addresses of everyone from his parents and siblings to his ex-girlfriends have been posted online. Some have also received threatening letters.
...
A Dominion spokeswoman says other company employees have also gone to more secure locations, been threatened and been digitally stalked.

This is getting out of hand. Hope Coomer wins a big fat defamation suit against Trump and his media.