Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: getting out ahead of this one...


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: getting out ahead of this one... Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: getting out ahead of this one... - 4/14/2017 2:27:18 PM   
RottenJohnny


Posts: 1677
Joined: 5/5/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx
quote:

ORIGINAL: RottenJohnny
Hire the Hell's Angels for security. It worked for the Rolling Stones.

Not exactly

A tragedy for sure at Altamont but nevertheless, Mr. Hunter didn't get the chance to shoot anyone.



_____________________________

"I find your arguments strewn with gaping defects in logic." - Mr. Spock

"Give me liberty or give me death." - Patrick Henry

I believe in common sense, not common opinions. - Me

(in reply to thompsonx)
Profile   Post #: 41
RE: getting out ahead of this one... - 4/14/2017 5:38:04 PM   
Aylee


Posts: 24103
Joined: 10/14/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

~FR~

There is ample evidence that the tranquility of the neighborhood will be shattered when outside agitators like Ann Counter are brought in to cause trouble. If the police and Dept of Student Safety can't handle the situation it should be cancelled, but that would violate Coulter's right to free speech.

Seriously, folks, the heckler's veto is a prohibition against the government from arresting the speaker to maintain law and order.

The speaker can keep on speaking while being heckled but the hecklers cannot be prohibited their opinions unless they threaten to drown out the speaker.

It is problematic (in Case Law) for the government to arrest hecklers except I would guess if the hecklers are causing a danger to safety and property. Then, it is just riot law.




Vincent,

It is a felony to conspire to “injure, threaten, or intimidate a person in any state, territory or district in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him/her by the Constitution or the laws of the Unites States.”

https://www.justice.gov/crt/conspiracy-against-rights

_____________________________

Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam

I don’t always wgah’nagl fhtagn. But when I do, I ph’nglui mglw’nafh R’lyeh.

(in reply to vincentML)
Profile   Post #: 42
RE: getting out ahead of this one... - 4/14/2017 6:30:27 PM   
vincentML


Posts: 9980
Joined: 10/31/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aylee


quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

~FR~

There is ample evidence that the tranquility of the neighborhood will be shattered when outside agitators like Ann Counter are brought in to cause trouble. If the police and Dept of Student Safety can't handle the situation it should be cancelled, but that would violate Coulter's right to free speech.

Seriously, folks, the heckler's veto is a prohibition against the government from arresting the speaker to maintain law and order.

The speaker can keep on speaking while being heckled but the hecklers cannot be prohibited their opinions unless they threaten to drown out the speaker.

It is problematic (in Case Law) for the government to arrest hecklers except I would guess if the hecklers are causing a danger to safety and property. Then, it is just riot law.




Vincent,

It is a felony to conspire to “injure, threaten, or intimidate a person in any state, territory or district in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him/her by the Constitution or the laws of the Unites States.”

https://www.justice.gov/crt/conspiracy-against-rights

Very very interesting, Aylee. Thank you. It will occupy me for a while this weekend.

_____________________________

vML

Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter. ~ MLK Jr.

(in reply to Aylee)
Profile   Post #: 43
RE: getting out ahead of this one... - 4/14/2017 6:51:56 PM   
Aylee


Posts: 24103
Joined: 10/14/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML


quote:

ORIGINAL: Aylee


quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

~FR~

There is ample evidence that the tranquility of the neighborhood will be shattered when outside agitators like Ann Counter are brought in to cause trouble. If the police and Dept of Student Safety can't handle the situation it should be cancelled, but that would violate Coulter's right to free speech.

Seriously, folks, the heckler's veto is a prohibition against the government from arresting the speaker to maintain law and order.

The speaker can keep on speaking while being heckled but the hecklers cannot be prohibited their opinions unless they threaten to drown out the speaker.

It is problematic (in Case Law) for the government to arrest hecklers except I would guess if the hecklers are causing a danger to safety and property. Then, it is just riot law.




Vincent,

It is a felony to conspire to “injure, threaten, or intimidate a person in any state, territory or district in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him/her by the Constitution or the laws of the Unites States.”

https://www.justice.gov/crt/conspiracy-against-rights

Very very interesting, Aylee. Thank you. It will occupy me for a while this weekend.



