| THIS IS A READ-ONLY ARCHIVE FROM THE SORABJI.COM MESSAGE BOARDS (1995-2016). |
|---|
I would never say that they didn't deserve the permit, or the right to speak, but when the taxpayers of the state are forced to pay $40,000 to protect them from the mob of unruly protestors they themselves created, I have some problems. Part of the beauty of free speech, in my eyes, is having the courage to face an unruly crowd, and stand by your convictions. These guys were kept at least 100 yards from the protestors, were ushered in by the police, and were each escorted to their cars afterwards by the cops. Why is it that if I walk into a crowded movie theater and shout fire, I can be charged with inciting riot, but when these bastards stand on the state capitol steps and scream a big ol' F bomb at me and my friends, the cops are there to make sure they all get to their cars safley? I think the first amendment failed me today. |
|
I just don't believe that speech that is intended to incite riot deserves $40,000 of my tax dollars to be used for protection. I wouldn't deny anyone the right to speak, I just think that if one truly stands behind their beliefs, then they should fare the consequences of the angry mob they create. I don't go around yelling racial epithets at the minorities in my neighborhood, because I know I very well could end up geting punched repeatedly in the head before the cops could arive. If this same fear of retribution were built into Klan day at the capitol, I think they would perhaps gain a much better understanding for just how hurtful their message is. If you truly believe that all blacks, jews and homosexuals are evil. Then tell them that. Don't stand behind a cop and scream insults. Maybe I am anti-american. Maybe I just don't understand the constitution. But I think that we need to remember that, like the bible, the constitution was relevant for the time in which it was drafted. While it is important to maintain the basic concepts, when we fail to let it evolve and grow with the country, we will eventually lose touch with it all together. |
|
|
Fuck nevermind, I'm to tired right no to attempt to defend this argument... I'll try later when I'm awake. |
moronic. the $40K is to keep people safe from people who would hurt them for their views. it is not caused by the klan, it is caused by potentially violent people. |
Of course, the same does not apply if they themselves are violent. Violence is stupid. I'd certainly hope that if I stood on the steps to talk about how all people are equal, the police would keep the Klan people from kicking my ass. That's the same thing, isn't it? |
|
|
|
no. they want to eat your hate. if you show that you hate them, it proves them right in some weird twisted way. it gives them reason to bug you more. like schoolyard bullies. i wonder if national socialists and klan members know much about eugenics. |
The real world application of this is here: A self-described nazi, who had a huge swastika tattooed on his bare chest was arrested before the rally for saying that he was going to kill the president. Now, Semillama, Tbone and Nate. Is this, or is this not, a violation of your idealized versions of the first amendment? |
Perhaps this may help. |
if you go up to someone (president or not) and tell them you are going to kill them, you are interfering with their liberty. if you create fear, you are assualting them. assault is criminal. if you assault the president, you should be arrested. if you dislike the president and say so, you're protected. if you dislike the president and say so while fucking an 8 year old boy in the ass, you should be arrested. get it? if your speech comes with a crime, you should be arrested. if your speech doesn't come with a crime, you shouldn't be arrested. |
That's the amendment. I believe that the nazi who stood on the capitol steps and shouted that he planned to kill the president deserves just as much protection as the klan would under this amendment. But, one went to jail, and the other incited a riot at my expense. Why? |
If they really incited a riot as defined by Minnesota law, then they should have been arrested under the state law. After all, it is perfectly possible to state the klan's point of view in a manner so as not to incite a riot. However, if the arrest violates the state's bill of rights (assuming Minnesota has one), then they should not be arrested. Also, Minnesota has laws against assault and such. It seems like the cost to taxpayers would be much higher had the police have had to arrest several people for assualt after a riot broke out. I find it interesting that a neo-nazi stated he wanted to kill George W. Bush, though. I also find it interesting that they only spent $40,000. Seems like a bargain to me. |
The crime was only stating that he was going to kill the president. The man was no where near the president at the time, and he was unarmed. How is that different from the klan calling me a nigger who needs to be put in a cage and sent back to Africa with the other chimps? One could easily argue that his intent to cage me, and deprive me of my liberty was just as real a threat as the nazi's threat on the president. semillama- I am just arguing off of your first response, where you called my original rant a first amendment lapse. If you no longer believe it is a first amendment issue, then shouldn't I, as a tax payer, have the right to say that I don't want my tax dollars spent to fund a rally that is no longer protected by the first amendment? |
hooooo boy, scary stuff. |
if said manboy threatend your person in such a way you feared for your safety, that would be assault and he should be arrested. if a group of manboys decide to shout about how they think all niggers should be sent back to africa in cages, that's protected speech. and the only reason they care to do it is because ten times their number comes out to tell them what a bunch of greasy little punkass pussies they are. if they were ignored, they'd stop. but that's a side note. occassionaly abortion clinics get bombed. perhaps the cops shouldn't do anything to deter those acts of violence, either? i mean, i'm anti-abortion. i don't want my tax dollars going to protect baby killers. |
|
sure, if he attacked you, you could present his threat or statement of hatred as evidence. but unless you're a rich cocksucker or a public figure, they're not going to care unless something happens. if you were the president, or bill gates, or chris rock or somebody, it'd be a lot different. they don't care what happens to you as long as you stand in line to pay $6.50 to see their latest movie. |
"They" don't know how to drive. "They" don't know how to wait their turn. "They" think they rule the world. "They" have it better than us and IT'SNOT FAIR. Well, we're sick of it. We're (*sob*) people too. |
*giggle* i'd prolly be a selfish prick too if i had the equipment. |