Dana Loesch goes through a hell of a lot in her role as a spokesperson for the National Rifle Association. Just the stuff I’ve seen on Twitter directed at her has been among the vilest filth ever to infest the internet, and she routinely brushes it off like it’s nothing. Loesch has become the epitome of grace in the wake of outright hatred.
I get that they blame the NRA for mass shootings, but they’re lashing out at her like she’s the one pulling the trigger.
Then, to top it off, Twitter wanted to try and argue that being hopeful for the death of Loesch’s children didn’t violate their rules.
It does not violate Twitter’s rules against abuse to wish death upon National Rifle Association (NRA) spokeswoman Dana Loesch’s children, Twitter ruled Sunday evening.
“The only way these people learn is if it affects them directly,” Twitter user Milan Legius wrote in a reply to Loesch. “So if Dana Loesch has to have her children murdered before she’ll understand, I guess that’s what needs to happen.”
“You may not make specific threats of violence or wish for the serious physical harm, death, or disease of an individual or group of people,” Twitter’s rules state.
But when Loesch’s husband Chris reported the tweet wishing death upon their children, Twitter initially ruled in favor of Legius.
“We have reviewed your report carefully and found that there was no violation of the Twitter Rules against abusive behavior,” Twitter wrote in an email that Chris shared with The Daily Caller News Foundation.
Twitter did reverse the decision, but who in the hell thinks this is acceptable? Who?
Oh, that’s right. The “caring” anti-gunner hypocrites who seem to think it’s perfectly acceptable to make such statements about the children of pro-gun activists, but who would be up in arms if someone said the same thing about Shannon Watts or someone similar.
The fact is, such statements are out of line regardless of people’s politics. They’re not warranted in any circumstance. They’re just plain wrong.
That anyone at Twitter could look at those comments and not see them as a clear violation of the rules as stated is idiotic. What happened was someone at Twitter saw the comments and who they were directed to and figured, “She had it coming.” In other words, the rules weren’t about to be applied evenly to all Twitter users.
On appeal, Loesch got satisfaction, but it shouldn’t have even gotten that far.
What these rabid anti-gunners don’t comprehend is that their position isn’t a lifesaving one. Theirs isn’t some moral high ground that is unassailable.
Bad people keep getting guns, regardless of gun laws. People can make submachineguns in their backyards. All the gun laws do is disarm those who are more inclined to obey the law.
Gun laws disarm the law-abiding, but these jackwagons act like it’s so moral to oppose private gun ownership to the point that they think wishing for the murder of children is a noble act. It’s not the first time it’s happened, either, nor will it be the last.
The question is, will Twitter continue to pretend the rule apply to everyone evenly? Or will they make it a reality?
I’m not holding my breath.