View Poll Results: Should protesters be allowed to curb free speech in this country?

Voters
57. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes. Protests are protected by the Constitution.

    36 63.16%
  • No. If protesters stop free speech, they should be removed by police.

    20 35.09%
  • If fake protesters & their masters should be prosecuted.

    12 21.05%
Multiple Choice Poll.
Page 35 of 43 FirstFirst ... 253334353637 ... LastLast
Results 341 to 350 of 425

Thread: Should Orchestrated (fake) Protests Be Allowed To Hinder Free Speech?

  1. #341
    Sage
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    08-27-09 @ 08:41 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    6,344

    Re: Should Orchestrated (fake) Protests Be Allowed To Hinder Free Speech?

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    Nah, you might get parole some day....

    (I had to pick between groceries or internet last month, groceries won. On the plus side, my work called this week to make sure I was still available for work, so hopefully they are looking to call people back soon)
    Oh please, you know you needed to go on a diet anyway!

    (fingers crossed you get the call though! )

  2. #342
    Sage

    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Goldsboro,PA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 03:13 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    5,595
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Should Orchestrated (fake) Protests Be Allowed To Hinder Free Speech?

    Legislaters must learn to write enforceable laws.
    In the process they must work with others (the criminal justice system)..to this end...
    And, some news, the old ways do not always work.

  3. #343
    Sporadic insanity normal.


    The Mark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 01:46 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    19,736

    Re: Should Orchestrated (fake) Protests Be Allowed To Hinder Free Speech?

    Quote Originally Posted by Devil505 View Post
    Just as Congress made many previously (State jurisdiction) crimes like Murder (of a President or murder as a Hate Crime") federal offenses, I see no reason why crossing state borders with the intention of interfering with someone's First Amendment rights couldn't also be made a federal crime.
    I'm not asking you to agree with me, but simply answering your question.
    So, to be clear:

    You, Devil505, see no reason why a federal law cannot be put in place to punish persons who cross state borders with the intention of interfering with some other person's first amendment rights.

    A few questions:

    Why the "crossing state borders" stipulation?

    What do you consider "interfering with someones first amendment rights"?

    What, specifically, do you refer to when you say "first amendment rights"?

    A reference to assist you: The United States Constitution - First Amendment
    Education.

    Sometimes I think we're alone. Sometimes I think we're not. In either case, the thought is staggering. ~ R. Buckminster Fuller

  4. #344
    Professor
    Shadow Serious's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Oklahoma
    Last Seen
    07-18-14 @ 07:06 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    1,460

    Re: Should Orchestrated (fake) Protests Be Allowed To Hinder Free Speech?

    Quote Originally Posted by Devil505 View Post
    What "peaceably" means will always be open to subjective interpretation. What one cop may consider peaceable another may deem a crime. (it's up to the courts & a jury of your peers to sort it all out) Do you not accept that fact of life?
    What "peaceably" means in context of the 1st Amendment is the original intent, that is, not a rioting mob or insurrection, but Citizens who gather together and protest discontent. I do not see how you keep going on about being too loud. These are public meetings not a NPR studio.

  5. #345
    Professor
    Shadow Serious's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Oklahoma
    Last Seen
    07-18-14 @ 07:06 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    1,460

    Re: Should Orchestrated (fake) Protests Be Allowed To Hinder Free Speech?

    Quote Originally Posted by Devil505 View Post
    From page 17

    Moderator's Warning:
    Going to say this once, to both sides.

    This thread is not talking about any specific event. Its the only reason its here, rather than conspiracy theories. If the continued attempts to either steer it towards a singular event, by either side, then action will be taken with the poster, the thread, or both.



    I hope the mods will carry through on the above warning by dealing with the violating poster & not the thread itself. Many of us, on both side are trying to keep this thread generic & an intelligent discussion on protests rights/tactics in general. It would be a shame to allow one side to shut down this discussion, which I fear may be the ultimate goal of some.

    I was just citing examples of people who are being organized and are suppressing the freedoms of speech of others and it follows under your 1st post so it is allowed. Notice i do not subscribe that it is a Conspiracy since that would require more secrecy than has been shown. I also do not believe the suppressors are being paid to do so in this case so no money changes hands. Saying they would get some perks in exchange would be Conspiratorial i really those "Thugs" are there for their own beliefs and need no further encouragement. Just like the people who attend and are beaten upon.

  6. #346
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Masschusetts
    Last Seen
    03-01-14 @ 10:44 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    3,512

    Re: Should Orchestrated (fake) Protests Be Allowed To Hinder Free Speech?

