|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
United States43752 Posts
On August 19 2017 01:27 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On August 19 2017 01:23 Broetchenholer wrote:On August 19 2017 01:16 xDaunt wrote:On August 19 2017 01:15 Broetchenholer wrote:
It's also really strange to see huge groups of potentially dangerous and violent people with assault rifles protesting in the streets and the police keeps a respectful distance when african Americans are getting shot when mentioning they own guns. I would have loved to see an actual arrest of one of the neo-nazis out of that group. Arrested for doing what? If the speech is protected, and the carrying of the firearm is lawful in that circumstance (I believe it was), what are the grounds for the arrest? Throwing a stone at someone. It's hypothetical. I find it extremely weird that african americans are being shot from officers conducting traffic controls and a huge block of dangerous people carrying assault rifles over their shoulders is not a problem. There were voices here that stated that the police should wait till those people commit an actual crime and then arrest those that commited a crime. When stated that it would be...threatening... to the cops to arrest someone among his ar-15 carrying friends, the answer was, well, that's how it works. And what i see from how nervous american cops seem to be around minorities, i would have liked to see how they treat those nice, peaceful genocide-lovers. The important lesson here is not to conflate problems. That the police are assholes to black people or anyone else has nothing to do with demonstration rights of Nazis. The law is often messy and cumbersome, but it should be universally adhered to. Society breaks down when it's not.
Nobody is saying "these peoples' rights weren't respected so nobody's rights should be respected". The argument is "it's pretty fucked up that so many peoples' rights aren't respected but the right only comes out in force to defend civil rights when a Nazi is the one being oppressed".
|
On August 19 2017 01:30 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On August 19 2017 01:27 xDaunt wrote:On August 19 2017 01:23 Broetchenholer wrote:On August 19 2017 01:16 xDaunt wrote:On August 19 2017 01:15 Broetchenholer wrote:
It's also really strange to see huge groups of potentially dangerous and violent people with assault rifles protesting in the streets and the police keeps a respectful distance when african Americans are getting shot when mentioning they own guns. I would have loved to see an actual arrest of one of the neo-nazis out of that group. Arrested for doing what? If the speech is protected, and the carrying of the firearm is lawful in that circumstance (I believe it was), what are the grounds for the arrest? Throwing a stone at someone. It's hypothetical. I find it extremely weird that african americans are being shot from officers conducting traffic controls and a huge block of dangerous people carrying assault rifles over their shoulders is not a problem. There were voices here that stated that the police should wait till those people commit an actual crime and then arrest those that commited a crime. When stated that it would be...threatening... to the cops to arrest someone among his ar-15 carrying friends, the answer was, well, that's how it works. And what i see from how nervous american cops seem to be around minorities, i would have liked to see how they treat those nice, peaceful genocide-lovers. The important lesson here is not to conflate problems. That the police are assholes to black people or anyone else has nothing to do with demonstration rights of Nazis. The law is often messy and cumbersome, but it should be universally adhered to. Society breaks down when it's not. Nobody is saying "these peoples' rights weren't respected so nobody's rights should be respected". The argument is "it's pretty fucked up that so many peoples' rights aren't respected but the right only comes out in force to defend civil rights when a Nazi is the one being oppressed".
I don't know what thread you have been reading, but there has been quite a bit of advocacy for the violation of the Nazis' rights around here.
|
Sanya12364 Posts
On August 19 2017 01:26 WolfintheSheep wrote:Show nested quote +On August 19 2017 01:24 TanGeng wrote:On August 19 2017 01:16 Mohdoo wrote:
I can't help but think our weird free speech laws contribute to this "well, that's just another point of view" bullshit we hear people say about ethnic cleansing. It is sad how any thought of eliminating hate speech is immediately met with "whoa there, next thing you know it, the government will be jailing political opponents!" I find it a healthier society that odious opinions and those who profess such odious opinions are openly known and identifiable. We know exactly who to watch out for. It's better to know the danger instead of having it creep up on you. And if such odious opinions are the majority or given audience in the political table, then society as a whole has a much bigger problem. It is here where President Trump shows how far US is from an open minded egalitarian society. I think it's a very tough argument to say that the US is a current model of a healthy society.
US ISN'T a healthy society. But it is better to lay bare the societal strain rather than bottle it up and letting it fester.
Every since the Emancipation Proclamation we've had egalitarian policies and end arounds around such policies. The ultimate solution is to resolve these deep seated beliefs through dialogue and discrediting rather than via violence and suppression.
