[kcplate]

You know, it was you that decided to drag your personal situation into the conversation, not me. Be offended, or not—I’m indifferent.

[antisol]

You know, I look forward to the day this unjust system that you blindly and stupidly trust bites you, too.

[kcplate]

And if that day comes I still won’t resort to violence…or even consider it.

Good luck.

[antisol]

When exactly did I say that I would resort to violence, or considered violence, or advocate for it, or suggest it?

[kcplate]

You are commenting about legal avenues not going your way on a thread literally about the concept of a violent response being justified for people when normal legal avenues don’t go your way.

[antisol]

Well I mean that's nice for you but I'm not sure how it responds to the question asked - when did I say anything about violence being justified? I merely responded to your ignorant and empirically incorrect fantasy-world assumption that the legal system is always right.

[kcplate]

At no point did I say the legal system is always right. I suggested that in certain situations it might be right and in those situations resorting to violence because you feel aggrieved at a legal loss would not be an appropriate response. Frankly, some people are guilty and some people are legally responsible.

I suggested that if you are having difficulty finding an attorney willing to take your case on contingency, there might be a reason for that. I stand by that. You are asking a person to take a risk on your behalf who has evaluated the environment and didn’t like the odds.