"the right of the people peaceably to assemble"

[Richard-H]

The first amendment of the U.S. Constitution guarantees:

"the right of the people peaceably to assemble"

When watching the videos of yesterday's protest and counter protest, a large number of the people at the protest were armed - many had helmets and shields as well as various weapons ranging from clubs to pepper spray to guns.

It's apparent that these people were at best anticipating violence, and may have intended to incite violence.
The Constitution does NOT have a right to violent protest. It does note cite a right to gather as an armed mob.

The violence at yesterdays protest would probably have been a whole lot less if no one on either side had weapons of any type, and if they did not any protective gear.

Even wearing protective gear shows that they are anticipating violence. Anyone who foes to a protest while anticipating violence has no right to go to that protest.

It seems that protest groups go far beyond their Constitutional right - if they intend to incite violence or even anticipate violence, they are no longer within their Constitutional rights.

In the future, if anyone shows up at a protest or counter protest with weapons or protective gear, they should immediately be arrested. If a sizable number have weapons or protective gear, the police should use whatever means necessary to end the protest!

 

[mudwhistle]

The first amendment of the U.S. Constitution guarantees:

"the right of the people peaceably to assemble"

When watching the videos of yesterday's protest and counter protest, a large number of the people at the protest were armed - many had helmets and shields as well as various weapons ranging from clubs to pepper spray to guns.

It's apparent that these people were at best anticipating violence, and may have intended to incite violence.
The Constitution does NOT have a right to violent protest. It does note cite a right to gather as an armed mob.

The violence at yesterdays protest would probably have been a whole lot less if no one on either side had weapons of any type, and if they did not any protective gear.

Even wearing protective gear shows that they are anticipating violence. Anyone who foes to a protest while anticipating violence has no right to go to that protest.

It seems that protest groups go far beyond their Constitutional right - if they intend to incite violence or even anticipate violence, they are no longer within their Constitutional rights.

In the future, if anyone shows up at a protest or counter protest with weapons or protective gear, they should immediately be arrested. If a sizable number have weapons or protective gear, the police should use whatever means necessary to end the protest!

Now point out how many people were shot yesterday. Mkay?

Apparently wherever there were weapons on display the Antifa assholes decided not to attack anyone.

 

[rightwinger]

Clubs? no
Protective gear does not provoke an attack

 

[2aguy]

The first amendment of the U.S. Constitution guarantees:

"the right of the people peaceably to assemble"

When watching the videos of yesterday's protest and counter protest, a large number of the people at the protest were armed - many had helmets and shields as well as various weapons ranging from clubs to pepper spray to guns.

It's apparent that these people were at best anticipating violence, and may have intended to incite violence.
The Constitution does NOT have a right to violent protest. It does note cite a right to gather as an armed mob.

The violence at yesterdays protest would probably have been a whole lot less if no one on either side had weapons of any type, and if they did not any protective gear.

Even wearing protective gear shows that they are anticipating violence. Anyone who foes to a protest while anticipating violence has no right to go to that protest.

It seems that protest groups go far beyond their Constitutional right - if they intend to incite violence or even anticipate violence, they are no longer within their Constitutional rights.

In the future, if anyone shows up at a protest or counter protest with weapons or protective gear, they should immediately be arrested. If a sizable number have weapons or protective gear, the police should use whatever means necessary to end the protest!

Sorry......the blame for that goes to antifa, the left wing democrat thugs. They have shown over and over that they are willing to attack and beat anyone they disagree with. It is no surprise that this caused the other fascists, the so called White Nationals to come prepared to defend themselves.....

During the election it was revealed that the Democrat National Committee paid two men, bob craemer, and scot foval, to organize people to go to Trump rallies to incite violence, they took credit for closing down Trump's rally here in Chicago, and for shutting down the highway at the other rally.....they did this with directions from the DNC director of special events, who recieved his marching orders straight from the hilary campaign....these two men also visted the White House a number of times and bob craemer is married to jan shakowski, a long time Illinois democrat politician.

This is not alleged, it is admitted to on video...




Bob craamer and scot foval left their jobs when that video came out.

You also have the various riots, beatings and attacks by antifa at Trump events, and at various colleges where Conservative speakers were giving speeches.....Berkely, U.C. Irvine.....they beat people, they sprayed people with pepper spray, they destroyed property, attacked police......