We aren't going to see a perfect society ever. But at least we can openly recognize our imperfections.
|
United States43752 Posts
On August 19 2017 01:32 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On August 19 2017 01:30 KwarK wrote:On August 19 2017 01:27 xDaunt wrote:On August 19 2017 01:23 Broetchenholer wrote:On August 19 2017 01:16 xDaunt wrote:On August 19 2017 01:15 Broetchenholer wrote:
It's also really strange to see huge groups of potentially dangerous and violent people with assault rifles protesting in the streets and the police keeps a respectful distance when african Americans are getting shot when mentioning they own guns. I would have loved to see an actual arrest of one of the neo-nazis out of that group. Arrested for doing what? If the speech is protected, and the carrying of the firearm is lawful in that circumstance (I believe it was), what are the grounds for the arrest? Throwing a stone at someone. It's hypothetical. I find it extremely weird that african americans are being shot from officers conducting traffic controls and a huge block of dangerous people carrying assault rifles over their shoulders is not a problem. There were voices here that stated that the police should wait till those people commit an actual crime and then arrest those that commited a crime. When stated that it would be...threatening... to the cops to arrest someone among his ar-15 carrying friends, the answer was, well, that's how it works. And what i see from how nervous american cops seem to be around minorities, i would have liked to see how they treat those nice, peaceful genocide-lovers. The important lesson here is not to conflate problems. That the police are assholes to black people or anyone else has nothing to do with demonstration rights of Nazis. The law is often messy and cumbersome, but it should be universally adhered to. Society breaks down when it's not. Nobody is saying "these peoples' rights weren't respected so nobody's rights should be respected". The argument is "it's pretty fucked up that so many peoples' rights aren't respected but the right only comes out in force to defend civil rights when a Nazi is the one being oppressed". I don't know what thread you have been reading, but there has been quite a bit of advocacy for the violation of the Nazis' rights around here.
A) That's not what I said. I said that nobody is arguing "if these rights aren't respected, nobody gets rights". And nobody is.
B) A few people are saying that if you're part of a movement with the end goal of killing people then you shouldn't be allowed to promote that goal. That's a totally different argument.
C) I'm not one of those people, although I do certainly see their point.
|
On August 19 2017 01:32 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On August 19 2017 01:30 KwarK wrote:On August 19 2017 01:27 xDaunt wrote:On August 19 2017 01:23 Broetchenholer wrote:On August 19 2017 01:16 xDaunt wrote:On August 19 2017 01:15 Broetchenholer wrote:
It's also really strange to see huge groups of potentially dangerous and violent people with assault rifles protesting in the streets and the police keeps a respectful distance when african Americans are getting shot when mentioning they own guns. I would have loved to see an actual arrest of one of the neo-nazis out of that group. Arrested for doing what? If the speech is protected, and the carrying of the firearm is lawful in that circumstance (I believe it was), what are the grounds for the arrest? Throwing a stone at someone. It's hypothetical. I find it extremely weird that african americans are being shot from officers conducting traffic controls and a huge block of dangerous people carrying assault rifles over their shoulders is not a problem. There were voices here that stated that the police should wait till those people commit an actual crime and then arrest those that commited a crime. When stated that it would be...threatening... to the cops to arrest someone among his ar-15 carrying friends, the answer was, well, that's how it works. And what i see from how nervous american cops seem to be around minorities, i would have liked to see how they treat those nice, peaceful genocide-lovers. The important lesson here is not to conflate problems. That the police are assholes to black people or anyone else has nothing to do with demonstration rights of Nazis. The law is often messy and cumbersome, but it should be universally adhered to. Society breaks down when it's not. Nobody is saying "these peoples' rights weren't respected so nobody's rights should be respected". The argument is "it's pretty fucked up that so many peoples' rights aren't respected but the right only comes out in force to defend civil rights when a Nazi is the one being oppressed". I don't know what thread you have been reading, but there has been quite a bit of advocacy for the violation of the Nazis' rights around here.
Large majority of people aren't saying that, there's just me and like 2-3 others. KwarK has already said that he disagreed.
I'm not the thread, I'm just some guy.
|
In other news, looks like Bannon is out.
|
On August 19 2017 01:36 xDaunt wrote:
In other news, looks like Bannon is out.
Happy to see that shigbag shown the door. He was out of his element and figured himself a lot more crafty and smart than he really is. I'll wait for more confirmation before getting too excited, though.