    Quote Originally Posted by The Mark View Post
    So, to be clear:

    You, Devil505, see no reason why a federal law cannot be put in place to punish persons who cross state borders with the intention of interfering with some other person's first amendment rights.

    A few questions:

    Why the "crossing state borders" stipulation?
    Typically, (unless the crime takes place on federal property) in order for a crime to be under federal jurisdiction, it must be believed that the crime is not just a local one, but that it has national characteristics/implications that may warrant a federal agency (typically FBI) to get involved with the case. (example: kidnapping is only an FBI jurisdiction case after a certain time period passes, under the assumption the the kidnapper probably brought the victim across state lines.

    Quote Originally Posted by The Mark View Post
    What do you consider "interfering with someones first amendment rights"?
    That's what the law would have to be carefully drawn up to enumerate.


    Quote Originally Posted by The Mark View Post
    What, specifically, do you refer to when you say "first amendment rights"?
    I'm referring to freedom of speech & peaceable assembly, but I'm not an AUSA so there may be other rights that fall under the First Amendment that allude me right now.
    Last edited by Devil505; 08-08-09 at 06:03 PM.

  7. #347
    Sage
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    08-27-09 @ 08:41 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    6,344

    Re: Should Orchestrated (fake) Protests Be Allowed To Hinder Free Speech?

    Quote Originally Posted by Devil505 View Post
    so there may be other rights that fall under the Foirst Amendment.
    I think he's referring to the New Joisey Bill of Rights!

  8. #348
    Professor
    Shadow Serious's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Oklahoma
    Last Seen
    07-18-14 @ 07:06 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    1,460

    Re: Should Orchestrated (fake) Protests Be Allowed To Hinder Free Speech?

    Quote Originally Posted by Devil505 View Post
    I can't argue with you there either.

    BUT

    If one side hires thugs to get in the face of others they should not run home to mommy crying when thugs from the other side give them a bloody nose.

    Please show where the protesters against the Universal Health Care Proposal are engaging in assault and battery. I do not consider speaking loudly to be Assault and do not give me any business about disturbing the peace or drowning out other peoples speech.

  9. #349
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Masschusetts
    Last Seen
    03-01-14 @ 10:44 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    3,512

    Re: Should Orchestrated (fake) Protests Be Allowed To Hinder Free Speech?

    Quote Originally Posted by Shadow Serious View Post
    Please show where the protesters against the Universal Health Care Proposal are engaging in assault and battery. I do not consider speaking loudly to be Assault and do not give me any business about disturbing the peace or drowning out other peoples speech.

    Off Topic (seepage 17...Mod warning)

  10. #350
    Sporadic insanity normal.


    The Mark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 01:46 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    19,736

    Re: Should Orchestrated (fake) Protests Be Allowed To Hinder Free Speech?

    Quote Originally Posted by Devil505 View Post
    Typically, (unless the crime takes place on federal property) in order for a crime to be under federal jurisdiction, it must be believed that the crime is not just a local one, but that it has national characteristics/implications that may warrant a federal agency (typically FBI) to get involved with the case. (example: kidnapping is only an FBI jurisdiction case after a certain time period passes, under the assumption the kidnapper probably brought the victim across state lines.
    That makes sense then. But what if someone traveled from one side of the state to the other side of the state? For example, from one election district to another, with intentions to "infringe on the free speech rights of others" in that other district? Would this not also be a problem in your eyes? If so, would you not wish a state law to be put in place to the same effect as your proposed federal law?

    Quote Originally Posted by Devil505 View Post
    That's what the law would have to be carefully drawn up to enumerate.
    And therein lies the issue most take with your proposal.
    There is far too much possibility for misuse, misinterpretation, addition, amendment, etc. in such a law, which, IMO, is why the constitution doesn't try, but simply allows all.

    I simply do not trust anyone except myself to regulate how I can speak.

    Further, I consider it to be a violation of my free speech rights to regulate how loudly I can say something (which, as I understand it, is one of your issues with some speech). There are currently in place some restrictions on what you can say, such as not inciting violence with your words, and the like. Such restrictions make sense, to some extent.

    Quote Originally Posted by Devil505 View Post
    I'm referring to freedom of speech & peaceable assembly, but I'm not an AUSA so there may be other rights that fall under the First Amendment that allude me right now.
    That's what I assumed you were referring to, but I wanted to be sure.

    What's an "AUSA"?
    Education.

    Sometimes I think we're alone. Sometimes I think we're not. In either case, the thought is staggering. ~ R. Buckminster Fuller

Page 35 of 43 FirstFirst ... 253334353637 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •