No one was present or injured at the office, a state Democratic Party spokesperson said. Tempe police said they are investigating the incident as a property crime.
  • Buffalox@lemmy.world
    97·
    2 months ago

    WTF? This is most likely scare tactics towards the Harris campaign, which means it’s terrorism. And they are examining it as a property crime?

    • The Pantser@lemmy.world
      554·
      2 months ago

      Also she’s still VP! It should be treated as treason because there is a chance she could have been there.

      • dual_sport_dork 🐧🗡️@lemmy.world
        131·
        2 months ago

        I mean, from a legal standpoint, sure.

        But realistically, given that she’s currently the sitting vice president, the odds of her actually being in the campaign office versus being in the White House or at a meeting somewhere on on a jet or giving a speech or elsewhere on the campaign trail are, including many decimal places, zero.

        I also don’t expect anyone dumb enough to actually try shooting at the campaign office to know that, though.

        That also doesn’t preclude anyone else from being in the office.

      • SassyRamen@lemmy.world
        2·
        2 months ago

        Oh man if this happened to a building being used by the fat peice of shit Trump, it’d be listed as him being shot at in another assassination attempt!

    • LeadersAtWork@lemmy.world
      2·
      2 months ago

      I feel it’s’s almost certainly retaliation for perceived wrongs. What it accomplishes will depend on the person. Some will see it as scare tactics, others as a warning, more as stupidity, and others besides.

      Let’s just hope it’s not an early herald of more.

      • neclimdul@lemmy.world
        2·
        2 months ago

        I understand I might not be asking the right person but what’s the difference between terrorism and a warning when it involves deadly force?

        • LeadersAtWork@lemmy.world
          1·
          2 months ago

          Intent, mostly. Other than that, not much. Because we can only assume why, even if it’s easy enough to come up with answers, it’s best to not leap to conclusions. I might be missing info though .

          • neclimdul@lemmy.world
            1·
            2 months ago

            I guess I don’t see the difference. If you are warning someone with a gun, the warning is that they willl use the gun. Legally that might not always be “terrorism” but the effect is the same so seems like we call it what it is.

            • bbuez@lemmy.world
              11·
              2 months ago

              Last I checked, brandishing a weapon is not any more legal, nor is negligent discharge of a weapon.

  • affiliate@lemmy.world
    17·
    2 months ago

    “damaged by gunfire” is a weird way to frame it. it puts a bit too much emphasis on the property damage side of things and not enough on the terrorism side of things.

  • BrianTheeBiscuiteer@lemmy.world
    111·
    2 months ago

    $2 some talking head is gonna say, “It was just a building! They weren’t shooting at Kamala. This isn’t even in the same ballpark!”

    • CharlesDarwin@lemmy.worldEnglish
      2·
      2 months ago

      And I bet some of them are some of the very same people that were more upset about “cities burning to the ground” than actual people being killed during protests.

      In other words, property crime is something that gets them worked up into a lather when they can try to pin it on BLM or “antifa”, but if their terrorists break stuff and steal things and smear feces on the walls, while storming the Capitol in a terrorist action, it’s NBD.