Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
Free speech Free speech

06-16-2017 , 08:43 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by goofyballer
So, now you know. Again, this is someone Fox News regularly has as a guest and that Donald Trump has invited to the White House - not in spite of his behavior like the above, but because of it. The right celebrates this, then turns around and suggests Kathy Griffin (who unlike Ted Nugent, faced consequences rather than celebration for her actions) is responsible for murder, lmao.
this is just stupidity from both sides, the left blamed Sarah Palin for gabby giffords. We can both agree the argument is stupid.

having done some reading on Ted Nugent he did face consequences, he got investigated by the fbi. He just isn't as much of a crybaby as Kathy. "he broke me" lolololol

in regards to Trump meeting with Ted I don't understand the point, this is just guilty by accusation which is a dumb argument. Some years ago Obama invited the rapper Common to the WH and the outrage then was just as dumb.
06-16-2017 , 10:45 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by mongidig
A nutball goes on a shooting spree at the congressional baseball game. I knew it was a leftist even before I heard it confirmed on the news. The reason I knew this is that conservatives are simply not unhinged enough to perform this act.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...plot/92094694/

Quote:
Federal authorities announced Friday that they have arrested three Kansas men in connection with an alleged attempt to bomb an apartment complex in Garden City, Kansas, that included many Somali-American residents and a mosque, officials said.
...
During the course of the several-month investigation aided by an informant, the men openly discussed their hatred for members of the Muslim community, referring to them as "cockroaches," and they discussed carrying out potential attacks on churches, organizations that have aided Muslims, public officials and landlords that have rented to members of the Somali community.
Perfectly hinged guys right here.
06-16-2017 , 11:03 PM
06-16-2017 , 11:19 PM
I guess the right does oppose free speech. Good point.
06-16-2017 , 11:29 PM


lol. That dip**** really thinks those people are Goebbels.
06-16-2017 , 11:34 PM
Or he's really ****ed up and they're gerbils? Unclear.
06-16-2017 , 11:40 PM
It's like taking drama class hostage with a pound of ripe bananas and demanding they use their best acting skills to say nice things about you for an earned release.
06-16-2017 , 11:42 PM
shes pretty hot
06-17-2017 , 12:01 AM
Powerful Joe Rogan

06-17-2017 , 02:22 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BitchiBee
thats clearly not what they are doing, pepper spraying/spraying bottles of their own excrement on trump supporting young women is their MO
06-17-2017 , 02:25 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by dagger9
Those that are quick to defend Islam and ANTIFA haven't posted anything condemning the assassination attempt on Republicans.
I could condemn his poor aim.
















Is this the strawman you're looking for?
06-17-2017 , 02:27 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by dagger9
Don't forget stabbing police horses with a flag pole.

The irony of a group named ANTIFA using violence against people protesting Sharia law.

Ahahahah how do you even go about 'protesting' 'Sharia law'?

Walk me through the steps.

p.s. See, posts like this are why you people have no business criticizing protest/ors. It's not about beliefs, rather it's because you clearly have no working definition of what 'protest' even means.
06-17-2017 , 03:02 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BitchiBee
having done some reading on Ted Nugent he did face consequences, he got investigated by the fbi.
Right but Kathy Griffin was, like, fired from jobs and stuff because people didn't think her behavior was a good look. When did Fox News fire Ted Nugent, exactly? LOL at pretending the treatment of the two of them is the same.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BitchiBee
in regards to Trump meeting with Ted I don't understand the point, this is just guilty by accusation which is a dumb argument.
I'm not attacking Trump or calling him guilty of anything, other than being a standard Republican who finds no problem with violent rhetoric directed at political opponents and has no problem with people who engage in it. Like, for example, Ted Nugent, who said some **** that was enough for a Secret Service investigation into whether he was actually planning to kill the President while the collective right snoozed, gave no ****s, and continued to tune in to watch him on Fox.

Ultimately, this started with mongidig talking about the need to shut down people who talk about violence. It sounds like you agree with me that his posts on the subject have been pretty damn stupid? I think it's nice for people on opposite sides like us to find common ground here and there.
06-17-2017 , 03:26 AM
Yeah, Bitchibee, here's your chance for some integrity.
06-17-2017 , 04:30 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Original Position
No one here supports or enjoys the assassination of their domestic political opponents. That is a betrayal of everyone's values.
In some cases assassination is desirable.
06-17-2017 , 04:33 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by jalfrezi
In some cases assassination is desirable.
Maybe so, but my guess is that you neither support nor enjoy the assassination of your political opponents.
06-17-2017 , 04:37 AM
Politicians are also citizens and with that hat on rather than their career hat I think it's OK for them to wish another politician dead in extreme cases.
06-17-2017 , 08:31 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by dagger9
Powerful Joe Rogan

lol. Rubin is calling it libel that they classified him as "far right." That is hilarious on about eight levels.
06-17-2017 , 10:27 AM
This thing where hard right people think they can just shamelessly lie and expect people to buy it is just wonderful.
06-17-2017 , 11:06 AM
Trouble in far right paradise... 'Who's gonna defend "free" speech if they fight each other to the death?'


https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.3dbe9ed10909

Quote:
The scuffle drew a flurry of attacks this week from the Daily Stormer and the white nationalist Altright.com, which blamed Oath Keepers for the incident and chided the militia group for not being as racist or radical as they would prefer.“Vicious, Freedom-Hating, Anti-Constitution Oath Keepers Might as Well be the Feds,” read one headline. “Oathkeepers turn against the alt-right,” read another. The sites ridiculed the militia group as “geriatrics,” “normies” and “cucks,” using an insult popular on the alt-right for conservatives who aren’t right-wing enough.

The Daily Stormer referred to the group as “Boomer Antifa,” a riff on the Oath Keepers’ perceived age range and the black clad anti-fascist protesters that have clashed with conservative activists at numerous political rallies this year.
06-17-2017 , 11:53 AM
I think they also called them the "Oaf Queefers," which is the one and only good thing that white supremacy has contributed to the world.
06-17-2017 , 01:30 PM
A 'not racist' "constitutional" group formed in 2009 is like an enigma of constitutional groups circa 2009.
06-17-2017 , 01:46 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Original Position
Maybe so, but my guess is that you neither support nor enjoy the assassination of your political opponents.
Well, it depends, doesn't it?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johann_Georg_Elser

You're about to claim that Elser was infringing someone's free speech, of course. After all, that someone was there to make a speech, wasn't he? And what harm can speech do?
06-17-2017 , 02:04 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by dagger9
Powerful Joe Rogan

What's with all the identity politics, leftists?

Hey, leftists, we've got a gay on our side so we must be doing it right!
06-17-2017 , 02:31 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by well named
Well, according to the state the crime is involuntary manslaughter. If this page is accurate (I looked at the actual state code briefly but I was having trouble finding the relevant sections) then the relevant definitions are:



It seems like the definition of "wanton or reckless conduct" is relevant here. It may not be a crime to commit suicide, but it's a crime to act in a way that "creates a high degree of likelihood that substantial harm will result to another person." There is certainly an argument that the texts in this case caused harm to the other person.

My argument is that if the facts in this case satisfy the requirements of the crime (I don't think I can conclude this myself) then I don't find a free speech defense compelling.
Lol no.

Russian roulette = 5:1 you die.

GL proving the odds a "go kill urself" text will cause suicide. Hell, GL a text is what causes suicide cuz short of a suicide note identifying the text as the cause you'll come up short.

      
m