You are welcome. You are fun to discuss with.

_____________________________

Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam

I don’t always wgah’nagl fhtagn. But when I do, I ph’nglui mglw’nafh R’lyeh.

(in reply to vincentML)
Profile   Post #: 44
RE: getting out ahead of this one... - 4/14/2017 6:55:32 PM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline

ORIGINAL: RottenJohnny
ORIGINAL: thompsonx

Hire the Hell's Angels for security. It worked for the Rolling Stones.

Not exactly


A tragedy for sure at Altamont but nevertheless, Mr. Hunter didn't get the chance to shoot anyone.


He got off one good kill shot

(in reply to RottenJohnny)
Profile   Post #: 45
RE: getting out ahead of this one... - 4/14/2017 6:58:39 PM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline

ORIGINAL: Aylee


It is a felony to conspire to “injure, threaten, or intimidate a person in any state, territory or district in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him/her by the Constitution or the laws of the Unites States.”

https://www.justice.gov/crt/conspiracy-against-rights


Obviously not since sessions is ag and not in the joint.

(in reply to Aylee)
Profile   Post #: 46
RE: getting out ahead of this one... - 4/14/2017 7:06:56 PM   
bounty44


Posts: 6374
Joined: 11/1/2014
Status: offline
thus the USA Today article I posted.

(in reply to vincentML)
Profile   Post #: 47
RE: getting out ahead of this one... - 4/14/2017 8:03:54 PM   
vincentML


Posts: 9980
Joined: 10/31/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aylee


quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML


quote:

ORIGINAL: Aylee


quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

~FR~

There is ample evidence that the tranquility of the neighborhood will be shattered when outside agitators like Ann Counter are brought in to cause trouble. If the police and Dept of Student Safety can't handle the situation it should be cancelled, but that would violate Coulter's right to free speech.

Seriously, folks, the heckler's veto is a prohibition against the government from arresting the speaker to maintain law and order.

The speaker can keep on speaking while being heckled but the hecklers cannot be prohibited their opinions unless they threaten to drown out the speaker.

It is problematic (in Case Law) for the government to arrest hecklers except I would guess if the hecklers are causing a danger to safety and property. Then, it is just riot law.




Vincent,

It is a felony to conspire to “injure, threaten, or intimidate a person in any state, territory or district in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him/her by the Constitution or the laws of the Unites States.”

https://www.justice.gov/crt/conspiracy-against-rights

Very very interesting, Aylee. Thank you. It will occupy me for a while this weekend.



You are welcome. You are fun to discuss with.

Indeed, i do enjoy our civil discussions, Aylee, but again I must disagree with you on this "conspiracy" law. The way I read it this prohibits conspiracy, even under cover of law, to prevent any one from participating on a public program like voting rights, fair housing, jury participation, interstate commerce, and public accommodations, etc.

