![]() |
Um why did you post an accompanying article which undermines your own argument?
'Supreme Court reaffirms there is no hate speech exception to first amendment.'
Did you read the article? They unanimously voted that it is unconstitutional to prevent the registering of a trademark entitled 'The Slants' despite any supposed offence towards Asian-Americans.
Justice Alito:
[The idea that the government may restrict] speech expressing ideas that offend … strikes at the heart of the First Amendment. Speech that demeans on the basis of race, ethnicity, gender, religion, age, disability, or any other similar ground is hateful; but the proudest boast of our free speech jurisprudence is that we protect the freedom to express “the thought that we hate.”
Last edited by Munificent_Fool; 16-08-2017 at 05:45 PM.
Nazi's v Juggalo's. what a time to be alive.
https://twitter.com/jesticide/status/897941541221670912
Unbelievable. It's like, actually I dunno what it's like, I have no words.
WWCC - Loyaulte Mi Lie
“The modern conservative is engaged in one of man’s oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness." - JK Galbraith
"Do you know why I have credibility? Because I don't exude morality." - Bob Hawke
#408. Sixty three not out forever.
Meanwhile, this transcript of the jury selection in the Martin Shkreli securities fraud trial is pretty amazing.
https://harpers.org/archive/2017/09/public-enemy/
I agree that the US's unique gun culture needs to be taken into account. It's not my personal preference, but I've seen comments from or talked to plenty of reasonable US people who own guns, like guns, consider themselves responsible gun owners and probably are.
I think there are a few extra things that are affecting the equation here though:
- when these groups see that they have tacit support from those in the white house. '**** went down', someone else may well be blamed.
- when these groups probably know that they have sympathies from some in the police in some places. Though fortunately the Charlottesville police seem fairly level-headed, based on the comments I've read.
- I think 'noone got shot by anyone who was armed because then they'd get smashed by the government response' gives too much credit to human nature being able to make rational self-preservation decisions (if that is indeed the aim) in moments of confusion and mayhem. Or even that there are more immediate self-preservations decisions - if there are heavily armed groups standing off against one another surely all it takes is one gunshot and it's all on, with lots of unarmed people likely caught up.
- You're still going to think twice or three times about being a peaceful opposition protester facing such heavily armed groups. Someone ****s up, you might get killed. Scant consolation if they're then arrested or shot by police.
Ha
Good luck with getting an impartial jury on that one
In genuinely and totally unrelated news: https://t.co/aKB0b2yk8P
what the fuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu-After searching her car, police claimed to have found .02 ounces of marijuana. That was enough, they apparently felt, to justify a full-body cavity search. When Corley refused to remove her clothes in the dimly lit parking lot where she was being detained, one of the officers threw her to the ground, pushed her partially underneath her own car, and yanked Corley's pants down to her ankles. For the next 11 minutes, dash cam video of the incident shows, she was held down by two officers while being searched. Corley claims that fingers repeatedly probed her ****** and that the officers ignored her protests. A third officer stood nearby holding a flashlight. No drugs were found on Corley's person.
citoyens, vouliez-vous une révolution sans révolution?
All three of them should be dismissed and imprisoned. The two who conducted the search should be charged with sexual assault.
That is beyond reprehensible.
Sure, if both sides turned up armed. I'm not trying to give them credit for being angels, there are mutual interests.
I'm not excusing any of the extremists or their behavior. Just saying, considering the legal and cultural factors, the Police couldn't just come in and stomp on legal activity, no matter how jerkish the behavior. To arrest, one needs arrestable offenses occurring and when that **** started, people got pinched. There's even some footage of one of the subjects of the Vice doco having a tear-jerked whinge on YT about how he's got a warrant now. A worse outcome would be if the police response was seen as instigating anything, though. That's dangerous for everyone.
Again, though, whilst this is true and absolutely why the gun nuts turned up with, well, lots of guns, it's outside my point that standing in public with a group of dudes armed to the balls is protected behaviour. I'd guess a lot of the police are quite sympathetic to their side too. That's why there should be (and probably is) communication and enforcement of cultural norms between these groups and police. I don't know about VA but for sure it does happen elsewhere and, even in Oz, gun clubs tends to have a decent relationship with police. There are vested interests in the norm not being massacres because the law doesn't protect 100% of the people 100% of the time. As I've said before, the role of the police absolutely must be seen as of and from the community, not above and in control of it.
EDIT: Here we go. Won't someone please think of the poor Nazis.
http://uproxx.com/news/white-suprema...cries-warrant/
In this video you can hear him talk about the relationship they have with local law and yet he's still playing the victim. Imagine if they thought the police were the enemy.
Last edited by Top_Cat; 17-08-2017 at 01:32 AM.
Juror no. 59's got the right idea.
~ Do you think I care for you so little that betraying me would make a difference ~
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)