https://xcancel.com/theliamnissan/status/1939721061710574072#m
The Idaho shooter who killed two fire fighters. https://www.cnn.com/2025/06/30/us/idaho-fire-shooter-wess-roley
this post was submitted on 30 Jun 2025
796 points (96.8% liked)
People Twitter
7545 readers
1293 users here now
People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.
RULES:
- Mark NSFW content.
- No doxxing people.
- Must be a pic of the tweet or similar. No direct links to the tweet.
- No bullying or international politcs
- Be excellent to each other.
- Provide an archived link to the tweet (or similar) being shown if it's a major figure or a politician.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Are you serious right now? We live in a time of mass strife brought on by the redcaps. If you dont want your face and name on the internet dont support fascism.
Ah so it is okay to doxx people according to you
it's not "doxxing" when they posted that photo themselves voluntarily. especially since there's no home address, work address, phone number, etc. they obviously want the world to know they're maga. and now the world does.
fuck them
It is doxxing when you grab a photo and then add information to it saying "these are the parents of the person you hate, go hate them too" and spread it to hundreds of people. And the only reason you don't see it is because you don't like the political party they support.
That is not, in fact, doxxing.
It is, and I have described why in two posts down this chain already with provided definitions.
couple things: a) you're free to try and change the definition of words to make them mean whatever you want them to mean, but no one else is obliged to follow your based-on-feelings definition. doxxing is defined as providing private information, of which this post has none. it is NOT doxxing, and you are the only one here who can't stand the fact that it's not
and b) you say "you don’t like the political party" as if maga-branded fascism deserves equal consideration as a valid stance on anything. again, you're free to think that, but you're not convincing anyone else.
and finally (again): fuck those asshole parents, fuck trump, and fuck trump voters
My definition of doxxing comes from wikipedia and is supported. People here think their opinion of what doxxing is, is real, despite no proof or actual definition. I already went through the definition and shown that this is indeed doxxing. Want to read it, here
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doxing
And yes, this post contains private information. It contains the information of "these are this guys parents" which would only be known to the select few neighbors at best. Furthermore, it contains information about their political beliefs. So yes, it absolutely is doxxing with the intention of shaming the parents. The info doesn't need to be completely private and hidden - aggregating info from public databases or facebook counts as well.
https://thesportsgrail.com/who-are-jason-roley-and-heather-lynn-kuuipo-cuchiara-parents-of-wess-roley-and-more-about-the-idaho-shooters-family-mom-dad-step-father-and-mother/
https://houseandwhips.com/wess-roley-parents/
https://www.hindustantimes.com/world-news/us-news/who-are-wess-roley-s-parents-idaho-shooters-mother-once-accused-his-father-of-violent-threats-101751318259257.html
https://gazettedirect.com/wess-roley-family-maga/
https://www.ghlinks.com.gh/wess-roley-parents-heather-lynn-kuuipo-cuchiara-tony-cuchiara/
https://scallywagandvagabond.com/2025/06/wess-val-roley-coeur-dalene-sniper-troubled-childhood-maga-parents/
it looks like you have a lot of angry letters to write regarding all these news outlets "doxxing" those poor innocent fascist assholes
get to work
Yup, so just proving further that law doesn't apply to people you don't like.
“these are this guys parents”
nope. that's not "private" information. they posted that photo on their own, and however OP found out it was the parents, was publicly posted as well. it's NOT doxxing, no matter how blue in the face you make yourself insisting that it is.
the post is fine, because it's not doxxing.
Literal quote from the wikipedia article I linked. It. Is. Doxxing.
lol not to say wikipedia is always wrong, but you shouldn't be basing your arguments on [citation needed] definitions
let's go with the actual definition:
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/doxxing
: to publicly identify or publish private information about (someone) especially as a form of punishment or revenge
no private information. not doxxing
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/doxing
the action of finding or publishing private information about someone on the internet without their permission, especially in a way that reveals their name, address, etc.:
no private information. not doxxing
https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-365-life-hacks/privacy-and-safety/what-is-doxing
When someone is doxed, their personal or private information is released into the world
no private information. not doxxing
look dude. it's not doxxing, and you're not going to somehow turn it into doxxing in this thread. but by all means waste your whole day on it. i'm done
not doxxing
Definition from oxford languages, search for and publish private or IDENTIFYING information about an individual, typically with malicious intent.
You are literally arguing semantics on something that is obviously doxxing because you don't like the fact that someone got doxxed that you don't like. For every definition that doesn't specifically say "identifiable" information, there are three that do. But by all means, you go out and find the ones that let you sleep at night. I'm done with having a "world battle" over something that's despicable behavior.
Just block the person and move on with your day.
If you look at the account you replied to, it is made two weeks ago with the sole intention of swearing at people who disagree with them. They will not take your advice.
They are sending their masked goons to kidnap people. They should not sleep safe or soundly. I'll make sure to feed your high horse when they come for you.
Ah yes so the best way to handle that is to doxx parents of a murderer because they are MAGA. That will show the government!
All you are doing is stooping down to their level and using their tactics against people who didn't have anything to do with the situation other than the fact of "they had a kid".
If you're MAGA, you endorse Jan 6 and support a convicted felon to lead the world.
Fuck MAGA.
Fuck these two—in spite of their alleged murderer son.
let their imaginary god sort them out
You don't commit crimes against people because "they support maga". Otherwise what you are doing is legitimizing them committing crimes against you, because you aren't maga. Let the courts handle this, not public opinion, and defo not public opinion aimed at the parents of the perp.
My point was that their proud wearing of MAGA caps, in my view, renders them deplorable even if their child's killing spree was not in any way their fault. (Which, come on, it almost certainly is.)
Fuck them in spite of him.
Crimes were not committed against the parents. There is no gag order on publicly posted info. If they receive threats as a result, THEN a crime will have occurred: it is illegal to make threats.
You keep using the word "doxx." I don't think you understand what that word means.
Off of wikipedia - it is an act of publically providing personally identifiable information about an individual without their consent
And if you read up on the article you will know that "aggregation from public databases and social media" counts too.
It may be carried out for reasons such as online shaming (...)
So yeah, this is 100% doxxing, so save me your "oh you don't know what it means" spiel.
Wow, some folks really do have trouble with the concept of cause and effect, don't they? They gave consent when they publicly posted the pics online.
No, they didn't give consent to have their names and faces shown publicly to people like you who would shame them for the crime of having a kid that grew up and commited murder.
Actually they did when they posted their names and photos publicly to the internet. "Public" doesn't mean only the people that you like.
Edit: Additionally, I find your "people like you" statement hilarious. You know nothing about me, you're upset that these parents were publicly identified, and you assume my motivations (completely incorrectly.) When something is PUBLICLY posted, that means there are NO restrictions on who sees it. Consent is not qualified by "oh I posted it publicly but not for this group of people I don't like." Public means everyone. Had they posted it PRIVATELY, you'd have an argument. But they did not, so you don't have a valid argument, you're just upset. There's a difference between the two.
Read up on the wikipedia definition of doxxing. It states plainly - it can be done from public databases or from social media, and that the goal is often to shame someone. This fits 100%. Otherwise you could argue that "it's not doxxing, I just went through this guys comments and he slipped up and said that he lives in X city, then posted a photo that let me triangulate his exact location in the city from landmarks". It is doxxing and a criminal act.
Please show me the law that was broken by referencing publicly available posts voluntarily shared by the people in question. Just because you don't like it, doesn't mean it's a "criminal act."
YES
DOXX ALL NAZI FUCKERS