(b) Whoever, whether or not acting under color of law, by force or threat of force willfully injures, intimidates or interferes with, or attempts to injure, intimidate or interfere with—
(1) any person because he is or has been, or in order to intimidate such person or any other person or any class of persons from—
(A) voting or qualifying to vote, qualifying or campaigning as a candidate for elective office, or qualifying or acting as a poll watcher, or any legally authorized election official, in any primary, special, or general election;
(B) participating in or enjoying any benefit, service, privilege, program, facility, or activity provided or administered by the United States;
(C) applying for or enjoying employment, or any perquisite thereof, by any agency of the United States;
(D) serving, or attending upon any court in connection with possible service, as a grand or petit juror in any court of the United States;
(E) participating in or enjoying the benefits of any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance; or
(2) any person because of his race, color, religion or national origin and because he is or has been—
(A) enrolling in or attending any public school or public college;
(B) participating in or enjoying any benefit, service, privilege, program, facility or activity provided or administered by any State or subdivision thereof;
(C) applying for or enjoying employment, or any perquisite thereof, by any private employer or any agency of any State or subdivision thereof, or joining or using the services or advantages of any labor organization, hiring hall, or employment agency;
(D) serving, or attending upon any court of any State in connection with possible service, as a grand or petit juror;
(E) traveling in or using any facility of interstate commerce, or using any vehicle, terminal, or facility of any common carrier by motor, rail, water, or air;
(F) enjoying the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, or accommodations of any inn, hotel, motel, or other establishment which provides lodging to transient guests, or of any restaurant, cafeteria, lunchroom, lunch counter, soda fountain, or other facility which serves the public and which is principally engaged in selling food or beverages for consumption on the premises, or of any gasoline station, or of any motion picture house, theater, concert hall, sports arena, stadium, or any other place of exhibition or entertainment which serves the public, or of any other establishment which serves the public and (i) which is located within the premises of any of the aforesaid establishments or within the premises of which is physically located any of the aforesaid establishments, and (ii) which holds itself out as serving patrons of such establishments; or
(3) during or incident to a riot or civil disorder, any person engaged in a business in commerce or affecting commerce, including, but not limited to, any person engaged in a business which sells or offers for sale to interstate travelers a substantial portion of the articles, commodities, or services which it sells or where a substantial portion of the articles or commodities which it sells or offers for sale have moved in commerce; or
(4) any person because he is or has been, or in order to intimidate such person or any other person or any class of persons from—
(A) participating, without discrimination on account of race, color, religion or national origin, in any of the benefits or activities described in subparagraphs (1)(A) through (1)(E) or subparagraphs (2)(A) through (2)(F); or
(B) affording another person or class of persons opportunity or protection to so participate; or
(5) any citizen because he is or has been, or in order to intimidate such citizen or any other citizen from lawfully aiding or encouraging other persons to participate, without discrimination on account of race, color, religion or national origin, in any of the benefits or activities described in subparagraphs (1)(A) through (1)(E) or subparagraphs (2)(A) through (2)(F), or participating lawfully in speech or peaceful assembly opposing any denial of the opportunity to so participate—
shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if bodily injury results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death. As used in this section, the term “participating lawfully in speech or peaceful assembly” shall not mean the aiding, abetting, or inciting of other persons to riot or to commit any act of physical violence upon any individual or against any real or personal property in furtherance of a riot. Nothing in subparagraph (2)(F) or (4)(A) of this subsection shall apply to the proprietor of any establishment which provides lodging to transient guests, or to any employee acting on behalf of such proprietor, with respect to the enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, or accommodations of such establishment if such establishment is located within a building which contains not more than five rooms for rent or hire and which is actually occupied by the proprietor as his residence.


This law was passed back in 1964 and may have been prompted by the killing of those three murdered civil rights workers in Mississippi.

I don't see anything here about free speech guanrantee. Do you?

Read the legal text here

_____________________________

vML

Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter. ~ MLK Jr.

(in reply to Aylee)
Profile   Post #: 48
RE: getting out ahead of this one... - 4/14/2017 8:04:41 PM   
RottenJohnny


Posts: 1677
Joined: 5/5/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx
He got off one good kill shot

Can you cite that? I know there was some debate over whether or not he shot off a round but I haven't found anything that indicates he killed anyone.

_____________________________

"I find your arguments strewn with gaping defects in logic." - Mr. Spock

"Give me liberty or give me death." - Patrick Henry

I believe in common sense, not common opinions. - Me

(in reply to thompsonx)
Profile   Post #: 49
RE: getting out ahead of this one... - 4/15/2017 1:34:20 PM   
bounty44


Posts: 6374
Joined: 11/1/2014
Status: offline
"Conservative Writer David Horowitz’s Talk At UC Berkeley Cancelled Due To Security Concerns"

quote:

There’s another challenge to free speech on the Cal campus.

College Republicans say they were forced to cancel a conservative speaker because of too many administration roadblocks.

But some are concerned about the cancellation.

The university’s efforts to prevent an encore of the violent protests that forced them to cancel a talk by conservative activist Milo Yiannopoulos, have, according to campus Republicans, stifled free speech and made it increasingly difficult to bring conservative thinkers to Cal.

