Anti American left

Rights Are Privileges

in a hearing for the “Chud the Builder” case, DA Robert Nash said: “Dalton’s abuse of First Amendment privileges is what got us into this mess in the first place.”

Let’s paraphrase:

Sure, you have a 1st Amendment right to Free Speech, guaranteed by the US Constitution, but if someone attacks you because they don’t like your speech, that’s your fault, and if you defend yourself with the 2nd Amendment you belong in prison.

That’s the position being taken by the state of Tennessee. As more information comes to light, it appears as though Fox was the aggressor. He recognized Dalton (Chud) and decided to attack him because he previously used the words “nigger” and “chimp out”

As a result, the court lowered his bond from $1.25 million to “only” $1 million, but then ruled he is not permitted to use the money from a give, send, go campaign because those funds are the result of a criminal enterprise, since he wouldnt have gotten that money if he hadnt tried to murder Fox. Even if he DOES manage to find a donor, he cant be bailed out unless he can prove at a hearing that he didn’t receive the money as a result of his crime.

Uh, he hasn’t been convicted of a crime yet, meaning he is innocent. That being the case, how can these funds be the result of a crime the state hasn’t even proven yet?

What we have here is an attack on the First, Fifth, and Eighth Amendments by the State of Tennessee, and proving Dalton’s point- we have a rwo tiered justice system.

Under this theory, if a person ever says something which offends someone, that person is permitted to physically attack them at any place or time in the future, and if the person who is being attacked defends themselves, they can be denied any Constitutional rights a court sees fit to strip from them.

Or perhaps its only blacks you aren’t permitted to offend.

Remember, the left believes speech is violence if it offends someone.

By Divemedic, ago

Next Time

This man sued the police because he was arrested for posts celebrating the murder of Charlie Kirk.

I agree. The police went about it the wrong way. If you disagree with what someone has to say, just label it as hate speech and kick the crap out of them. The First Amendment doesn’t apply to anything labeled as hate speech, and if they defend themselves you can claim he started it with his hateful rhetoric and isn’t permitted to defend himself.

By Divemedic, ago

That’s My Policy

Oregon police say that grown men exposing themselves isn’t a crime unless they can establish that the man exposing himself is doing it for sexual gratification. The leftists there agree with him because a 2 year old won’t remember it, so no harm, no foul.

Here is my answer:

When the cops arrive on scene and there is a dead naked guy in my yard next to my child, and I am standing there saying he was trying to sexually molest my child, who are they to say I am wrong?

By Divemedic, ago

Words and Self Defense

Social media is abuzz over some streamer in Tennessee named Dalton Eatherly who goes by the handle of “Chud the Builder.” I must confess this is the first I have heard of him. Still, he is known for posting streaming content some call “racist,” although you know how low the bar is to be called a racist these days. I tried to find some of his content, but all I could find were stories about current events, and people complaining about him being a racist. So, I have no opinion on whether or not his content is racist.

Racist content or not, I think it is boorish and rather childish to run around trying to piss people off so you can film the reaction and make money or fame.

Be that as it may, the current events are lacking in details, but it appears to be essentially like this: A black man saw Eatherly streaming and asked him to walk away, which he reportedly did. The man later walked up to Eatherly and started a second confrontation. The man mentioned having PTSD, then warned: “You start saying all that chimp out shit to me and I’mma hit you.” The man punched Eatherly and began repeatedly hitting him. Eatherly then shot the man, the man kept attacking him, so Eatherly shot him at least once more. During the struggle, one of the bullets struck Eatherly himself.

At the end of the day, Eatherly was charged with a list of crimes including attempted murder.

There are many people, including quite a few on the right and in self defense circles, who claim Eatherly was in the wrong because he is known for posting racist comments, and those comments are considered “fighting words.” That is incorrect. Just because a person says inflammatory things at some point does not grant people who heard him in the past the legal right to physically attack you for the rest of your life. That’s not what fighting words mean.

