Kalbear

US Politics: Locked, Loaded, Fired Up and Capitalized

416 posts in this topic

1 minute ago, Ghjhero said:

According to CNN the driver has been apprehended. Details beyond that have yet to be revealed. 

Just saw something similar. Thanks for the update.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Dr. Pepper said:

All of your posts have explicitly not included nazis and the kkk.  You've stated over and over that nazis and the kkk should be protected despite the fact that they cause intense emotional harm to significant portions of the population, though you seem to think that emotional harm shouldn't occur....I guess only if it's the WBC.  

 

Again, please note the bolded in the previous post:  "when they have a reasonable expectation of privacy."  I used the Westboro case as an example because it is an actual matter that illustrated the argument I was making, not because it doesn't have to do with nazis or the kkk.  The insinuation I'm trying protect the nazis or the kkk is ludicrous, I was addressing when I think protection from speech is warranted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This appears to be the video of the car that caused that all the injuries. Warning: It's graphic. Note the windows.

Completely tinted windows. I don't think this was any kind of accident.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

8 minutes ago, dmc515 said:

Again, please note the bolded in the previous post:  "when they have a reasonable expectation of privacy."  I used the Westboro case as an example because it is an actual matter that illustrated the argument I was making, not because it doesn't have to do with nazis or the kkk.  The insinuation I'm trying protect the nazis or the kkk is ludicrous, I was addressing when I think protection from speech is warranted.

Your point is perfectly clear, and has been clear across multiple posts in this thread (and others, for that matter).  "Don't protest on a public space if I'm at a funeral because that might make me cry, but definitely protest in a public space and demand my death because that's ok and we ought to protect that because some yahoo called genocide nothing more than an ideology that should be given equal treatment to everything else."

Positions like this are horrific and dangerous.  Those who hold these positions are the ones who allow the worst sorts of atrocities to occur because they are married to the idea that law and reason will win out, even while there are nazis in the white house and the white supremacist president making tweets that we ought to 'unite' with the fucktards demanding our extermination.  We've seen all this before. 

Edited by Dr. Pepper

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Trebla said:

This appears to be the video of the car that caused that all the injuries. Warning: It's graphic. Note the windows.

Completely tinted windows. I don't think this was any kind of accident.

The video from the other end of the street is absolute. The car sped up the closer it got to the crowd of people. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

Terrorist organizations do not have a specific right for peaceable assembly. 

Is this a normative claim?  To my knowledge the only terrorist-related exception to the Brandenburg test is Holder v. Humanitarian Law Project (2010), which dealt with giving material support to a foreign terrorist organization.  Are there others?  This is an honest inquiry, not trying to start an argument.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, S John said:

I disagree.  I realize this is a time of great stress where, almost unbelievably, ideologies that we'd left for dead seem to be gaining traction.  But it is our responsibility  to counter those arguments and to remind people that we've been down this road before.  Read your first sentence again and think about Islam and Sharia Law and you could find an extraordinarily similar tirade on any alt right sounding board.  I do not believe that the answer to unsavory ideologies is to shut them down, because that sets a precident that could easily be used against you before you know it.  The answer is to step up your game and rhetorically expose the weaknesses of the ideology and we certainly still have the advantage.  You're never going to convince everyone, but that is the price of a truly free society.

I agree. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 Is it too early to start drinking? Fuck me. This country is so screwed right now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 Looks like they slapped the Magic Bracelets on Richard Spencer...

/A drop of good news in a sea of shit I spose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, kairparavel said:

The video from the other end of the street is absolute. The car sped up the closer it got to the crowd of people. 

Yep, just found it. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said:

 Looks like they slapped the Magic Bracelets on Richard Spencer...

/A drop of good news in a sea of shit I spose.

That's pretty much the only arrest so far, isn't it?  Not sure how that's good news.

Again, this is a klan and nazi rally. This is a rally to exterminate people, not a rally to demand not to be murdered.  NAZIs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, dmc515 said:

Is this a normative claim?  To my knowledge the only terrorist-related exception to the Brandenburg test is Holder v. Humanitarian Law Project (2010), which dealt with giving material support to a foreign terrorist organization.  Are there others?  This is an honest inquiry, not trying to start an argument.

It's a normative claim, not a legal one. Though to my knowledge, groups that are known to be illegal do not have a right to peaceable assembly and can, in fact, be arrested; this happened several times with the weather underground in the 60s and 70s, as an example. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Dr. Pepper said:

Your point is perfectly clear, and has been clear across multiple posts in this thread (and others, for that matter).  "Don't protest on a public space if I'm at a funeral because that might make me cry, but definitely protest in a public space and demand my death because that's ok and we ought to protect that because some yahoo called genocide nothing more than an ideology that should be given equal treatment to everything else."

Well, then I don't get why you think I talked myself into a circle if you understand my argument was a funeral grants individuals a reasonable expectation of privacy.  No point in discussing the rest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is only somewhat related but my 5th grader came home with civil war homework on Friday.  He had a reading handout and had to ask several people two important things they knew about the civil war.  Of course I discussed slavery.  Other people he asked (including his parents) focused on state's rights and northern aggression.  The handout did as well.  Not a single mention of slavery.

Just to give an idea about how casual white supremacy is nurtured from a young age and how huge roving bands of nazis can come to be driving cars into crowds and how complacency from the so-called leftists help facilitate it.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

It's a normative claim, not a legal one. Though to my knowledge, groups that are known to be illegal do not have a right to peaceable assembly and can, in fact, be arrested; this happened several times with the weather underground in the 60s and 70s, as an example. 

Yep, that's my understanding as well - was just about to mention the weather underground myself - thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

I agree. 

Of course you do - because you believe that the police will correctly protect society and should be seen as unbiased. You also believe that Robert E. Lee was a hero and that his statue shouldn't be torn down. 

And when it is demonstrated that this isn't the case, you wring your hands and say that it's really bad that's not the case, but what else can you do?

Well, when the rule of law protects one side but not the other and is unfairly used and does not represent justice, the obvious next step is to reject the absolute rule of law for the sake of justice. If police will not defend people from white supremacist terrorists, there is little choice but to take matters into your own hands. If you don't want that to happen, start being a lot harder on the police and the government that is not doing enough to protect our citizens from white supremacist terrorism. 

Note that all of TWO DAYS AGO Sebastian Gorka went on national TV and said people shouldn't focus so much on white supremacy as an issue. The DHS recently chose to cut money to rehabilitate white supremacists, and delisted white supremacist organizations as terror organizations. The difference between the radical ideology of one group like ISIS and these guys is that white supremacists have been singled out as explicitly not a terrorist organization and are being supported by our government implicitly.

When it is the government that is supporting radical ideology, do you think mocking is the right course of action?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also note that an unlawful assembly is simply 3 or more people who intend to conspire to disturb the peace or cause violence. Based on this, one can easily make the claim that regardless of one's free speech laws, 3 or more people with a history of causing violence are intending to do this and should not be given the right to peacefully assemble, as they are by virtual definition an unlawful assembly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One person is now dead post-car ram. And do not forget the politicians around the country introducing bills to make this sort of thing ok. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Donny immediately condemning "many sides", of course the piece of garbage won't risk offending his base which falls on one side in particular.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.