Sure we do — when society breaks down and the police can no longer maintain peace. As happened in a number of US cities this past year, when police were helpless in the face of Democrat-endorsed arsonists. Apparently, the speaker was from one of these cities that suffered from frequent, organized arson.
Regardless, we’re clearly having an ethical argument: there’s no call to violence.
> "mowing down dipshit protesters"
Your example is clearly not a call to action, it’s an example of an act the speaker would approve of if it happened — which is an ethical statement.
The speaker is not saying people should or asking people to mow down protestors: just that they’re okay with militias shooting arson gangs if that’s what’s required to stop their serial arson attacks.
> it’s an example of an act the speaker would approve of if it happened
Oh, will no one rid me of this meddlesome priest!
I've probably engaged way past where I should, as you aren't here to discuss calmly and rationally, but what you describe is an extremely common rhetorical technique. The streamer all but said, "will no one rid me off these meddlesome protestors?"
> The streamer all but said, "will no one rid me off these meddlesome protestors?"
On the contrary, they made a clearly ethical statement you’re trying to misportray, in a way which defames the speaker.
You say “calmly and rationally”: I’ve talked about the structure of the comment and the societal breakdown/violence in which it occurred — have you?
I think understanding the violence the speaker experienced from serial arsonists is important to understanding why they’d give an exasperated endorsement of violence to resolve the situation.
> The streamer all but said, "will no one rid me off these meddlesome protestors?"
No, they didn’t — you’re just emotionally and irrationally misinterpreting them.
Since you want to talk about rhetorical techniques: defaming people with false accusations is much more common than veiled orders.
> "mowing down dipshit protesters"
... it says it right on the tin.
> I suspect you’re being uncharitable because you personally support the arsonists’ crime spree.
We don't shoot criminals, dude. Even if you thought there were arsonists out there, you don't just invite random people to come and shoot them.