• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Charlottesville: It's about the 1st Amendment

icehorse

......unaffiliated...... anti-dogmatist
Premium Member
ahh, like Charlottesville... Got ya

Ok, so how is being responsible in law more dangerous than uncontrolled incitement?

- I don’t think there is anyone on this forum advocating that we “play nice” with the asshats.
- A weekend like Charlottesville has many moments. Some of those moments were legal, some were not. Police should nail the asshats the second they do anything illegal. E.g. it surprises me that they weren’t busted immediately for carrying assault rifles?! (My understanding is that open carry of handguns is legal, I didn't think open carry of assault rifles was legal.)
- Anyone involved in policing such a situation OR in counter protesting ought to damn well know - very precisely - the limits of free speech. E.g. I believe that - like it or not - “incitement to future violence” is protected.
- While of course there is no moral equivalency between the groups, the counter-protestors must also obey the law, and they need to be nailed the second they don’t.
 

shmogie

Well-Known Member
You are ignoring history. And, in the situations in question, "avoiding it" is not an option. Many people were unable to escape the protest clashes, and racists were picking out random, non-violent people of color.

And, it has become all to clear that the white nationalist, alt-right, nazi protesters initiated the violence by throwing bottles before the counter-protesters. Once the first neo-nazi threw a bottle, their protest became illegal.
So, your point is what ? You have now moved from words to acts, two different things. As I said, illegal acts by ANYONE, black, white, nazi, antifa, grandmothers, should be crushed, that means stopped by overwhelming force. The Police of today are politically correct, they are afraid of being called names or being sued, so they don't do their jobs. They maintain skirmish lines and watch, when they should move in, and by whatever means necessary, stop the fighting and drag out the combatants. In this new world law enforcement is hobbled. You have seen the results
 

leibowde84

Veteran Member
So, your point is what ? You have now moved from words to acts, two different things. As I said, illegal acts by ANYONE, black, white, nazi, antifa, grandmothers, should be crushed, that means stopped by overwhelming force. The Police of today are politically correct, they are afraid of being called names or being sued, so they don't do their jobs. They maintain skirmish lines and watch, when they should move in, and by whatever means necessary, stop the fighting and drag out the combatants. In this new world law enforcement is hobbled. You have seen the results
My point was only that once one single white supremacist protester threw one single bottle, their entire protest ceased to be legal. The rest I agree with.
 

shmogie

Well-Known Member
I disagree. Because of the countless examples of racists becoming violent unprovoked throughout American history following the use of racial slurs, people of color have every reason to feel physically threatened when they are spewed at them personally.
Sorry, but no. They have the right to feel however they feel, they do not have the right to use that feeling as justification for a violent act based on words. No one receives more verbal abuse than a Police Officer. They are verbally attacked in every way imaginable, and yes, regardless if they are black or white, they are verbally abused in a racial context. One only need look at the statistics to see that HISTORICALLY they are murdered at a high rate. So, using your reasoning, someone verbally abusing an officer, threatening to kill her, threatening to beat her up, etc., etc., causing her to feel threatened ( all officers feel fear at times), though just talking, justifies her action of macing the guy, beating him up with her baton and generally making a physical mess of him ?

Are you proposing that a segment of society is justified in responding to words with violence, but no one else has the same justification under the same circumstances ?
 

shmogie

Well-Known Member
My point was only that once one single white supremacist protester threw one single bottle, their entire protest ceased to be legal. The rest I agree with.
No, that demonstrator broke the law. That demonstrator should be arrested. People cannot be collectively held responsible for the individual acts of others. Many peaceful black protests result in terrible violence and property damage.Should the organizers and peaceful marchers be held accountable for these acts ?
 

leibowde84

Veteran Member
Sorry, but no. They have the right to feel however they feel, they do not have the right to use that feeling as justification for a violent act based on words. No one receives more verbal abuse than a Police Officer. They are verbally attacked in every way imaginable, and yes, regardless if they are black or white, they are verbally abused in a racial context. One only need look at the statistics to see that HISTORICALLY they are murdered at a high rate. So, using your reasoning, someone verbally abusing an officer, threatening to kill her, threatening to beat her up, etc., etc., causing her to feel threatened ( all officers feel fear at times), though just talking, justifies her action of macing the guy, beating him up with her baton and generally making a physical mess of him ?

Are you proposing that a segment of society is justified in responding to words with violence, but no one else has the same justification under the same circumstances ?
Actually, cops do often use physical force in response to words unprovoked and get away with it. That has happened quite a few times recently.
 

leibowde84

Veteran Member
No, that demonstrator broke the law. That demonstrator should be arrested. People cannot be collectively held responsible for the individual acts of others. Many peaceful black protests result in terrible violence and property damage.Should the organizers and peaceful marchers be held accountable for these acts ?
No. That's not what I'm saying. That specific protest is no longer legal, according to the law. The government has the right to step in and break it up. But, no one should be held legally accountable after the protest for the actions of others.
 
it surprises me that they weren’t busted immediately for carrying assault rifles?!

They aren't assault rifles as they are only configured to fire in semi-automatic mode rather than having options for automatic/burst firing. Assault rifles (I think) are illegal, but I'm no expert on US gun laws.
 

shmogie

Well-Known Member
Actually, cops do often use physical force in response to words unprovoked and get away with it. That has happened quite a few times recently.
Yes, it does happen, and it is wrong every time. They don always get away with it. I knew some who were bounced and prosecuted for doing so
 

icehorse

......unaffiliated...... anti-dogmatist
Premium Member
They aren't assault rifles as they are only configured to fire in semi-automatic mode rather than having options for automatic/burst firing. Assault rifles (I think) are illegal, but I'm no expert on US gun laws.

Thanks for providing the distinction. Asshat-ish as they are, they do seem to know how to walk right up to the legal limits of stuff.
 

ChristineM

"Be strong", I whispered to my coffee.
Premium Member
- I don’t think there is anyone on this forum advocating that we “play nice” with the asshats.
- A weekend like Charlottesville has many moments. Some of those moments were legal, some were not. Police should nail the asshats the second they do anything illegal. E.g. it surprises me that they weren’t busted immediately for carrying assault rifles?! (My understanding is that open carry of handguns is legal, I didn't think open carry of assault rifles was legal.)
- Anyone involved in policing such a situation OR in counter protesting ought to damn well know - very precisely - the limits of free speech. E.g. I believe that - like it or not - “incitement to future violence” is protected.
- While of course there is no moral equivalency between the groups, the counter-protestors must also obey the law, and they need to be nailed the second they don’t.

Essentially what i sad a couple of days ago. I.e. free speech comes with responsibly. On both sides
 
Top