Interesting debate.

Just curious, had Elser, Stauffenberg, Tresckow et al been successful in their attempts to kill Hitler and saved several million lives..... would those suggesting that assassination attempts are always wrong, still hold that opinion?

Obviously Giffords isn't Hitler, the question is only as to the opinions that it wouldn't matter even if it was Pelosi or Obama.

So is it the individual act you all are condemning or is it a subjective judgment as to whether the target was deserving?


And if individual acts are always wrong, exactly how do you fellas figure you would stop a tyrant if we ever had one? Voting is done away with or reached a point of charade.... Protesting and forming of militias will, under a tyrant, be illegal and met with force either overtly or Gestapo/Stasi/NKVD style.

So how do you fellas gauge what is an acceptable act and what is not?

[Linked Image]