Antifa is not a large group.

Thats irrelevant. I believe in free speech for those i disagree with , even if they are hypocrites.

Also this:

the evidence seems to be pretty strong. i don't 4chan but i do watch and consequently get reccomended youtube channels that are right biased like gavin mcinnes, steven crowder, ben shapiro, dave rubin etc. its part of my effort to not live in a left biased (+ or - fox) media bubble. they rarely prematurely get involved in fringe weirdo stuff afaik. gavin mcinnes posted a video about this and refereed to 4chan as an autistic mob with unlimited time on their hands. i have no clue, i've never even been on there by accident

the question isn't should mr bike lock be arrested, its should he and people like him be allowed to shut down free speech? or perhaps skull crackers should be shut down. thats the whole point with the coulter situation and others on berkley. this violent mob of loons should not be able to control anything with threats of violence and property destruction. thats what should be shut down

as far as the validity of the claims this guy is a school teacher, from what i've seen id say its extremely hard to deny. he has ties to the other loon teacher thats organizing these protests. its in the video which is kind of long so i understand if people dont watch. she is open about her intentions and its clear she has a screw loose

Not in terms of being a demographic of the left. Obviously it is a fringe of the left and not representative of them. Alot of people seem to be apologists for them though.

But in terms of a group of people looking to destroy property , throw fireworks and rocks into crowds and assault people I would say that anything over 30 is a large group of people.

I think there was a few hundred at Berkely

yes there were. basedstickman and generaldeplorable. in fact, they organized many ppl to come from many miles and states away.

and no, they were not a response to antifa. they were a response to liberals that were peacefully organizing that those thugs thought they could pummel.

It's not irrelevant. The free press is an issue when it comes to free speech so I posted it in a free speech thread.

Okay, and you shut it down by arresting people who commit violence, destroy property or threaten violence. How else do you shut it down?

When I was talking about elements of the left shutting down free speech I was meaning in general and mainly on university campuses.

There is exceptions to every rule and on this occasion I think its maybe for the best. I think someone will be killed soon to be honest as the violence seems to be escalating.

I was meaning in relation to allowing Anne Coulter to speak.

thats how you shut it down

the cops have stood back and let it happen while being offered a pepsi by a kardashian

when you show up to a campus with a face mask and weapons, along with a mob of other people in face mask and with weapons, then law enforcement should probably participate in some law enforcement. this isn't some sort of grey area of peaceful protest. the antifa and BAMN mobs have stated their intentions before the event and have followed through. picking out people with face masks and weapons at an ann coulter speech isn't some form of a radical police state given that these groups have stated their intentions ahead of the event and demonstrated that they follow through in the past

I did not post it to say she should not be able to speak. I posted it to show she wants to oppress free speech. To the cheers of some on the right.

Nope. They were fed up of people being attacked by masked thugs. They would not have got violent if the protestors hadnt gotten violent.

If they wanted to attack innocent liberals how come they dont show up at the march for science , the tax protests or anything related to DAPL?

You are fooling yourself.

Yea she is a hypocrite and so is anyone that says they are for free speech and supports Trumps stance on flag burning or for locking up journalists.

@juan: I only lightly skimmed your massive text wall, but as you can see from reading my posts, I do not favor silencing Coulter violently or otherwise. I called her a white Christian supremacist because those are the views she holds.

There are many more such quotes.

I can see you in my mind's eye already preparing a text wall rebuttal. That's fine if you want to spend the time. But unless the rebuttal is that she renounced these and her other equally abhorrent sentiments, you will not change my mind (and tbh I probably won't bother reading anyway).

And lest I give the impression that only liberals view Coulter as a white supremacist:

Seems like he would know.

A person who doesn't understand the value of free speech still has the right to free speech, don't they?

Are police just letting people walk around with weapons? The whole point of wanting a closed space for Coulter's speech was so people could be searched before entering the venue.

I don't know what the law says about just arresting people who cover their face. Seems like a stretch by itself.

It seems reasonable to enforce a temporary restriction on covering your face in the area while she is there. Arresting people would be too much unless there was a refusal or repeat offenses.

I was at the Boston marathon last week and they had random bag checks on public streets. Normally that would be a violation of 4th amendment rights but it was temporarily relaxed for a special circumstance.

I don't see why the same logic couldn't be applied here.

Sure. People should be able to use their free speech rights to say free speech should be oppressed.

Wonder what percentage of the "free speech" folk at burkley would like commie hippies put in jail for burning the flag.

I agree that free speech covers those who want to speak out against free speech. So how is pointing out her hypocrisy or the hypocrisy of those who want to ban flag burning anything but a distraction from the actual issue at hand here?

This is a free speech thread. How is her wanting it oppressed not an issue an of free speech.

Journalists are not on the verge of being jailed because she said what she did and there are no flag burning laws about to be passed.

So do people who do understand the value of free speech. We can chose not to exercise those bits that we don't think should be allowed.

Seriously, lets not assume that those who think there should be no restrictions on free speech (assuming that there are such people) are the ones who are correct about the value of free speech.

You support flag burning do ya?