597
Tennessee Congressional Candidate Arrested for Shooting Flock Safety Cameras
(www.gadgetreview.com)
If I was in US he has my vote
this post was submitted on 05 Aug 2026
597 points (99.0% liked)
Technology
86879 readers
3713 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
a good problem to have.
" we dint see anything" maybe he was shooting at the gun range.
Those flock cameras are known to aggressively attack. Im absolutely certain this was in self defense.
It was coming right at me!
Fuck dude. I'm moving there and voting for him
I mean, based? Elect him
This is a real politician who i want in office. Someone who talks the talk and walks the walk?
Still eligible to hold office.
I'd vote for him.
people have voted for far worse.
Using what? Shotgun, paintball gun, pellet gun: I'll donate to this campaign/defense fund. Handgun, canon, or rifle: go fuck yourself.
Lol, what?
"I support it if he used a shotgun but by gawd if he used a handgun he can burn in hell"
This makes no god damn sense man.
Basic gun safety states to know your target and what lies beyond it. Even a simple .45 has the potential to go through a camera, wall, and into a person, meaning that a perfect shot still has a non-zero chance of your bullet taking out a person or ruining someone's day.
Using one of the first gun types displays foresight and consideration that I'd desire in a politician. The second type indicates a reckless figure who is uninformed about the tools and power that they wield, and doesn't embody the values of a politician I'd trust.
It's not enough to take action and be a badass; it's important to also show that you'll at least try to keep your constituents safe.
That's fair actually and does make sense.
Well, shotguns generally are extremely range limited, and birdshot is pretty mild after a couple dozen feet. You’re not gonna hurt someone accidentally, even if you completely miss the thing.
Handguns and rifles have an extremely high likelihood of hitting something or someone behind whatever you’re shooting at and travel great distance. Miss the camera, and you end up doming some poor bastard just walking down the street a mile away, or hitting some kid chilling in their room.
If by "extremely high likelihood" you mean "a remote but non zero chance" then I agree. It's obviously too high a chance to take when it could result in someone's death, but there's just to much empty space between people to make it likely he would hit someone.
That's fair acrually but I would hope he would walk up to it and shoot it and not try to hit it with a scope from 100 yards away.
There is truth in what you say though.
I broke my foot a few years ago and can't run anymore. I can't play anymore but I've really been considering pulling my paintball gun out of the closet.
Let's cheer you up by going to the paintball range and purchasing far more paintballs than we'll be able to use in our allotted time. I'm sure you'll dispose of the extras safely.
Couldn't have said it better myself.
So what you're saying is he's a first amendment supporter with good aim who isn't afraid to take direct action against federal surveillance overreach, right? I think you could sell this to the Republicans as a candidate just as easily as to the Democrats.
I think you mean 2nd Amendment, 1st is free speech. The 2nd is right to bear arms. But you're otherwise 100% correct. If I were in the district/state he would have my vote. If we can put a pedophile in the White House, we can surely put this guy in Congress.
If money is a form of speech, so are bullets.
This is hard at fuck. This makes me hard as fuck.
Bullets cost money, so bullets are just a way of projecting speech. Finally, a way for the average person to "talk" to a politician where they'll actually listen.
Does this qualify me to be a Supreme Court judge?
I want this on a shirt.
First is more! Speech, press, religion, assembly and redress of grievances. But no one on the right believes Trump is a pedophile btw.
More like 4th the "come back with a fucking warrant" amendment
That would make me vote for him.
Felony "charges". They can nullified just as easily as bad charges can be convictions if you have the correct jury.
Who cares? electing felons is in fashion this decade.
He'd get my vote. ( If I were so unfortunate to have tolive in Tennessee)
A beautiful state ruined by rednecks and religion.
There are lots of decent people in Tennessee too. I really want to visit, it's so beautiful there, especially the mountains.
He's got my vote
This will get him more votes not fewer
Yeah, might have found a way to swing republican voters to his side.
Couldn't be him. He was at my birthday party all of those days.
True. I was there and also saw him each of those days.
Did you guys know that when you vote for state primaries you have to choose which political party to get the choices for and you don't see any other choices?
So this guy being independent, you would only ever get to vote for him if you picked the independent ballot and then you couldn't vote for any of the democrats who are the only real chances to actually win against republicans and unseat them.
You get, Democratic, Republican, Independent, Green Party or Issues Only. That's it.
Whole thing's fucking rigged man.
load more comments
(19 replies)
From their Q&A:
Trickle down economics has failed to produce results. Subsidizing projects for corporations to reap the benefits while working class Americans struggle is fiscally irresponsible. Redirecting subsidies from multi-billion dollar corporations to public education and health programs.
Based.
view more: next ›