You neatly sidestepped the question. Capitol puts everyone in danger, that isn't special. Would you do the special honors of placing your child in front of a firing squad if it meant you could say that you stood firm in your ideals?

[–] REgon@hexbear.net 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

And you are sidestepping multiple responses highlighting the flaws in your presented argument

[–] BabyTurtles@hexbear.net 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I'm ignoring them because aren't good faith? I didn't say "Jack Smith is literally in this situation", I'm just pointing out how easy it is for armchair revolutionaries to snear from the sidelines when it's not their necks on the line.

[–] REgon@hexbear.net 3 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

That you dislike an answer does not make it bad faith

[–] BabyTurtles@hexbear.net 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I found yours, yours is just like gibberish.

You are here presenting the situation as if it was a sudden development, rather than a known risk from the start. You are also presenting it as a definite certainty. Neither of these presentations are correct.

No, risk is a spectrum, like everything. The level of risk changes based on the situation. Jack found it to be an acceptable level of risk, the situation changed, the risk got higher, and it was no longer acceptable to him.

I was presenting a hypothetical situation where risk was the absolute maximum because I want people to use their heads and think about it, and maybe break out of the snearing circlejerk bubble for a second.

[–] REgon@hexbear.net 2 points 1 week ago

Talk about bad faith lol

[–] LENINSGHOSTFACEKILLA@hexbear.net 2 points 1 week ago

Yes

Now go touch grass