The House Bill Would Mean a Tax Hike for Millions of Seniors. Learn More

Reply
Valued Social Butterfly
Posts: 21,645
Registered: ‎11-07-2009

Re: Free Speech

[ Edited ]
Message 11 of 241 (45 Views)

rk9152 wrote:

Olderscout66 wrote:

What does support of Nazi's KKK and the altRight "fighting words" have to do with free speech? What the RW lunitic fringe is doing is NOT protected under the Constitution for much the same reason you don't get to yell "FIRE" in a crowded theater.


That is a decision to be made by the Courts - not posters here or masked, armed thugs in the streets.


That decision has been made by the courts.  'Hate speech' is too broad of a term to be prohibited. The following are not protected by the first amendment:

 

  • Obscenity
  • Fighting words
  • Defamation (including libel and slander)
  • Child pornography
  • Perjury
  • Blackmail
  • Incitement to imminent lawless action
  • True threats
  • Solicitations to commit crimes

 

(note incitement to imminent lawless action)

 

http://www.newseuminstitute.org/about/faq/which-types-of-speech-are-not-protected-by-the-first-amend...


"The only thing man learns from history is man learns nothing from history"
Valued Social Butterfly
Posts: 31,631
Registered: ‎02-21-2014

Re: Free Speech

Message 12 of 241 (43 Views)

Olderscout66 wrote:

What does support of Nazi's KKK and the altRight "fighting words" have to do with free speech? What the RW lunitic fringe is doing is NOT protected under the Constitution for much the same reason you don't get to yell "FIRE" in a crowded theater.


That is a decision to be made by the Courts - not posters here or masked, armed thugs in the streets.

Valued Social Butterfly
Posts: 21,645
Registered: ‎11-07-2009

Re: Free Speech

Message 13 of 241 (65 Views)

erikm219989 wrote:

ChasKy53 wrote:

rk9152 wrote:


Klan hoods are illegal in much of the country - antifa masks should be treated the same.

 

"Whay" do I suppose people have such a reaction? - because victimology has become a major industry and often an excuse for bad behavior.

 

I am not aware of any "slave chasing" lately. So, let's stick to our contemporary context.


If you want Antifa masks made illegal talk to you state representatives or your federal ones.

 

'Whay"?  Should we all start pointing out your numerous misspellings Too?

 

"Stick to contemporary context"?  You instructing others how and what to post now?


If you want that, you can start by telling the present to Declare ANTIFA a terrorist organization.


Should the KKK also be declared as a terrorist organization?


"The only thing man learns from history is man learns nothing from history"
Conversationalist
Posts: 7
Registered: ‎11-16-2017

Re: Free Speech

Message 14 of 241 (73 Views)

rk9152 wrote:

MIseker wrote:


Yes they did..theirs. the mob disagreed.


I'm not sure of your point. Are you so dissatisfied with our form of government that you are calling for an armed uprising to end it?


Well, with the way things are going now with the attempts to pass a 'Tax Scam' bill, I do sense that there could already be calls being made for an armed uprising to end the GOP control of the whitehouse.

Conversationalist
Posts: 7
Registered: ‎11-16-2017

Re: Free Speech

Message 15 of 241 (78 Views)

ChasKy53 wrote:

rk9152 wrote:


Klan hoods are illegal in much of the country - antifa masks should be treated the same.

 

"Whay" do I suppose people have such a reaction? - because victimology has become a major industry and often an excuse for bad behavior.

 

I am not aware of any "slave chasing" lately. So, let's stick to our contemporary context.


If you want Antifa masks made illegal talk to you state representatives or your federal ones.

 

'Whay"?  Should we all start pointing out your numerous misspellings Too?

 

"Stick to contemporary context"?  You instructing others how and what to post now?


If you want that, you can start by telling the present to Declare ANTIFA a terrorist organization.

Conversationalist
Posts: 7
Registered: ‎11-16-2017

Re: Free Speech

Message 16 of 241 (76 Views)

alferdpacker wrote:

rk9152 wrote:


An interesting idea - pols always told the truth until.....when was it, around the time of the Reagan taxscam?

 

Back in the day there were things called "muckrakers" who used journalism to sell their ideas. Was that wrong?