On August 19 2017 01:32 TanGeng wrote:Show nested quote +On August 19 2017 01:26 WolfintheSheep wrote:On August 19 2017 01:24 TanGeng wrote:On August 19 2017 01:16 Mohdoo wrote:
I can't help but think our weird free speech laws contribute to this "well, that's just another point of view" bullshit we hear people say about ethnic cleansing. It is sad how any thought of eliminating hate speech is immediately met with "whoa there, next thing you know it, the government will be jailing political opponents!" I find it a healthier society that odious opinions and those who profess such odious opinions are openly known and identifiable. We know exactly who to watch out for. It's better to know the danger instead of having it creep up on you. And if such odious opinions are the majority or given audience in the political table, then society as a whole has a much bigger problem. It is here where President Trump shows how far US is from an open minded egalitarian society. I think it's a very tough argument to say that the US is a current model of a healthy society. US ISN'T a healthy society. But it is better to lay bare the societal strain rather than bottle it up and letting it fester.
Every since the Emancipation Proclamation we've had egalitarian policies and end arounds around such policies. The ultimate solution is to resolve these deep seated beliefs through dialogue and discrediting rather than via violence and suppression. We aren't going to see a perfect society ever. But at least we can openly recognize our imperfections.
Another way to think of this is that by giving these groups free access to assemble and spread their ideology, such as is seen in communities on Reddit and elsewhere, they are able to recruit and gain legitimacy. You are ignoring the recruitment aspect that is massively aided by these types of demonstrations. People are emboldened by community and agreement.
I also think its silly to point out we'll never be perfect, as if that somehow should discourage us from getting as close as we can.
|
On August 19 2017 01:32 TanGeng wrote:Show nested quote +On August 19 2017 01:26 WolfintheSheep wrote:On August 19 2017 01:24 TanGeng wrote:On August 19 2017 01:16 Mohdoo wrote:
I can't help but think our weird free speech laws contribute to this "well, that's just another point of view" bullshit we hear people say about ethnic cleansing. It is sad how any thought of eliminating hate speech is immediately met with "whoa there, next thing you know it, the government will be jailing political opponents!" I find it a healthier society that odious opinions and those who profess such odious opinions are openly known and identifiable. We know exactly who to watch out for. It's better to know the danger instead of having it creep up on you. And if such odious opinions are the majority or given audience in the political table, then society as a whole has a much bigger problem. It is here where President Trump shows how far US is from an open minded egalitarian society. I think it's a very tough argument to say that the US is a current model of a healthy society. US ISN'T a healthy society. But it is better to lay bare the societal strain rather than bottle it up and letting it fester. Every since the Emancipation Proclamation we've had egalitarian policies and end arounds around such policies. The ultimate solution is to resolve these deep seated beliefs through dialogue and discrediting rather than via violence and suppression. We aren't going to see a perfect society ever. But at least we can openly recognize our imperfections.
We are also the first generation to grow up with no first had experience of the pre-civil rights era. We don’t’ seem to have a good grasp on when those unjust practices worm their way back into our society.
|
United States43752 Posts
Part of it is just the moral hazard intrinsic to giving the government power to ban ideologies. Can anyone say with certainty that MLK's rallies wouldn't have been banned, if it were legal to do so?
|
On August 19 2017 01:36 xDaunt wrote:
In other news, looks like Bannon is out.
What awesome news. Can you link?
I suspect Trump won't last long without him against mainstream republicans
|
I'm one of them. I don't see how you can say nazis have a right to peaceful protest/assemble when their motives are everything but.
I also don't see how you can have armed police in riot gear at peaceful rallies across the nation, but when nazis show up, they're under-armed and can't control the rallies.
It's almost like they expect peaceful blacks who are marching in protest against police brutality to be violent with police who are heavily armed. But they don't expect violence when nazis are wielding assault rifles, walking down the street, professing hatred.
No, they should not have that right to promote hatred.
|
|
|
On August 19 2017 01:30 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On August 19 2017 01:27 xDaunt wrote:On August 19 2017 01:23 Broetchenholer wrote:On August 19 2017 01:16 xDaunt wrote:On August 19 2017 01:15 Broetchenholer wrote:
It's also really strange to see huge groups of potentially dangerous and violent people with assault rifles protesting in the streets and the police keeps a respectful distance when african Americans are getting shot when mentioning they own guns. I would have loved to see an actual arrest of one of the neo-nazis out of that group. Arrested for doing what? If the speech is protected, and the carrying of the firearm is lawful in that circumstance (I believe it was), what are the grounds for the arrest? Throwing a stone at someone. It's hypothetical. I find it extremely weird that african americans are being shot from officers conducting traffic controls and a huge block of dangerous people carrying assault rifles over their shoulders is not a problem. There were voices here that stated that the police should wait till those people commit an actual crime and then arrest those that commited a crime. When stated that it would be...threatening... to the cops to arrest someone among his ar-15 carrying friends, the answer was, well, that's how it works. And what i see from how nervous american cops seem to be around minorities, i would have liked to see how they treat those nice, peaceful genocide-lovers. The important lesson here is not to conflate problems. That the police are assholes to black people or anyone else has nothing to do with demonstration rights of Nazis. The law is often messy and cumbersome, but it should be universally adhered to. Society breaks down when it's not. Nobody is saying "these peoples' rights weren't respected so nobody's rights should be respected". The argument is "it's pretty fucked up that so many peoples' rights aren't respected but the right only comes out in force to defend civil rights when a Nazi is the one being oppressed".