Remember Charlie Kirk, and how the left kept attempting to incite the right by pointing at their necks? Or say a black man once called someone a cracker, does that mean I get to beat him? Of course not. Eatherly doesn’t forfeit his right to self defense simply because he called someone a nigger or a chimp, whether he did so in the past or even in the immediate seconds before the attack. Mere words don’t justify a physical attack unless they rise to fighting words, but that is a fairly high bar to clear, as discussed above.

Legal Standard for Incitement

The controlling precedent is Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969). The Supreme Court ruled that the government cannot punish speech advocating force or law violation unless it is:

  1. Directed at inciting or producing imminent lawless action, and
  2. Likely to incite or produce such action.

Abstract advocacy, inflammatory rhetoric, or offensive language—even racist speech like that at a KKK rally using the word “nigger” and calling for “revengeance” against Black people and Jews—was protected. according to the court. The Court struck down a broader Ohio law criminalizing advocacy of violence.

Someone using language that others find offensive or cause emotional distress, or potential for unrest does not qualify. Courts protect “the thought that we hate” precisely because the First Amendment prioritizes robust debate over shielding feelings. The First Amendment is there to protect unpopular speech. Someone saying “Puppies are cute” doesn’t need free speech protection. Someone speaking things making people uncomfortable does, even if that speech is unpopular, especially if that speech is unpopular.

A narrower exception involves “fighting words” defined as personally abusive epithets directed at an individual that, by their very utterance, tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace (Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire, 1942). However, this has been significantly narrowed:

  • Courts repeatedly hold that racial slurs, including the N-word, are not fighting words per se. Context matters heavily (e.g., tone, intent to provoke a fight, likelihood of immediate violence).
  • Examples: Someone loudly calling a Black man ‘nigger’ while trying to start a fight could qualify in one case, but yelling it without evidence of imminent violence or actual breach of peace does not. What matters is that the person saying it was trying to provoke a fight, and not merely being insulting.
  • Yelling slurs is widely viewed as rude, inflammatory, or bigoted, and it can have serious social, professional, or civil repercussions. But legally equating it to incitement to violence would gut the First Amendment, as affirmed across decades of Supreme Court rulings. Context always determines outcomes in edge cases.

Hate speech, slurs, and bigoted expression are generally protected unless they cross into true threats, targeted harassment, or the narrow incitement/fighting words categories.

Proportionality

However, once the physical confrontation began, the question becomes whether Eatherly reasonably believed he faced imminent death or serious bodily injury, and whether shooting was a proportionate response. There aren’t enough facts out there to determine that at this point.

In my opinion, this entire case hinges upon proportionality. Tennessee’s Stand Your Ground law (Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-11-611), like most states, allows deadly force only if the person reasonably believes it is immediately necessary to prevent death, serious bodily injury, or certain other harms.

  • A single punch or minor scuffle generally does not justify deadly force.
  • Factors that strengthen a claim: Continued attack after the defender is down, multiple strikes (“ground and pound”), size/strength disparity, weapons involved, or signs the attacker would not stop (e.g., the victim continuing to hit after being shot).
  • Juries assess this objectively: Would a reasonable person in Eatherly’s position fear serious injury?

Some accounts say Fox continued hitting even after being shot. If that was indeed the case, that could strengthen Eatherly’s case for self defense.

Critical gaps for proportionality:

  • How sustained or severe was the beating? One punch + a few follow-ups vs. a prolonged assault that put Eatherly at risk of being knocked unconscious or stomped?
  • Positions during the shots (standing, on the ground, distance after initial punch)?
  • Did the man stop after the first shot, or was he still actively attacking?
  • Any video evidence (courthouse surveillance, bystander, or Eatherly’s own stream) showing the full sequence.

If evidence shows Eatherly was actively being beaten in a way that created a credible fear of serious injury (e.g., head strikes, unable to disengage, larger/stronger attacker with PTSD-related agitation noted), self-defense is viable. If it appears more like a fistfight where Eatherly quickly resorted to a gun and fired multiple rounds, conviction on a lesser charge (aggravated assault) or full conviction becomes more likely.