 

Nixon got tripped up by a media that did not exist in the colonial days. Was that wrong?

 

JFK beat Nixon due to the use of TV, not available in the colonial days. Was that wrong?

 

Ideas and freedom are not technology based - they stand alone.

 

And then the idea of RWers Right to Lie - does the left have exclusive Right to Lie?


Everyone who breathes has told lies - and will unquestionably tell more before they cease breathing - it is a basic human characteristic.

 

An elevated propensity for telling lies currently exists in a majority of members of the Grand Old Pedophile (republican) party...


I believe Greedy Oppressive Politicians would be the better term to use here for that party...

Valued Social Butterfly
Posts: 21,645
Registered: ‎11-07-2009

Re: Free Speech

Message 17 of 241 (87 Views)

rk9152 wrote:

ChasKy53 wrote:

rk9152 wrote:

chas - you really should try to get away from your obsession with the word "troll" - it is leading you down a rabbit hole. 

 

 


The "rabbit hole" is yours. Stop trolling and it will disappear.


When will you deal with your false claim, "You brought up "slave chasing", what does that have to do with free speech?"?


When will you deal with the hundreds of false claims that you have made?


"The only thing man learns from history is man learns nothing from history"
Conversationalist
Posts: 7
Registered: ‎11-16-2017

Re: Free Speech

Message 18 of 241 (90 Views)

ChasKy53 wrote:

rk9152 wrote:

 



It seems impossible to get an answer from MIseker, so I'll ask the writers of the above - Cassandra Santiago and Tina Burnside, what are your thoughts on "What do we want, dead cop..."? is that hates speech so not covered by free speech? And how about those Klan hoods vs masks and bandannas?


Why do you go to such great lengths and use never ending examples in trying to defend a white supremacist hate group such as the KKK?


Maybe its because the poster who made that post is a white supremacist who probably doesn't belong in this AARP Community.

Valued Social Butterfly
Posts: 3,579
Registered: ‎12-17-2010

Re: Free Speech

Message 19 of 241 (91 Views)

rk9152 wrote:

No bunk here, the KKK had a permit and those protesting the KKK had a permit also.

No one had a permit to attack anyone.


 


And you have spent weeks defending those who attacked because they had a permit.

Valued Social Butterfly
Posts: 3,579
Registered: ‎12-17-2010

Re: Free Speech

Message 20 of 241 (89 Views)

rk9152 wrote:

Olderscout66 wrote:

MIseker wrote:

rk9152 wrote:

Olderscout66 wrote:

SCOTUS long ago established that not all speech is protected. "Fighting words", words that can reasonably be expected to provoke a violent responce, have NO protction under the 1st Amendment or any other part of the Constitution. People who have made a career spewing "fighting words" in PRIVATE venues can and should be barred from doing the same thing in a public one, especially a public school.


That is true, the courts have made such rulings - and that is where such decisions blame. Not in the hands of the masked, armed street mobs or the "that hurts my feelings" mindset. If it hurts your feelings, don't listen.


sounds like you would have been a royalist during the Revolution and soon woud have had to move to Canada. WOuldnt have been able to stand that mob action. 


A "mob" is a group bent on violating the law. Once a Constitutional issue has been decided, it is the right of all Americans to make use of the decision, in this case to prevent "fighting words" from disrupting their lives.

 

The anti-fascists were simply acting to protect their RIGHT to be free from the violence that flows from the altRight and KKK hate speech and their history of formenting violent confrontation.

 

the RWers here confuse "group of concerned citizens" lawfully acting to prevent fascists from inciting violence and the mob of facists that caused and committed the violence.


An honest look at the situation would show that the antifa were the ones that allowed for the violence. Had the weekend dress-up dudes been ignored, there would have been no violence.

 

The subject is not "history" it is the events of that day.


True, if the counter-protesters had not been there the poor 'weekend dress-up dudes' wouldn't have had anyone to assault. But as smart as many of them appear to be they would have had to resort to assaulting each other.

 

Gee, if the 'weekend dress-up dudes' had not been trying to force Charlottesville to keep statues that the people of Charlottesville wished to remove they would not have had to assault anyone.