Which side fired a gun at a protester?

Your story is is not telling the whole truth.

Oh, and I stick to my belief that there are no good nazis.

Eegore wrote on 08/30/17 at 06:12:10:


No, anything, even food, in extremes, will make you fat and unable to participate in society in a normal manner, often leaving it up to another do do what you should be doing....
Booze, ditto.

These are obvious examples.
However, its a little harder to see where beliefs, to an extreme, so rigid it judges things, assigning value to them in a prejudicial way, that often is accompanied by physical danger/threats, to others.

Look how the radical environmentalism spawned such, with burning and damaging SUV's and bobby trapping trees to kill and maim loggers.

I think the debate now is, should we allow folks to demonstrate.
On its face, it seems a direct assault on free speech, but you could say that about yelling fire in a theater too.

When speech impacts the safety of others, that is a mitigating circumstance that needs to be considered.

Gathering in mass really is encroaching on other freedoms, when it impacts the lives of others.
Look at how some demonstration shut down port, roadway, etc.

Why does the privileged of some, hold others captive?  

Is "war" extremism?
Is the USA, bad then?

 Should we allow folks to demonstrate?

 No.  Since the potential for something bad to happen exists we need to remove a basic right from everyone.  Wont somebody please think of the children!

 Yelling fire in a theatre is not free speech.  Not being prosecuted for appropriate displays of your opinion is.  This very thread is an example of free speech.

"Gathering in mass really is encroaching on other freedoms, when it impacts the lives of others."

 I'd like an example as well, and referencing things that are already illegal like shutting down roads without permit/through excess protest doesn't count because its already addressed.

 How are people held "captive" and its not being addressed?  Are you in a location where protesters can restrict others without consequence?  Theres no laws against holding people "captive" by definition?

 Im not even going to address the "is war extremism" thing, its a whole other discussion with huge amounts of variables an opinions.

raydawg wrote on 08/30/17 at 09:45:42:



LOL - (not to speak for Eegore, but) you don't get sarcasm, do you?

Eegore wrote on 08/30/17 at 10:16:51:


OK, cool.....
Just wanted to make sure.
No, as I stated, it seems an affront to a granted freedom.

I am just putting out fodder.

Could not freedom of expression, be lent to the confederate flag, statues, etc, as well?

Who get to decide what is, and isn't?
Based on what, hurt feelings, etc?

Is owing a gun a granted freedom that is now popular to place constraints upon, because of some folks using it, a gun, to cause harm to others?
Are these folks, gun owners, expected to give up "their" rights for what others see as a societal good, necessity?

If these demonstrations spawn activities that are, as you say, already illegal, like property damage and physical harm, etc, how is that different than what a gun does?

Do we not already have laws against criminal gun use?

Why are the new laws we want to use to hopefully address gun violence, punitive, or impinging on the rights of legal and lawful gun owners?

Could we not say then, you can demonstrate, but it can be no more than 6 people gathered, at any one time.
Banners and flags must be small enough they don't interfere with motorist, or pedestrians, etc.
And you must show your face, etc.

Who get to decide these things?

The party in power?
Judges?
Who?

And if we don't like it, we what, resist, rebel, and extend our right to try and tear down what the opposition built?
Rinse, and repeat?

Or......restrict freedom of speech by controlling what you can, and can not say, under the guise of a social awareness program of the likes of Political Correctness in our schools, media, and public arena, and even into the private sector....

Gee, that sounds so, uh, nazi like  

( that was my sarcasm )      

Eegore wrote on 08/30/17 at 10:47:43:


I love it.....

To think our founding fathers drafted a system that gave a vehicle to allow local folks input.

Kinda like Dorthy didn't have to go all the way to Oz, huh  

raydawg wrote on 08/30/17 at 11:33:05: