←back to thread

Twitter hides Donald Trump tweet for “glorifying violence”

(twitter.com)
1061 points danso | 1 comments | 29 May 20 07:24 UTC | HN request time: 0.206s | source
Show context
shiado ◴[29 May 20 07:38 UTC] No.23347239[source]▶
The service that hosts the accounts of all branches of the US military, all major weapons contractors, all three letter agencies, and many foreign militaries, governments, and world leaders guilty of all manner of war crimes, and this is where they draw the line for violence. Really interesting.
replies(6): >>23347272 #>>23347293 #>>23347332 #>>23350446 #>>23350795 #>>23351894 #
crazygringo ◴[29 May 20 15:07 UTC] No.23350795[source]▶
Well, in political science and sociology, one of the most common definitions of the state is that it possesses a monopoly on legitimate/lawful violence.

Violence conducted via the military or police, according to regulation, is lawful.

But violence conducted by citizens, or by members of the government or military that is not according to law/regulation, is not lawful.

I'm not saying Twitter's drawing the line exactly right, but it's somewhere in the right vicinity.

replies(4): >>23351003 #>>23351295 #>>23351377 #>>23352198 #
daveslash ◴[29 May 20 15:41 UTC] No.23351295[source]▶
"Any difficulty and we will assume control but, when the looting starts, the shooting starts"

I think Trump's saying that if things get out of control, law enforcement will start shooting. If I understand your post correctly, this would be lawful...

replies(1): >>23352284 #
jaredmosley ◴[29 May 20 16:46 UTC] No.23352284[source]▶
Well, it is not legal to shoot someone for stealing in Minnesota so I'm not sure how this would be lawful violence. He would need to have said something like "when the looting starts, we will attempt to arrest anyone that we see, if they then threaten the officers' lives instead of stopping or running away, then the shooting starts".

It is NOT legal for the Minnesota police to shoot a citizen that they believe is committing a crime unless their life or another person's life is under direct threat.

replies(1): >>23353087 #
1. daveslash ◴[29 May 20 17:45 UTC] No.23353087[source]▶
Well, yes - you're of course right. And Trump should have said something different, like you suggested. I'm not defending the tweet in any way. I was suggesting that the tweet was in alignment with the idea that the state has a monopoly on violence. But I think I read crazygringo's comment too fast and didn't really digest the emphasis on lawful/legal/regulated violence. In other-words, I derp'd.