Well, techinically there's no such thing as rights, they're more like privileges granted by the government. The US government can also take away those privileges, whenever they please.
Just google Japanese Americans and German Americans in the 1940s, they also thought they had rights.. didn't stop the US from detaining 110.000 Jap, Americans and 11.000 Ger. Americans. (Born Americans btw. Their only fault was their parents were born in the wroong country)
|
On August 19 2017 01:38 KwarK wrote:
Part of it is just the moral hazard intrinsic to giving the government power to ban ideologies. Can anyone say with certainty that MLK's rallies wouldn't have been banned, if it were legal to do so?
Depends how the laws are written. If a requirement for banning is to say a race is superior to another, MLK would not have been banned.
|
On August 19 2017 01:22 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On August 19 2017 01:16 NewSunshine wrote:On August 19 2017 01:01 xDaunt wrote:On August 19 2017 00:57 KwarK wrote:On August 19 2017 00:47 xDaunt wrote:On August 19 2017 00:33 KwarK wrote:On August 19 2017 00:24 xDaunt wrote:On August 19 2017 00:15 Acrofales wrote:On August 19 2017 00:06 xDaunt wrote:On August 18 2017 23:43 KwarK wrote:
[quote]
Your passionate defence of civil rights would seem a whole lot more genuine if you showed up when people who weren't Nazis were getting their rights infringed upon. If you turn a blind eye when non Nazis are impacted then it gives the appearance that it was never actually about rights, it was just about Nazis. I never really have much of an opportunity to defend the leftist free speech rights because people on the right -- even the extreme right -- seem to be better at tolerating public discourse and don't try to start shit at lawful rallies. But when Ann Coulter shows up at Berkeley, that's a five-alarm fire for the various asshole factions of the left. Wasn't everybody protesting at Ferguson vermin? I remember you advocating they send in the national guard and didn't really care what happened to them if and when that happened. If BLM wants to demonstrate peaceably, I have no problem with that. I expressly referred to the rioters and looters as vermin. There is no constitutional protection to destroy the property of others. When that happens, regardless of who is doing it, I will always advocate sending in the authorities to clear the vermin out, whether it be BLM, Nazis, or the Girl Scouts of America. Getting away from the topic of rioting and free speech for a second, what about the constant violations of the civil rights of the black population of Ferguson that the investigation revealed? Where were you in defence of their rights? I've made it clear previously that I am on board with the idea that the police need reforming and that there's a problem regarding how black people are treated by the justice system. So I'm not sure what else you want. Thank you for that. So presumably you disagree with Sessions ending the justice department investigations into these police departments? Will you be marching peacefully alongside BLM when the time comes? I'll consider it when you start showing a commitment to refraining from shitting up the thread with irrelevant tangents. Pretty telling that you would hold black support hostage to a petty squabble with a teamliquid forum moderator. It may tell something to the clueless, but I really have no interest in shitting up the thread with Kwark's mindless and endless whataboutisms. And I certainly am less inclined to indulge people who have a history of relentless strawmanning and misrepresentation.
noted; so you are entirely in agreement with us not indulging you in the slightest given your long history of doing such.
|
On August 19 2017 01:38 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On August 19 2017 01:36 xDaunt wrote:
In other news, looks like Bannon is out. What awesome news. Can you link? I suspect Trump won't last long without him against mainstream republicans
Drudge is reporting it. There's no article to link yet, but Drudge is reliable.
