Two people that do not understand free speech

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by Quantum Windbag, Sep 27, 2012.

  1. Quantum Windbag
    Offline

    Quantum Windbag Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2010
    Messages:
    58,308
    Thanks Received:
    5,016
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +5,225
  2. theDoctorisIn
    Offline

    theDoctorisIn Senior Mod Staff Member Senior USMB Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2009
    Messages:
    31,013
    Thanks Received:
    6,025
    Trophy Points:
    1,140
    Location:
    East, but still West
    Ratings:
    +12,848
    What the fuck does "free speech" have to do with this?
     
  3. C_Clayton_Jones
    Offline

    C_Clayton_Jones Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2011
    Messages:
    41,610
    Thanks Received:
    8,973
    Trophy Points:
    2,030
    Location:
    In a Republic, actually
    Ratings:
    +24,074
    Nothing.

    Most conservatives are either ignorant of the fact that the First Amendment applies only to law-making entities and not private organizations or individuals, or aware of this they nonetheless attempt to create the illusion of some sort of ‘free speech violation.’
     
  4. Quantum Windbag
    Offline

    Quantum Windbag Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2010
    Messages:
    58,308
    Thanks Received:
    5,016
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +5,225
    If I have to explain why they were both wrong I am pretty sure it won't help.
     
  5. Quantum Windbag
    Offline

    Quantum Windbag Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2010
    Messages:
    58,308
    Thanks Received:
    5,016
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +5,225
    Is it legal to deface private property because you do not like the speech that the property displays?
     
  6. Polk
    Offline

    Polk Classic

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2009
    Messages:
    9,791
    Thanks Received:
    574
    Trophy Points:
    138
    Location:
    Ost
    Ratings:
    +583
    Forever and ever, amen.
     
  7. Polk
    Offline

    Polk Classic

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2009
    Messages:
    9,791
    Thanks Received:
    574
    Trophy Points:
    138
    Location:
    Ost
    Ratings:
    +583
    Although, I am annoyed by the fact that the spraypainting woman got arrested, but the camerawomen that assaulted her did not.
     
  8. peach174
    Offline

    peach174 Gold Member Gold Supporting Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2010
    Messages:
    21,466
    Thanks Received:
    4,481
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Location:
    S.E. AZ
    Ratings:
    +8,550
    It is against the law to deface a sign.
    She can just as easily get her own sign to put up.
    Why would she be supporting a group violent people, who wants to kill all Jews and Christian's and anyone who will not conform to Islam?
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  9. peach174
    Offline

    peach174 Gold Member Gold Supporting Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2010
    Messages:
    21,466
    Thanks Received:
    4,481
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Location:
    S.E. AZ
    Ratings:
    +8,550
    Keeping the other woman away from her with the end of her camera pole is not assault.
    Neither woman committed an assault.
    The one who got arrested was breaking the law of defacing a sign.
     
  10. Polk
    Offline

    Polk Classic

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2009
    Messages:
    9,791
    Thanks Received:
    574
    Trophy Points:
    138
    Location:
    Ost
    Ratings:
    +583
    Except that the other woman didn't touch her, so yeah, jabbing her with the camera pole is assault. As was when she shoved her.
     

Share This Page