So to put this in equal measure on the white national fascists is not true or accurate, the democrat antifa fascists have demonstrated that they are violent and hateful and willing to attack peaceful people attending rallies....

 

[miketx]

The first amendment of the U.S. Constitution guarantees:

"the right of the people peaceably to assemble"

When watching the videos of yesterday's protest and counter protest, a large number of the people at the protest were armed - many had helmets and shields as well as various weapons ranging from clubs to pepper spray to guns.

It's apparent that these people were at best anticipating violence, and may have intended to incite violence.
The Constitution does NOT have a right to violent protest. It does note cite a right to gather as an armed mob.

The violence at yesterdays protest would probably have been a whole lot less if no one on either side had weapons of any type, and if they did not any protective gear.

Even wearing protective gear shows that they are anticipating violence. Anyone who foes to a protest while anticipating violence has no right to go to that protest.

It seems that protest groups go far beyond their Constitutional right - if they intend to incite violence or even anticipate violence, they are no longer within their Constitutional rights.

In the future, if anyone shows up at a protest or counter protest with weapons or protective gear, they should immediately be arrested. If a sizable number have weapons or protective gear, the police should use whatever means necessary to end the protest!

Nonsense. They were armed to protect themselves form proven, PROVEN, murderous liberals. Rightly so. It's not safe to go around them!, and that's a PROVEN fact! So answer the question, HOW MANY WERE SHOT?

 

[Si modo]

The "blame" for this clusterfuck goes to anyone who participated in physical violence. Doesn't matter, to me, at least, who started what.. Each and every person there had a choice to respond with violence or not...except the victims...that choice was robbed from them.

 

[miketx]

The "blame" for this clusterfuck goes to anyone who participated in physical violence. Doesn't matter, to me, at least, who started what.. Each and every person there had a choice to respond with violence or not...except the victims...that choice was robbed from them.

I also blame the media for it never ending race baiting by calling them white supremists, nazis, separatists, KKK, etc etc, perpetually and the politicians who shut it down before it began. Notice the pols and media NEVER do this when blacks are rioting looting and burning a city.

 

[Richard-H]

The first amendment of the U.S. Constitution guarantees:

"the right of the people peaceably to assemble"

When watching the videos of yesterday's protest and counter protest, a large number of the people at the protest were armed - many had helmets and shields as well as various weapons ranging from clubs to pepper spray to guns.

It's apparent that these people were at best anticipating violence, and may have intended to incite violence.
The Constitution does NOT have a right to violent protest. It does note cite a right to gather as an armed mob.

The violence at yesterdays protest would probably have been a whole lot less if no one on either side had weapons of any type, and if they did not any protective gear.

Even wearing protective gear shows that they are anticipating violence. Anyone who foes to a protest while anticipating violence has no right to go to that protest.

It seems that protest groups go far beyond their Constitutional right - if they intend to incite violence or even anticipate violence, they are no longer within their Constitutional rights.

In the future, if anyone shows up at a protest or counter protest with weapons or protective gear, they should immediately be arrested. If a sizable number have weapons or protective gear, the police should use whatever means necessary to end the protest!

Now point out how many people were shot yesterday. Mkay?

Apparently wherever there were weapons on display the Antifa assholes decided not to attack anyone.

Regardless of what weapon was used, a person was murdered yesterday. If no one had any weapons or protective gear, there would have been less violence and passions would not have risen to the level that hey did. Most likely no one would have been killed.

 

[miketx]

The first amendment of the U.S. Constitution guarantees:

"the right of the people peaceably to assemble"

When watching the videos of yesterday's protest and counter protest, a large number of the people at the protest were armed - many had helmets and shields as well as various weapons ranging from clubs to pepper spray to guns.

It's apparent that these people were at best anticipating violence, and may have intended to incite violence.
The Constitution does NOT have a right to violent protest. It does note cite a right to gather as an armed mob.

The violence at yesterdays protest would probably have been a whole lot less if no one on either side had weapons of any type, and if they did not any protective gear.

Even wearing protective gear shows that they are anticipating violence. Anyone who foes to a protest while anticipating violence has no right to go to that protest.

It seems that protest groups go far beyond their Constitutional right - if they intend to incite violence or even anticipate violence, they are no longer within their Constitutional rights.

