The Western beliefs overlayed on Ghandi is armchair quarterbacking.

Essentially, humans know what Ghandi accomplished. The West only overcame totalitarian powers using active violence. India, chose a different path. The West, due to cultural arrogance, believe their way is the best or only way.

But that is not demonstrated or proven by the facts. in 2020, people use the Ghandi method and not the Western blitzkrieg or war method.

Yes I’m afraid it is.

Terry Meza

https://capitol.texas.gov/Members/MemberInfo.aspx?Leg=86&Chamber=H&Code=A3455

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terry_Meza

https://mobile.twitter.com/TerryforTexas/status/1329504824879173634?

https://twitter.com/TerryforTexas/status/1329504827928358912

https://legiscan.com/TX/text/HB196/id/2214951

…a very worrying piece of legislation was introduced by Irving State Representative Terry Meza. HB 196 seeks to repeal the Castle Doctrine, preventing a homeowner from using firearms to defend their property.

https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/new-bill-would-require-texans-to-retreat-from-attack-ban-deadly-force-to-protect-property/

However, a very worrying piece of legislation was introduced by Irving State Representative Terry Meza. HB 196 seeks to repeal the Castle Doctrine, preventing a homeowner from using firearms to defend their property.

She believes that homeowners are too eager to pull the trigger when facing armed home invaders.

“I’m not condoning stealing, it is against the law,” Meza says, “but it’s not an offense that is punishable by death.”

https://www.lsgr.live/post/tx-rep-terry-meza-files-bill-making-it-illegal-to-defend-your-home-with-a-firearm

Now if the party pursuing resource redistribution says “No” to the property “owner’s” refusal give up the spoils of injustice there may be a problem of competing interests, but social justice must in the end prevail. The property “owner” might be permitted to gift the individual seeking resource redistribution with a bit of lead or tungsten (green option) in the lower limbs or knees (avoid the femoral artery or the naughty bits of course).

Just thinking like a Terry (lie back and think of social justice).

Is that really, real? I have followed and read the link and still cannot believe it.

If it is, and I don’t trust the tabket I am using, then that is one of the more stunning things I have read in years, and it nearly exceeds my own powers of parody.

The only thing I can think of that is more extreme, and something I mockingly suggested the left might pursue some years ago (and paralleling Om’s sarcastic take), is the negation of the principle that one has the right to bodily integrity and to refuse undesired sexual congress. This, on the putative basis of human solidarity, social ownership of the body, and compensatory social “justice”.

There were a couple of law journal articles at the time delving into the question as to whether compelled marriage might not fit in with the general principles of social justice totalitarianism, but that was speculative.

Now, it appears that the mainstream left is so morally insane as to be beyond parody. They have joined the 1960’s Reds of the Bill Ayers and German revolutionary kind. Soon they will be again demanding, this time more broadly, as they once were in their own communes, that you and your children submit to sodomy under the same pretext.

Refusal of the privileged to embrace and accept penetration, is violence … or something …

This has become an anthropological, not an ideological or political dispute.

All Commies Are Bastards.

“In Texas, State Representative Terry Meza (D-Irving) has introduced HB196. Her bill would repeal the state’s “castle doctrine.” This doctrine allows a homeowner to use deadly force against an armed intruder who breaks into his home.

Now listen to what she has to say…

“I’m not saying that stealing is okay,” Meza explained. “All I’m saying is that it doesn’t warrant a death penalty. Thieves only carry weapons for self-protection and to provide the householder an incentive to cooperate. They just want to get their loot and get away. When the resident tries to resist is when people get hurt. If only one side is armed fewer people will be killed.”
Meza was quick to reassure that her bill “would not totally prevent homeowners from defending themselves.

Under the new law the homeowner’s obligation is to flee the home at the first sign of intrusion. If fleeing is not possible he must cooperate with the intruder. But if violence breaks out it is the homeowner’s responsibility to make sure no one gets hurt. The best way to achieve this is to use the minimum non-lethal force possible because intruders will be able to sue for any injuries they receive at the hands of the homeowner.”

“In most instances the thief needs the money more than the homeowner does,” Meza reasoned. “The homeowner’s insurance we reimburse his losses. On balance, the transfer of property is likely to lead to a more equitable distribution of wealth. If my bill can help make this transfer a peaceful one so much the better.”

https://legiscan.com/TX/text/HB196/2021?fbclid=IwAR0KbtQkn-g7x0YQzA3UJmj62DjKf9EaC9X5NcH51ip-LF_Gv0lGalI6qfE

I rabidus. Unde super illud tradere,