There are not many facts out there, but there are plenty of people running around saying that because Eatherly said racist things in the past, he deserved to be punched, and is not allowed to defend himself from the attack. That’s false, and can’t be the law, or else we are all open to attack for any offense we may have caused someone to take by something we may or may not have said at some point in the past.

The case will hinge on the seconds of physical violence and whether shooting met the proportionality/necessity test. More evidence (especially video) will be decisive. As of now, it’s too early for a confident prediction. As usual, this case will rely upon all of the evidence, and right now the details are very thin.

By Divemedic, ago

Stupidity

I mean, yeah. That’s how we got rid of street drugs like meth, marijuana, and heroin. We just passed a law with harsh sentences and prison. Now that’s solved, let’s move on to obesity.

The lockpicking lawyer? Why pick the lock when I can just cut the case open with a Sawzall? Do these incel retards even know how to use tools?

Revoke all carry permits? Yeah, OK.

Government buybacks? What happens if I don’t want to sell?

I don’t need to rent a shooting range. Once they start confiscations, I can call 911 and a target will be delivered to my location in 10 minutes or less.

By Divemedic, ago

World War Eleven!

I will let this clip begin this post:

This is the caliber of Representative from the left. Of course, Democrats have doubled down. Just like Trump assassination attempts, they are claiming it was fake, or you misheard it, or something. They are claiming there is no transcript showing she said this, so obviously she didn’t say it

Why does the left do this? Simple: people identify with the causes they support. When you admit your support for someone so obviously stupid, you are admitting to being as stupid as they are if you are emotionally invested in them.

This extends to assassination attempts. Emotional investment means you either have to claim the assassination is a false flag, or you have to admit you are supporting murder.

“The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.”
― George Orwell, 1984

By Divemedic, ago

More Info, the Manifesto

Fifteen minutes ago, the Washington Post released what they are calling the shooter’s “manifesto.” It was reportedly sent to family ten minutes before shots were fired, so I would class it more as a suicide note. Here is the full text:

Hello everybody!

So I may have given a lot of people a surprise today. Let me start off by apologizing to everyone whose trust I abused.

I apologize to my parents for saying I had an interview without specifying it was for “Most Wanted.”

I apologize to my colleagues and students for saying I had a personal emergency (by the time anyone reads this, I probably most certainly DO need to go to the ER, but can hardly call that not a self-inflicted status.)

I apologize to all of the people I traveled next to, all the workers who handled my luggage, and all the other non-targeted people at the hotel who I put in danger simply by being near.

I apologize to everyone who was abused and/or murdered before this, to all those who suffered before I was able to attempt this, to all who may still suffer after, regardless of my success or failure.

I don’t expect forgiveness, but if I could have seen any other way to get this close, I would have taken it. Again, my sincere apologies.

On to why I did any of this:

I am a citizen of the United States of America.

What my representatives do reflects on me.

And I am no longer willing to permit a pedophile, rapist, and traitor to coat my hands with his crimes.

(Well, to be completely honest, I was no longer willing a long time ago, but this is the first real opportunity I’ve had to do something about it.)

While I’m discussing this, I’ll also go over my expected rules of engagement (probably in a terrible format, but I’m not military so too bad.)

Administration officials (not including Mr. Patel): they are targets, prioritized from highest-ranking to lowest

Secret Service: they are targets only if necessary, and to be incapacitated non-lethally if possible (aka, I hope they’re wearing body armor because center mass with shotguns messes up people who *aren’t*

Hotel Security: not targets if at all possible (aka unless they shoot at me)

Capitol Police: same as Hotel Security

National Guard: same as Hotel Security

Hotel Employees: not targets at all

Guests: not targets at all

In order to minimize casualties I will also be using buckshot rather than slugs (less penetration through walls)

I would still go through most everyone here to get to the targets if it were absolutely necessary (on the basis that most people *chose* to attend a speech by a pedophile, rapist, and traitor, and are thus complicit) but I really hope it doesn’t come to that.

Rebuttals to objections:

Objection 1: As a Christian, you should turn the other cheek.

Rebuttal: Turning the other cheek is for when you yourself are oppressed. I’m not the person raped in a detention camp. I’m not the fisherman executed without trial. I’m not a schoolkid blown up or a child starved or a teenage girl abused by the many criminals in this administration.