In the future, if anyone shows up at a protest or counter protest with weapons or protective gear, they should immediately be arrested. If a sizable number have weapons or protective gear, the police should use whatever means necessary to end the protest!

Now point out how many people were shot yesterday. Mkay?

Apparently wherever there were weapons on display the Antifa assholes decided not to attack anyone.

Regardless of what weapon was used, a person was murdered yesterday. If no one had any weapons or protective gear, there would have been less violence and passions would not have risen to the level that hey did. Most likely no one would have been killed.

Unfortunately, you are quite wrong. The presence of Americans legally exercising their right to keep and bear arms, kept the violence much lower than it could have been. And you have no idea what actually went on in the driver of that cars head. Authorities are keeping a tight lid on it until they can figure it all out.

 

[Richard-H]

The first amendment of the U.S. Constitution guarantees:

"the right of the people peaceably to assemble"

When watching the videos of yesterday's protest and counter protest, a large number of the people at the protest were armed - many had helmets and shields as well as various weapons ranging from clubs to pepper spray to guns.

It's apparent that these people were at best anticipating violence, and may have intended to incite violence.
The Constitution does NOT have a right to violent protest. It does note cite a right to gather as an armed mob.

The violence at yesterdays protest would probably have been a whole lot less if no one on either side had weapons of any type, and if they did not any protective gear.

Even wearing protective gear shows that they are anticipating violence. Anyone who foes to a protest while anticipating violence has no right to go to that protest.

It seems that protest groups go far beyond their Constitutional right - if they intend to incite violence or even anticipate violence, they are no longer within their Constitutional rights.

In the future, if anyone shows up at a protest or counter protest with weapons or protective gear, they should immediately be arrested. If a sizable number have weapons or protective gear, the police should use whatever means necessary to end the protest!

Now point out how many people were shot yesterday. Mkay?

Apparently wherever there were weapons on display the Antifa assholes decided not to attack anyone.

If no one, White supremacists or anti-fascists had weapons or protective gear, the worse that would happen would be fist fights.

Are you saying that white supremacists are such a bunch of pussies that can't handle a fist fight with a bunch of liberals?

No one has a constitutional right to gather as an armed mob - regardless of which side they're on.

 

[Confounding]

Having a means of defending yourself in a situation that might call for one is just smart. If it wasn't commonplace for protestors to get beat up and shot at by police officers maybe they wouldn't feel a need to defend themselves while using their first amendment rights.

 

[Richard-H]

The first amendment of the U.S. Constitution guarantees:

"the right of the people peaceably to assemble"

When watching the videos of yesterday's protest and counter protest, a large number of the people at the protest were armed - many had helmets and shields as well as various weapons ranging from clubs to pepper spray to guns.

It's apparent that these people were at best anticipating violence, and may have intended to incite violence.
The Constitution does NOT have a right to violent protest. It does note cite a right to gather as an armed mob.

The violence at yesterdays protest would probably have been a whole lot less if no one on either side had weapons of any type, and if they did not any protective gear.

Even wearing protective gear shows that they are anticipating violence. Anyone who foes to a protest while anticipating violence has no right to go to that protest.

It seems that protest groups go far beyond their Constitutional right - if they intend to incite violence or even anticipate violence, they are no longer within their Constitutional rights.

In the future, if anyone shows up at a protest or counter protest with weapons or protective gear, they should immediately be arrested. If a sizable number have weapons or protective gear, the police should use whatever means necessary to end the protest!

Sorry......the blame for that goes to antifa, the left wing democrat thugs. They have shown over and over that they are willing to attack and beat anyone they disagree with. It is no surprise that this caused the other fascists, the so called White Nationals to come prepared to defend themselves.....

During the election it was revealed that the Democrat National Committee paid two men, bob craemer, and scot foval, to organize people to go to Trump rallies to incite violence, they took credit for closing down Trump's rally here in Chicago, and for shutting down the highway at the other rally.....they did this with directions from the DNC director of special events, who recieved his marching orders straight from the hilary campaign....these two men also visted the White House a number of times and bob craemer is married to jan shakowski, a long time Illinois democrat politician.

This is not alleged, it is admitted to on video...




Bob craamer and scot foval left their jobs when that video came out.

