protectionist
Diamond Member
- Oct 20, 2013
- 58,623
- 19,343
- 2,250
The protests against Donald Trump of the last 2 days have shown a lack of preparedness on the part of police regarding crowd control. No protester should ever be able to smash the windows of a police car. They should not be able to throw eggs or anything else at police or anyone else. They should not be allowed to get close enough to attack Donald Trump (or any candidate) , to his supporters.
When George Bush came to Tampa a few years ago, protesters weren't able to get with 3 blocks of the building Bush was driven to. They were hustled off to a "free speech zone" 3 blocks away, and held their protest there. Some people complained that it was a violation of free speech. I differ with that. Not all speech is free. Freedom of speech is one of the parts of the Constitution that is riddled with exceptions >> slander, libel, perjury, sedition, obscenity laws, child pornography, threats, fighting words, inciting a riot, etc.
In the case of the anti-Trump protesters, they have more than shown their hand enough for there to be preventive measures taken. There should be no anti-Trump protesting in the vicinity of the building (including parking lots) where Trump is scheduled to appear. Simple as that. Anyone protesting with the perimeter area should be subject to arrest.
I'm wondering if the leniency of the police we're seeing in some of these cities (Chicago, Costa Mesa, Burlingame, etc) are a result of deliberate semi-stand down policies of liberal mayors. Maybe we need a national ruling on this. Well, if we have to go to Obama for that, I guess we can forget that idea.
Might be interesting to research if there already are laws of that sort in California, Indiana, and other states.
When George Bush came to Tampa a few years ago, protesters weren't able to get with 3 blocks of the building Bush was driven to. They were hustled off to a "free speech zone" 3 blocks away, and held their protest there. Some people complained that it was a violation of free speech. I differ with that. Not all speech is free. Freedom of speech is one of the parts of the Constitution that is riddled with exceptions >> slander, libel, perjury, sedition, obscenity laws, child pornography, threats, fighting words, inciting a riot, etc.
In the case of the anti-Trump protesters, they have more than shown their hand enough for there to be preventive measures taken. There should be no anti-Trump protesting in the vicinity of the building (including parking lots) where Trump is scheduled to appear. Simple as that. Anyone protesting with the perimeter area should be subject to arrest.
I'm wondering if the leniency of the police we're seeing in some of these cities (Chicago, Costa Mesa, Burlingame, etc) are a result of deliberate semi-stand down policies of liberal mayors. Maybe we need a national ruling on this. Well, if we have to go to Obama for that, I guess we can forget that idea.
Might be interesting to research if there already are laws of that sort in California, Indiana, and other states.