See https://freedes.net to join the community in support of Des. (That's Mr. Estrada, not Data Encryption Standard)
30-year sentence for transporting zines is a five-alarm fire for free speech
531–540 of 577 posts
Re: 30-year sentence for transporting zines is a five-alarm fire for free speech
#532Earlier quoted context omitted.
The "protestors" shot someone, if that's not the wrong way to protest then what is?
The "officer" was chasing people on foot and drew his weapon. He was then shot. Given the Pretti and Good murders, in my opinion this is a clear cut case of self defense.
Why the scare quotes? Are you denying he was a cop?
Re: 30-year sentence for transporting zines is a five-alarm fire for free speech
#533Earlier quoted context omitted.
The writing on the wall is pretty clear now: Undoing Trump-policies and Trump-legacy should be priority for any potential presidential dem candidate, no mater how center or left leaning. I don't think we'll get a Ocasio-Cortez type front runner, but I don't think you can be a total milquetoast "water under the bridge" candidate to win either. If there is one thing the Trump 47 presidency has shown, it is that traditi…
Absolutely no way. The Democratic party is currently having a public freak out about 3 DSA members winning in NY primaries and about the mayor of NY. They voted en-masse last year to join with the Republicans in congress to symbolically "denounce socialism" in all its forms. a) That party would rather lose to Trump than let even moderate social democrats have strong influence b) There is no way they're going to bat f…
> appeal to the "non-existent" center
This is an insane notion. The center decides all elections in a two party system.
Re: 30-year sentence for transporting zines is a five-alarm fire for free speech
#534Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think there's even a claim the speech is illegal. Rather, it's that "transporting zines" when your spouse gets arrested on suspicion of crimes related to a designated terrorist organization is about as legal as "arts and crafts" (i.e. shredding documents) when your spouse is arrested for fraud. It's the obstruction of justice part that's illegal, not the possession. As far as I know she could be fully acquitt…
It's worth noting that the average sentence for murder in the US is 15 years. And it is not actually a "designated terrorist organization". The government is claiming they are a "domestic terrorist organization" which isnt a thing under US law, additionally, there is no organization to speak of.
> And it is not actually a "designated terrorist organization".
It is.[1] Perhaps you mean it's not a statutory Foreign Terrorist Organization, like Al-Qaida or Hamas. That is a harsher designation, but that's not possible for Antifa because it's not foreign.
[1]: https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/09/desi...
Re: 30-year sentence for transporting zines is a five-alarm fire for free speech
#535Earlier quoted context omitted.
The "officer" was chasing people on foot and drew his weapon. He was then shot. Given the Pretti and Good murders, in my opinion this is a clear cut case of self defense.
Resisting arrest isn't a justification for shooting a law enforcement officer. The law enforcement officer had a pretty solid reason to draw his firearm, given that the rioters also had firearms. I'm really baffled by the line of reasoning here. People, armed with guns, tried to break into a government facility. The law enforcement officers proceeded to try and arrest the rioters, and the rioters shot one of the offi…
Your interpretation of the facts and institutions here are thoroughly alien to me.
There's so much unpacking to be done I'm not sure I have the time on my smoke break but I'll give it a shot.
First, law enforcement as a concept is not static. It is a social construct. For me, the only acceptable reason for LE to draw a firearm is to exercise deadly force to protect civilians from a deadly force. For you, it seems you find it justifiable for agents of the state to exercise deadly force against people for vandalism and protest. I do not accept your view. Calling people rioters doesn't really change any facts except to bias the reader against them. Stating that the protesters were armed is not a good argument either. In Texas it is legal to open carry firearms so that is not a justification for deadly force.
You don't actually know that these people tried to break into a government facility. The case centers around the protesters allegedly luring law enforcement out of the facility. Sort of the opposite. Then the prosecution said the intent was to create an ambush.
But all of that is "well technically". The root here is that ICE is now an unaccountable irregular military equipped occupation force. When someone, anyone, raises a firearm toward you, you can either get shot to death and hope they get convicted after the fact (and again I point to Pretti and Good) or you defend yourself and then deal with survivor problems later.
Just because someone has a badge and a uniform does not mean you don't have a right to defend yourself from them, even if the courts are not honoring that right.
Re: 30-year sentence for transporting zines is a five-alarm fire for free speech
#536Earlier quoted context omitted.
The "officer" was chasing people on foot and drew his weapon. He was then shot. Given the Pretti and Good murders, in my opinion this is a clear cut case of self defense.
Why the scare quotes? Are you denying he was a cop?
They were protesting an ICE facility. Sort of famous for not wearing uniforms and hiding their faces. Maybe you think these tactics are justified but it has led to a lot of police impersonation.
Re: 30-year sentence for transporting zines is a five-alarm fire for free speech
#537Earlier quoted context omitted.