Berkeley Campus Republicans spokesperson Troy Worden said, “There is such a thing as the heckler’s veto. Basically, if they’re loud enough and violent enough, then they succeed in shutting down your event.”

Campus Republicans canceled an upcoming appearance by David Horowitz after university police told them that to insure they could provide adequate security…the event would have to be held in the middle of the day…and outside the center of campus.

UC Berkeley spokesperson Dan Mogulof said, “We’re sorry they had to cancel it. It has nothing to do whatsoever with the speaker’s perspective and everything to do with what law enforcement professionals believed needed to be done to provide a safe and secure event.”

Students say they’re troubled by the violence, by the willingness to drown out opinions with which you don’t agree.

Berkeley student Rachel Feher said, “I think of this campus as emblematic of what free speech should be — and what it was in the 1960s. And it saddening for me as a student to see that those same values are not as well encompassed today.”

The university says it’s committed to providing a safe and secure environment for guest speakers, but can’t guarantee they’ll be given a prime time slot in the heart of campus.

But campus Republicans say they shouldn’t have to choose between security and free speech.

Worden said, “The policy they have for dealing with these outside groups really does tacitly approve of and encourage the violence we have seen.”

The decision to cancel Horowitz’s speech was, in part, strategic. Campus Republicans say they’re focusing their efforts on an appearance by Ann Coulter, which is scheduled for April 27th.


http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2017/04/11/uc-berkeley-presses-campus-republicans-to-cancel-another-conservative-speaker/amp/

(in reply to bounty44)
Profile   Post #: 50
RE: getting out ahead of this one... - 4/15/2017 1:35:19 PM   
BoscoX


Posts: 11243
Joined: 12/10/2016
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

"Conservative Writer David Horowitz’s Talk At UC Berkeley Cancelled Due To Security Concerns"

quote:

There’s another challenge to free speech on the Cal campus.

College Republicans say they were forced to cancel a conservative speaker because of too many administration roadblocks.

But some are concerned about the cancellation.

The university’s efforts to prevent an encore of the violent protests that forced them to cancel a talk by conservative activist Milo Yiannopoulos, have, according to campus Republicans, stifled free speech and made it increasingly difficult to bring conservative thinkers to Cal.

Berkeley Campus Republicans spokesperson Troy Worden said, “There is such a thing as the heckler’s veto. Basically, if they’re loud enough and violent enough, then they succeed in shutting down your event.”

Campus Republicans canceled an upcoming appearance by David Horowitz after university police told them that to insure they could provide adequate security…the event would have to be held in the middle of the day…and outside the center of campus.

UC Berkeley spokesperson Dan Mogulof said, “We’re sorry they had to cancel it. It has nothing to do whatsoever with the speaker’s perspective and everything to do with what law enforcement professionals believed needed to be done to provide a safe and secure event.”

Students say they’re troubled by the violence, by the willingness to drown out opinions with which you don’t agree.

Berkeley student Rachel Feher said, “I think of this campus as emblematic of what free speech should be — and what it was in the 1960s. And it saddening for me as a student to see that those same values are not as well encompassed today.”

The university says it’s committed to providing a safe and secure environment for guest speakers, but can’t guarantee they’ll be given a prime time slot in the heart of campus.

But campus Republicans say they shouldn’t have to choose between security and free speech.

Worden said, “The policy they have for dealing with these outside groups really does tacitly approve of and encourage the violence we have seen.”

The decision to cancel Horowitz’s speech was, in part, strategic. Campus Republicans say they’re focusing their efforts on an appearance by Ann Coulter, which is scheduled for April 27th.


http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2017/04/11/uc-berkeley-presses-campus-republicans-to-cancel-another-conservative-speaker/amp/


Words are so dangerous, to fascist pigs

_____________________________

Thought Criminal

(in reply to bounty44)
Profile   Post #: 51
RE: getting out ahead of this one... - 4/15/2017 3:18:17 PM   
bounty44


Posts: 6374
Joined: 11/1/2014
Status: offline
unfortunately, one of the very interesting things about david horowitz is, he's a reformed/converted leftist. tammy bruce is that way to an extent also.