Turning the other cheek when *someone else* is oppressed is not Christian behavior; it is complicity in the oppressor’s crimes.

Objection 2: This is not a convenient time for you to do this.

Rebuttal: I need whoever thinks this way to take a couple minutes and realize that the world isn’t about them. Do you think that when I see someone raped or murdered or abused, I should walk on by because it would be “inconvenient” for people who aren’t the victim?

This was the best timing and chance of success I could come up with.

Objection 3: You didn’t get them all.

Rebuttal: Gotta start somewhere.

Objection 4: As a half-black, half-white person, you shouldn’t be the one doing this.

Rebuttal: I don’t see anyone else picking up the slack

Objection 5: Yield unto Caesar what is Caesar’s.

Rebuttal: The United States of America are ruled by the law, not by any one or several people. In so far as representatives and judges do not follow the law, no one is required to yield them anything so unlawfully ordered.

I would also like to extend my appreciation to a great many people since I will not be likely to be able to talk with them again (unless the Secret Service is *astoundingly* incompetent.)

Thank you to my family, both personal and church, for your love over these 31 years.

Thank you to my friends, for your companionship over many years.

Thank you to my colleagues over many jobs, for your positivity and professionalism.

Thank you to my students for your enthusiasm and love of learning.

Thank you to the many acquaintances I’ve met, in person and online, for short interactions and long-term relationships, for your perspectives and inspiration.

Thank you all for everything.

Sincerely,

Cole “coldForce” “Friendly Federal Assassin” Allen

PS: Ok now that all the sappy stuff is done, what the hell is the Secret Service doing? Sorry, gonna rant a bit here and drop the formal tone.

Like, I expected security cameras at every bend, bugged hotel rooms, armed agents every 10 feet, metal detectors out the wazoo.

What I got (who knows, maybe they’re pranking me!) is nothing.

No damn security.

Not in transport.

Not in the hotel.

Not in the event.

Like, the one thing that I immediately noticed walking into the hotel is the sense of arrogance.

I walk in with multiple weapons and not a single person there considers the possibility that I could be a threat.

The security at the event is all outside, focused on protestors and current arrivals, because apparently no one thought about what happens if someone checks in the day before.

Like, this level of incompetence is insane, and I very sincerely hope it’s corrected by the time this country gets actually competent leadership again.

Like, if I was an Iranian agent, instead of an American citizen, I could have brought a damn Ma Deuce in here and no one would have noticed shit.

Actually insane.

Oh and if anyone is curious is how doing something like feels: it’s awful. I want to throw up; I want to cry for all the things I wanted to do and never will, for all the people whose trust this betrays; I experience rage thinking about everything this administration has done.

Can’t really recommend it! Stay in school, kids.

This guy is clearly sane, clearly leftist, and clearly planned this out. He’s a smart guy. CalTech isn’t a school for idiots. The insanity defense isn’t going to work here. His biggest flaw, and IMO the reason his plan failed, is real life isn’t like a first person shooter video game. He expected to sail through level after level of increasingly serious opponents until he faced down and defeated the “big boss.”

Look, the Secret Service has a limited budget. They can’t search everyone and their hotel rooms. This is still the US and people still have civil rights. Instead, they layer security. He made it through the outer layer, which was staffed by hotel staff and local police. He got to the first layer staffed by Secret Service personnel, and decided to run through the checkpoint. He didn’t make it. Had he, there would have been more and heavier opposition, but there was no way he would have made it all the way to the room where a gaggle of protectees was sitting.

On a larger note, the left has declared war on the nation. Read social media for a bit. I do, and what the left wants for us is no less than a full on communist utopia, with themselves as sitting around writing poetry, painting pictures, and playing video games while the rest of us toil in the factories, fields, and gulags. That’s why they hate the electoral college- they don’t think those of us who live in flyover America deserve a say, because we are all uneducated racist rednecks who are busy fornicating with our sisters.

It’s coming. Keep stocking up on supplies.

By Divemedic, ago