>>danso+(OP)
In fairness, Trump's tweets are not about actually doing anything, they are more about getting votes. So arguing the feasibility of suggestions outlined in a Trump tweet kind of misses the point.
>>bilbo0+K8
It was a message, directly to law enforcement, that he thinks it’s okay for them to shoot protestors so long as there is looting. I can’t see how anyone would see that as anything other than a crime against humanity
>>tehweb+qz
I don't know why you're getting down voted. Trump's words are a quote of someone who believed that "... it’s okay for them to shoot protestors so long as there is looting."
Trump is very much saying he believes looter should be shot.
>>choose+LN
To be clear here: Looting is not a capital offense. It's stuff. No TV/car/stereo is worth killing a person over. You have insurance for these things (hopefully).
Though laws vary widely in the US, in CA the punishment is about a year in county jail, give or take:
>>andrew+W01
To be clearer still: Minnesota does not have stand your ground / castle doctrine laws - you can't protect "material items" with deadly force, no matter how valuable or irreplaceable. Instead, there is are Duty to retreat laws.