Reply With Quote
who said it was? it's not fair to hold permit holders responsible for violence unaffiliated people commit.
The 1st Amendment isn't absolute.
who said it was? it's not fair to hold permit holders responsible for violence unaffiliated people commit.
People get in where they fit in. There's no requirement that people agitate for all rights equally, or all at once. There isn't even an inconsistency there.
People pick and choose what's important to them. Just because I didn't ride your particular hobby horse doesn't mean I think the 2nd Amendment is inconsequential, nor does it render my advocacy of the 1st moot.
Your desire to see the left suffer doesn't trump anything -- it's pure petulance at best, pure sadism at worst.
I'll go one further: such a statute induces people who disagree with parade permit holders to commit violence, knowing the organizers will be held legally responsible for it.
expanding racketeering law to include properly permitted political expression in the total absence of evidence of coordination between civil society and violent criminals tortures the law and chills protected speech.
civil authorities already have the power to protect public order and detain violent criminals. the law is unnecessary and admit it: it's crafted to deter protests.
when electoral majorities change, it can be used to preempt your political speech, or those of a like mind. are you cool with that DMC?
Which privilege is more integral to a free, equitable political process, free speech, or the right to bear arms?
"The First Amendment isn't absolute" therefore I'm cool with any degree of infringement. Don't touch muh 2nd Amendment tho.
- DMC
I'm still interested to hear how DMC thinks the 2nd Amendment has been unreasonably infringed. Apart from depriving mentally unstable people, no bill of particulars has been offered.
er made the 2nd Amendment an individualized right for the first time ever in what, 2008? Seems to me he has the trend wrong.
Ok then, no need for me to advocate for all rights equally or at once. Carry on.
You do realize the quotes indicate what I actually said, right?
Let one nutjob shoot up a school and every leftist on here is calling for a ban on guns, for everyone, even permit holders.
Do you have a permit to protest?
Have any of these come to pass?
You're ing about that didn't happen. I'm ing about something that is.
Can you discern the difference?
How has the 2nd Amendment been infringed?
That's beside the point. The left perhaps isn't as politically powerful as the right, so they cannot infringe as much as they'd like. I don't advocate for infringement of any rights, but the left sure as does. Deal with your own house first. Don't expect the right to not giggle at you for being freaked out about a proposed amendment violation, assuming there was one. We've dealt with it for decades.
It's a proposal.
There have been countless proposals to ban guns in some form or another, but when the right es about that it'smuh guns
It's not beside the point. Actual infringement of the BoR counts for more than merely intended, and failed, attempts to do so.
Can you not tell the difference between proposed and actual infringements of liberty?
To hold them equal is absurd.
you never weighed in as to whether free speech or gun ownership is more central to normal political process. do you have an opinion about this, DMC?
is one more integral than the other?
at this hyperbolic asshole. I think the extent of the proposed legislation after sandy hook was universal background checks and closing the gun show loophole. I'd hardly call that a ban on guns.
"people were talking about"
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions