Glinner Bullseye comment on X

[Thatcatsaflippingnightmare]

Always trying to explain Glinner to DH, today he showed me on X JD Vance defending murder of the woman by ICE. Glinner had replied something like 'bullseye', as in agreement. I tried to comprehend with "satire?" but he said no he's on Liz truss show these days. I said well he's always been about protecting women and children, he's not suddenly supporting femicide, but the post convinced DH otherwise. Any insights? I'm not on social media

I have friends who I disagree with on really fundamental issues including abortion, Brexit, tax. Its not the disagreeing with a political position that's the problem. It's the inability to see the point blank shooting of a woman by an armed pseudo police force as tragedy. There are people on the left who absolutely do that too. Eg people making excuses for the assault on KJK with a soup can.
It's hard to explain but its not the belief thats the problem its the tribalism. It's very obvious why Glinner would be succeptible to that. It doesn't make it OK though.

I was driving home from work once and came upon a Police incident, it must have just happened or I don't think the traffic would have seen me anywhere near it. The police had stopped a car and were surrounding it. I crept past in my car to make room for another Police vehicle and I realised a policeman was pointing a gun at my head. It seemed to be just happenstance, he was probably pointing at the driver who had ducked down behind the wheel, who would have been between me and the copper. It lasted barely a moment as I drove on but it was one of the most chilling experiences of my life. I utterly sympathise with you but I doubt that brief experience of mine can give me more than a little insight.

Being executed on the spot is not normally the penalty for failing to exit a vehicle when asked.

He's still a bit dim if he thought that shooting her was a better idea than jumping out of the way. Did he think the car would stop immediately if the driver was dead?

They'll be even more resistant now.

This
Regardless of what "side" you're on, in what way is being shot in the head (more than once!) and instant death a proportionate response?!

Ironically the closet comparison I can make in this country is to when Linehan was escorted from an aeroplane by armed police, but I think they were armed because they were airport police. I don't think anyone seriously expected him to be shot if he resisted arrest.

(I know there is an argument that this was an act of self defence, but I think that that is a separate argument).

If the corollary of arming police is that people will be shot if they don't do what the police tell them, then, as you say, that is not a liberal democracy of the kind to which we are accustomed.

Not true

And even though they were likely armed because they were airport police there WAS a lot of sympathising with him, including on here, because being met with armed police is a scary situation. And the numbers seemed like overkill. However for worse than being met with armed police when you don't warrant that is:

• Being confronted by armed pseudo police with their weapons drawn
• Being shot by said police
• Being called a fucking bitch and a domestic terrorist in the aftermath of the event

I think if Glinner was less tunnel minded he'd be able to empathise a bit better. I think some of the fear around the suppression of the trans debate was we were becoming like a police state etc. There may have been police overreach but no-one on the GC side was shot in the head and then called a terrorist. You would hope that people like Glinner would want the same rights extended to people they disagree with as they ask for themselves.

Plus, we don't even know the victims views on trans. All we know is she was a nice Christian mother who had views on immigration. That puts her on the other side to Trump and therefore to MAGA and Glinner and therefore that makes her the enemy and her death doesn't matter apparently.

🤢🤮 totally disgusting

They'd been shouting at her to "move move" ...so she did and they shot her

Glinner in a nutshell. Plus the level of contempt and rage towards women who disagree with him is appalling.

Re the Washington DC murder rate and the National Guard. DC murder rates were on a downward trend before Trump called in the National Guard. The figures he used to justify the use of force were false (41 per 100,000). The highest they'd been in recent years was 39.4/100,000 in 2023 but had fallen consistently since then (27.3/100,000 in 2024). They fell again in the first half of 2025 (latest data) but not by the same proportion seen between 2023-2024. There's no evidence that the National Guard has made any impact on murder rates in DC. For a lawyer, you might want to examine your facts a little more closely.

https://counciloncj.org/crime-in-washington-dc-what-you-need-to-know/

Edited to add that the national guard were deployed to DC in August 2025 - so in fact there is no current official data on the impact on murder rates in DC

I've done some training on working at checkpoints in the military. It's not anything I've ever done, not my wheelhouse, but it would be pretty much the same as the training police would get.

And no, shooting the tyres out would not be a thing. Nor is shooting someone in a limb. If you are shooting someone, you shoot as if they are a threat to life and you shoot to kill and you aim for the centre of mass.

I'm not crazy about sending these kinds of armed groups for this work, through I haven't dug into how they make their decisions about deploying them. But if you have a checkpoint, and someone drives off, you are then past the point of trying to defuse or deescalate. And the guys working the checkpoint frankly have no idea what the intentions or background of the person in the car is. Maybe she is a gobby idiot. Maybe she is intending to escape. Maybe she has drugs in the vehicle, or a bomb, or someone in her trunk. Maybe she is trying to use the car as a weapon. There is literally no way to know and the fact that it's a woman, or a lesbian, or a young person, or an old geezer, doesn't really tell you much.

Trying to drive through an armed police checkpoint seems mad to me and tbh that would be the case whether I was in the US or the UK or Spain or Japan.

Completely agree. And as Brendan O’Neill points out in the earlier linked article, many people on the left also mocked the brutal public murder of Charlie Kirk and lionised Luigi Mangione. There was also a female executive who was murdered who they took the piss out of. And of course all the death threats and grave dancing on the deaths of feminists like Magdalen Berns. But BON like me believes that it’s not a tribalist political issue to not celebrate people’s deaths but a personal principle that it’s always wrong, whatever “side”.

Didn't he threaten to kill them if they handcuffed him?

Apologies. There is some police data which shows the falling pattern (odd reading as it appears that there was 1 murder in 2025 but scrolling down you can see the homicide pattern over 20yrs).
https://mpdc.dc.gov/dailycrime

I'm not the one urging people to see things from their perspective, or writing about their carmaradarie as if there were bravely carrying on a noble struggle behind enemy lines.

These people aren't your everyday law enforcement officers with legitimacy, they are armed thugs who are terrorising US citizens in their own country. Many of them are literally convicted domestic terrorists. The latest video (of many) I've seen shows a gang of them storming up to an uninvolved bystander, abusing him and threatening to arrest him while shouting out completely fictional laws. This woman has every right to "mouth off" in fact I'd say it's every American's duty.

I'm m sorry if I've hit a nerve but if you "both sides" this kind of thing on a public forum, you can expect some pretty robust pushback.

I think my opinion of Glinner has always been shaped by the opinion of the women who he knows in real life- his wife left him, his Sister-in-Law has to ask him publicly to leave her alone.

I know his schtick is 'all my friends, family and colleagues left me because of my GC views' but that's never sat completely right with me. IME men who've alienated all the women they know always have a plausible excuse, and there's always more to it.

And now to re-post the stuff he's posting? Well it doesn't surprise me, even if I agree with his GC views.

So many people are so naive and behind the curve on this it's unbelievable. You're talking as if these are highly trained operatives using up to the minute information to make difficult decisions, like they're characters from a Jason Bourne film. They are mainly angry men who failed high school and in many cases have been pardoned and released from jail specifically for this. They're given a signing on bonus, six hours training and then handed a gun.

I'm not crazy about sending these kinds of armed groups for this work, through I haven't dug into how they make their decisions about deploying them
They're sent into areas that are politically opposed to the current president, hope this helps.

Trying to drive through an armed police checkpoint seems mad to me and tbh that would be the case whether I was in the US or the UK or Spain or Japan.
It wasn't a "checkpoint" i.e. something that was previously fixed in place as she approached it. I suppose you could call it a "pop up checkpoint" in that they decided they objected to her presence, gave her conflicting orders and then shot her dead.

Honestly the bootlicking I've seen over the last couple of days is absolutely something else. "Ooh, don't let's be rude to them, they've got guns, it must be so difficult and intimidating for them."

I'm glad you said all that, Limpys, because I honestly wouldn't know where to start with Tempest's post. Tempest seemed to be talking about what it might be like in some kind of tinpot dictatorship in the developing world, not about the biggest democracy in the world. "Checkpoints" ffs! She was just a woman driving a car and dropping her kid off at school. Are we supposed to assume now that if we're just going about our business - taking kids to school, going to work, nipping to the shops - we should expect to be treated as if we're potential terrorists?

I'm not sure why you think I was talking about "highly trained operatives".

I am talking about what it means to work at a checkpoint.

Lack of training and experience is not going to make them better at it, that is a real issue. But whether their training was great or not, their backround is irrelevant to the fact that they were legally empowered to operate a checkpoint and ask people to stop, leave their vehicle or whatever.

Any place in the world you try to drive through an armed checkpoint there is a real chance of being shot.

Still going on about checkpoints and expecting to be treated as if you know what you're talking about, then?

@ScholesPanda who's his sister-in-law? (If you don't mind me asking.) I've heard mentions of disagreements with various Serafinowitzes, do they have a sister?

I think what's depressing for me is the lack of basic humanity. A 37-year old woman, a mum of three who was apparently well-loved and who wasn't doing anything wrong by normal standards, is brutally shot dead, and people can't even bring themselves to say that it's tragic or to feel sad for the three children and a wife she's left behind. What is wrong with people, seriously?

I don't even know how you argue with these people because if you don't even have a shared moral understanding that a woman's violent death is a tragedy to be mourned, then what is there even to argue about?

You know, there are times when there have been armed checkpoints in the UK. Even recently. You could certainly encounter them in parts of Europe. You can make all kinds of points or ask questions about whether they are justified or not.

That includes police checkpoints. And while police in the UK are often unarmed that's pretty unusual, it's not just an American thing. Have you ever travelled in Spain? They are quite common there. You can find these kinds of things in liberal democracies.

But if the state has decided to have such a thing, there are certain things that are the case and a huge one is that people are expected to comply with their legal direction to stop your vehicle, show your papers, get out of the car, etc. If the encounter is emotionally fraught good soldiers or officers will typically try to deescalate (and will have attempted to keep things calm in the first place), and this is where the lack of experience American officers have often shows in police encounters all over the country.

But that all stops once a car just drives off. You can't deescalate that, and you can't just let it go. Maybe they can chase the car with other vehicles or stop it that way if it just seems to be trying to escape. But if they drive at one of the soldiers or officers, the chance of an armed response is going to be very high no matter where you are, even in countries where they have really good training. Even in the UK.

It's a little ironic to be called naive when people seem to be talking from a really privileged position of never having worked in or had to be subject to this kind of check. Although its a bit surprising really that people in the UK would be so isolated from any memory of this.