this post was submitted on 19 Jun 2024
307 points (97.8% liked)

politics

18160 readers
2980 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] SPRUNT@lemmy.world 84 points 1 month ago (1 children)

If I owned a venue, I would "book" these things as often as possible and then cancel as late as contractually possible without penalties.

[–] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 38 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

Burry it in the contract clauses stipulating that the event can’t be used to spread hate. Then cancel as they’re spreading hate.

“Sorry, didn’t know who you were, or I would have said something sooner. It was brought to my attention yesterday and today we found you’re a hate group.”

And then hope your security is up to snuff.

[–] timmy_dean_sausage@lemmy.world 7 points 1 month ago (2 children)

That's pretty risky.. As someone who works in many venues (touring live production), I wouldn't want to throw venue security into the line of fire like that. No venue security crew is equipped to deal with mobs with molotovs...

[–] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

That’s easy. Have your venue in a gun-permissive state, and then have a working verbal agreement with the local Socialist Rifle Association to do replacement events/rallies when some hate group books your thing to come around and very obviously open carry.

[–] timmy_dean_sausage@lemmy.world 1 points 4 weeks ago

Would you invite a large scale firefight at your place of work? Probably not. This is unnecessarily risky any way you look at it. I don't make decisions that put people in danger..

[–] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I’d suggest Pinkertons, but they’re pretty fascist. (They’ve been on the wrong side of history for most of their history.)

My company would drop you like a sack of rocks for the stunt.

[–] timmy_dean_sausage@lemmy.world 1 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

Did you mean to reply to someone else?

[–] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 1 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

Nope, I work in contract security, If you’re going to be pissing off fascists like that, I would suggest Pinkertons.

They have a long history providing the kind of security services we don’t really talk about much. Like managing strike lockouts and strikebreaking type stuffs.

If you were going to provoke ravening hordes of red-hatted assholes, they’re the company I’d want between me and the assholes. Even if they are, themselves, frequently on the wrong side IMO- for example all the strike breaking-

[–] timmy_dean_sausage@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Oh, gotcha. That's an interesting thought, but I would still be worried about the possibility of bullets and molotovs flying around my venue and people dying, when all of that is avoidable by just saying no to having the event in the first place.

People are fantasizing about sticking it to the fascists (which, believe me, I'm 1000% for), but this just isn't the way to do it, IMHO.

[–] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago

I totally agree with that!

But fantasies are fun….