|
United States43752 Posts
On August 19 2017 01:40 thePunGun wrote:Show nested quote +On August 19 2017 01:30 KwarK wrote:On August 19 2017 01:27 xDaunt wrote:On August 19 2017 01:23 Broetchenholer wrote:On August 19 2017 01:16 xDaunt wrote:On August 19 2017 01:15 Broetchenholer wrote:
It's also really strange to see huge groups of potentially dangerous and violent people with assault rifles protesting in the streets and the police keeps a respectful distance when african Americans are getting shot when mentioning they own guns. I would have loved to see an actual arrest of one of the neo-nazis out of that group. Arrested for doing what? If the speech is protected, and the carrying of the firearm is lawful in that circumstance (I believe it was), what are the grounds for the arrest? Throwing a stone at someone. It's hypothetical. I find it extremely weird that african americans are being shot from officers conducting traffic controls and a huge block of dangerous people carrying assault rifles over their shoulders is not a problem. There were voices here that stated that the police should wait till those people commit an actual crime and then arrest those that commited a crime. When stated that it would be...threatening... to the cops to arrest someone among his ar-15 carrying friends, the answer was, well, that's how it works. And what i see from how nervous american cops seem to be around minorities, i would have liked to see how they treat those nice, peaceful genocide-lovers. The important lesson here is not to conflate problems. That the police are assholes to black people or anyone else has nothing to do with demonstration rights of Nazis. The law is often messy and cumbersome, but it should be universally adhered to. Society breaks down when it's not. Nobody is saying "these peoples' rights weren't respected so nobody's rights should be respected". The argument is "it's pretty fucked up that so many peoples' rights aren't respected but the right only comes out in force to defend civil rights when a Nazi is the one being oppressed". Well, techinically there's no such thing as rights, they're more like privileges granted by the government. The US government can also take away those privileges, whenever they please. Just google Japanese Americans and German Americans in the 1940s, they also thought they had rights.. didn't stop the US from detaining 110.000 Jap, Americans and 11.000 Ger. Americans. (Born Americans who's only fault was their parents were born in the wroong country)
I don't think anyone here thinks internment is a good thing and should be repeated.
|
Can not wait to see t_d reeee over this. This is their doomsday. Deep state infiltrated trump admin ahahaha
|
On August 19 2017 01:32 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On August 19 2017 01:30 KwarK wrote:On August 19 2017 01:27 xDaunt wrote:On August 19 2017 01:23 Broetchenholer wrote:On August 19 2017 01:16 xDaunt wrote:On August 19 2017 01:15 Broetchenholer wrote:
It's also really strange to see huge groups of potentially dangerous and violent people with assault rifles protesting in the streets and the police keeps a respectful distance when african Americans are getting shot when mentioning they own guns. I would have loved to see an actual arrest of one of the neo-nazis out of that group. Arrested for doing what? If the speech is protected, and the carrying of the firearm is lawful in that circumstance (I believe it was), what are the grounds for the arrest? Throwing a stone at someone. It's hypothetical. I find it extremely weird that african americans are being shot from officers conducting traffic controls and a huge block of dangerous people carrying assault rifles over their shoulders is not a problem. There were voices here that stated that the police should wait till those people commit an actual crime and then arrest those that commited a crime. When stated that it would be...threatening... to the cops to arrest someone among his ar-15 carrying friends, the answer was, well, that's how it works. And what i see from how nervous american cops seem to be around minorities, i would have liked to see how they treat those nice, peaceful genocide-lovers. The important lesson here is not to conflate problems. That the police are assholes to black people or anyone else has nothing to do with demonstration rights of Nazis. The law is often messy and cumbersome, but it should be universally adhered to. Society breaks down when it's not. Nobody is saying "these peoples' rights weren't respected so nobody's rights should be respected". The argument is "it's pretty fucked up that so many peoples' rights aren't respected but the right only comes out in force to defend civil rights when a Nazi is the one being oppressed". I don't know what thread you have been reading, but there has been quite a bit of advocacy for the violation of the Nazis' rights around here.
I am just disagreeing with the rights of neonazis in the States. I would not advocate commiting crimes to stop them or to bend the rules for them to arrest them even if the laws allow for that. Laws are universal as you said and i agree.
I am saying your open carry laws need to go because they seem to discriminate minorities and weakly organised individuals and give groups like neonazis an intimidation against the police they shouldn't have. I am also arguing that promoting hatecrimes should not be protected by freespeech and associating yourself with the third reich to be promoting hatecrimes.
|
On August 19 2017 01:45 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On August 19 2017 01:38 Nebuchad wrote:On August 19 2017 01:36 xDaunt wrote:
In other news, looks like Bannon is out. What awesome news. Can you link? I suspect Trump won't last long without him against mainstream republicans Drudge is reporting it. There's no article to link yet, but Drudge is reliable.
NYT is also reporting that Trump told aids that Bannon is out.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