I enjoy listening to and reading both of them.

(in reply to BoscoX)
Profile   Post #: 52
RE: getting out ahead of this one... - 4/15/2017 3:39:09 PM   
vincentML


Posts: 9980
Joined: 10/31/2009
Status: offline
quote:

But campus Republicans say they shouldn’t have to choose between security and free speech.

In an ideal world perhaps that would be true but in this era of extreme partisan politics the school administration has an absolute duty to consider the security of the student population. Speech is hindered for good cause.

_____________________________

vML

Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter. ~ MLK Jr.

(in reply to bounty44)
Profile   Post #: 53
RE: getting out ahead of this one... - 4/15/2017 3:48:20 PM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline
and its been done by SCOTIUS, you cant yell fire in a crowded theater. I note that no guns were allowed at the RNC, security wins over 1a and 2a so far, and there are others security wins over.

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to vincentML)
Profile   Post #: 54
RE: getting out ahead of this one... - 4/15/2017 6:50:14 PM   
Hillwilliam


Posts: 19394
Joined: 8/27/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aylee






Vincent,

It is a felony to conspire to “injure, threaten, or intimidate a person in any state, territory or district in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him/her by the Constitution or the laws of the Unites States.”

https://www.justice.gov/crt/conspiracy-against-rights

Sooooooooooooooo, Trump supporters and their leader should have been arrested last year?

_____________________________

Kinkier than a cheap garden hose.

Whoever said "Religion is the opiate of the masses" never heard Right Wing talk radio.

Don't blame me, I voted for Gary Johnson.

(in reply to Aylee)
Profile   Post #: 55
RE: getting out ahead of this one... - 4/15/2017 6:51:33 PM   
Hillwilliam


Posts: 19394
Joined: 8/27/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

unfortunately, one of the very interesting things about david horowitz is, he's a reformed/converted leftist.

So is Trump

Except he isn't reformed

_____________________________

Kinkier than a cheap garden hose.

Whoever said "Religion is the opiate of the masses" never heard Right Wing talk radio.

Don't blame me, I voted for Gary Johnson.

(in reply to bounty44)
Profile   Post #: 56
RE: getting out ahead of this one... - 4/15/2017 6:57:10 PM   
Hillwilliam


Posts: 19394
Joined: 8/27/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: BoscoX


quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44





They're so cute when they give each other a simultaneous reacharound aren't they?

See My earlier quote on hyperpartisanship leaching all the intelligence out of a cranium.

Here are my examples

_____________________________

Kinkier than a cheap garden hose.

Whoever said "Religion is the opiate of the masses" never heard Right Wing talk radio.

Don't blame me, I voted for Gary Johnson.

(in reply to BoscoX)
Profile   Post #: 57
RE: getting out ahead of this one... - 4/16/2017 7:08:37 AM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline

ORIGINAL: RottenJohnny
ORIGINAL: thompsonx
He got off one good kill shot

Can you cite that? I know there was some debate over whether or not he shot off a round but I haven't found anything that indicates he killed anyone.


Hunter s. thompson left without a passport when shot himself in the head.

(in reply to RottenJohnny)
Profile   Post #: 58
RE: getting out ahead of this one... - 4/16/2017 7:15:35 AM   
BoscoX


Posts: 11243
Joined: 12/10/2016
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

quote:

But campus Republicans say they shouldn’t have to choose between security and free speech.

In an ideal world perhaps that would be true but in this era of extreme partisan politics the school administration has an absolute duty to consider the security of the student population. Speech is hindered for good cause.


Something only a communist would say

Free speech is dangerous to fascist pigs

_____________________________

Thought Criminal

(in reply to vincentML)
Profile   Post #: 59
RE: getting out ahead of this one... - 4/16/2017 7:43:29 AM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline

ORIGINAL: BoscoX


Free speech is dangerous to fascist pigs


That is why fascist pig phoquers like yourself abhor free speech.

(in reply to BoscoX)
Profile   Post #: 60
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: getting out ahead of this one... Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.109