Resisting arrest isn't a justification for shooting a law enforcement officer. The law enforcement officer had a pretty solid reason to draw his firearm, given that the rioters also had firearms. I'm really baffled by the line of reasoning here. People, armed with guns, tried to break into a government facility. The law enforcement officers proceeded to try and arrest the rioters, and the rioters shot one of the offi…
Your interpretation of the facts and institutions here are thoroughly alien to me. There's so much unpacking to be done I'm not sure I have the time on my smoke break but I'll give it a shot. First, law enforcement as a concept is not static. It is a social construct. For me, the only acceptable reason for LE to draw a firearm is to exercise deadly force to protect civilians from a deadly force. For you, it seems you…
This group showed up at the ICE facility with a dozen sets of body armor, multiple firearms, and radios. They shot fireworks at the facility, and when the law enforcement officers went to go arrest them a member of the group shot the officer. Those facts are not disputed.
Using deadly force in self defense against law enforcement officer is only justified when that law enforcement officer is acting outside the bounds of the law. The fact that said law enforcement officer had a drawn firearm does not make it legal to shoot that officer. The officers having their firearms drawn was also reasonable given that the rioters were armed with guns. These officers were making a legal arrest, and thus any claim of self defense by the rioters is moot.
Like it or not, ICE is still law enforcement. You don't get to just say "I don't like this agency, so I am justified in gunning down any member of that agency that tries to arrest me."
Re: 30-year sentence for transporting zines is a five-alarm fire for free speech
#538Here's the case: https://www.justice.gov/usao-ndtx/pr/antifa-cell-members-con... The 30 year sentence was for hiding documentation being sought under a federal warrant after being called by his wife and asking him to do so. The warrant was for documentation after the protesters shot fireworks to bring out first responders from the ICE facility, and allegedly one of the group shot a responder in the neck instead of th…
> The 30 year sentence was for hiding documentation being sought under a federal warrant
Can you cite a source to support the claim that the stuff he transported was being sought under a federal warrant at the time he transported it? And is there documentation showing that he was aware of the warrant?
Re: 30-year sentence for transporting zines is a five-alarm fire for free speech
#539Earlier quoted context omitted.
Intending to murder someone is often directly a crime though, so yes. And murdering people is illegal. Moving some magazines isn't normally illegal. I wouldn't normally assume having some magazines is evidence of a crime. And if they are, what crime was owning the magazines involved in? That you happen to read some of the same articles as someone else who committed a crime? Is sharing the same books as others now imp…
> Moving some magazines isn't normally illegal. Neither is shooting a gun (at e.g. a gun range). This case has about as much to do with moving magazines as a murder charge has with discharging a firearm. Its intrinsic to the crime, but not what the actual crime is. > I wouldn't normally assume having some magazines is evidence of a crime. If someone called you up and told you that the magazine contained evidence of a…
> If someone called you up and told you that the magazine contained evidence of a crime, the police ard looking for them, and asked you to hide the magazines, would your assumptions change? Because that seems to be what happened here.
Is it? I've read the testimony provided by the FBI agent who was surveilling Rueda and Sanchez, and the quote he provided from her phone call (presumably he would have selected the most incriminating one) was, "whatever you need to do. Move whatever you need to move from the house."
There are many other reasonable interpretations of that sentence other than "please remove incriminating evidence from the house". Like, that could just mean, "If YOU need anything from the house, go ahead and get it."
As far as I've been able to tell from the publicly available documents I've seen, the materials he moved from the house didn't contain any evidence of any crime. I haven't seen any indications as to whether they belonged to Rueda or Sanchez. It seems plausible that he moved the zines from the city of Garland to the city of Denton because Denton is a college town where political demonstrations and the distribution of pamphlets and whatnot is extremely common, and he was intending to distribute the zines there in the coming days.
It seems to me like law enforcement had justifiable cause to be suspicious and to seize the materials, but I haven't yet seen compelling evidence that the investigation was actually hindered by Sanchez or that he had intent to hinder it. I'm open to revising that conclusion if other evidence is provided.
Re: 30-year sentence for transporting zines is a five-alarm fire for free speech
#540Earlier quoted context omitted.
I didn't say it was murder, I made the concession about self-defense, didn't I? A nice concession from you might be to admit that kids on your side maybe shouldn't attend protests with intention to do harm. That's basically where right and left don't see eye to eye on this.
Yeah I agree people should not go to protests with the objective to harm or destroy. I dont think that is really the major party dividing line tho. I dont think most of the right thinks they went there with intention to harm, but to "defend". I also think many people on the "left" take issue with someone putting themselved in a situation that could require lethal self defense, particularly over property.
If someone on the left killed right wing protestors that person would not be treated like a celebrity. The reason why not is simply that violence isn't celebrated on the left like it is on the right.
With the exception of Luigi and I think that's more generational than left vs right.