You also have the various riots, beatings and attacks by antifa at Trump events, and at various colleges where Conservative speakers were giving speeches.....Berkely, U.C. Irvine.....they beat people, they sprayed people with pepper spray, they destroyed property, attacked police......

So to put this in equal measure on the white national fascists is not true or accurate, the democrat antifa fascists have demonstrated that they are violent and hateful and willing to attack peaceful people attending rallies....

Any prohibition against weapons and protective gear at protest would apply equally to both sides of the protest.

No one has a constitutional right to gather as an armed mob.

 

[BluesLegend]

To peaceably assembly yes, to be a racist stupid shit no.

 

[Richard-H]

Having a means of defending yourself in a situation that might call for one is just smart. If it wasn't commonplace for protestors to get beat up and shot at by police officers maybe they wouldn't feel a need to defend themselves while using their first amendment rights.

What a load of nonsense. Police are NEVER looking for a violent confrontation. They have a responsibility to keep the peace and to protect everyone from violence - including themselves.

If anyone believes that any protest will turn violent, they have no right to protest.

funny how you RWNJs suddenly don't care about the constitution when it's inconvenient.

 

[cnelsen]

Even wearing protective gear shows that they are anticipating violence. Anyone who foes to a protest while anticipating violence has no right to go to that protest.

But what if your right to assemble peaceably is being infringed?

 

[Confounding]

to be a racist stupid shit no.

The first amendment does indeed afford you the right to be a stupid racist prick.

 

[Confounding]

Police are NEVER looking for a violent confrontation.

Coulda fooled me.

funny how you RWNJs

What exactly do you know about my political opinions other than what you just assumed?

 

[Richard-H]

To peaceably assembly yes, to be a racist stupid shit no.

People have a right to peacefully assemble - no matter how repulsive their views.

Any counter protests must be peaceful.

 

[miketx]

The first amendment of the U.S. Constitution guarantees:

"the right of the people peaceably to assemble"

When watching the videos of yesterday's protest and counter protest, a large number of the people at the protest were armed - many had helmets and shields as well as various weapons ranging from clubs to pepper spray to guns.

It's apparent that these people were at best anticipating violence, and may have intended to incite violence.
The Constitution does NOT have a right to violent protest. It does note cite a right to gather as an armed mob.

The violence at yesterdays protest would probably have been a whole lot less if no one on either side had weapons of any type, and if they did not any protective gear.

Even wearing protective gear shows that they are anticipating violence. Anyone who foes to a protest while anticipating violence has no right to go to that protest.

It seems that protest groups go far beyond their Constitutional right - if they intend to incite violence or even anticipate violence, they are no longer within their Constitutional rights.

In the future, if anyone shows up at a protest or counter protest with weapons or protective gear, they should immediately be arrested. If a sizable number have weapons or protective gear, the police should use whatever means necessary to end the protest!

Sorry......the blame for that goes to antifa, the left wing democrat thugs. They have shown over and over that they are willing to attack and beat anyone they disagree with. It is no surprise that this caused the other fascists, the so called White Nationals to come prepared to defend themselves.....

During the election it was revealed that the Democrat National Committee paid two men, bob craemer, and scot foval, to organize people to go to Trump rallies to incite violence, they took credit for closing down Trump's rally here in Chicago, and for shutting down the highway at the other rally.....they did this with directions from the DNC director of special events, who recieved his marching orders straight from the hilary campaign....these two men also visted the White House a number of times and bob craemer is married to jan shakowski, a long time Illinois democrat politician.

This is not alleged, it is admitted to on video...




Bob craamer and scot foval left their jobs when that video came out.

You also have the various riots, beatings and attacks by antifa at Trump events, and at various colleges where Conservative speakers were giving speeches.....Berkely, U.C. Irvine.....they beat people, they sprayed people with pepper spray, they destroyed property, attacked police......

So to put this in equal measure on the white national fascists is not true or accurate, the democrat antifa fascists have demonstrated that they are violent and hateful and willing to attack peaceful people attending rallies....

Any prohibition against weapons and protective gear at protest would apply equally to both sides of the protest.

No one has a constitutional right to gather as an armed mob.

No one did that. what are you blabbering about?

 

[BluesLegend]

to be a racist stupid shit no.

The first amendment does indeed afford you the right to be a stupid racist prick.

No it doesn't.