Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This is why we have a Second Amendment. It's not for hunting or target shooting; the Second Amendment is designed to protect the First. Not saying that it's justified here, but it just reinforces the notion that the Second Amendment is not obsolete. Although it is debatable whether you have a First Amendment right to set up a protest camp assembly in a public park, it's easy to extend the tactics of the government and police to a more concrete demonstration of political action.
So, what part of nails in boards fits that peaceful part.
Where does it say that those assemblies are allowed to break laws, and affect other people to their detriment.
Where does it allow this freedom of speech, and peaceful assembly to ruin the livelihood of those people who do not give free food to these people.
Where does it allow for destruction of property, arson, murder, and the many other violations of law these people have committed.
Quite frankly, as soon as they fire a shot at the police, I would take an M-14 or M-16 and open up, rock and roll, and clean up the corpses once completed. The Police are performing a JOB they are TOLD to do, the individual officers didn't come to some hidden conclusion to join forces and move these people, they are following orders, legally issued, so what gives the protestors the right to endanger our public servants?
If the police infringe on their rights with the violence they have used elsewhere, these people have a second amendment right to defend themselves and their rights.
Right to peaceably assemble, etc. They're on public property anyways. In our legal system people don't lose rights because of someone else's actions. If an arsonist attacks, it doesn't mean no one else has a right to protest there.
Hows that different from TEA party protestors going to rallies with guns strapped across their back?
Shield vs. Gun, you tell me whats worse? Were you outraged when folks exercised their second amendment rights? You sure seem outraged about people exercising their first amendment rights, when they disagree with you.
The Tea Party Folks were not breaking any laws and paid for permits to protest. Unlike these laws breaking hooligans that are disrupting peoples lives and costing TAXPAYERS millions of dollars.
So, what part of nails in boards fits that peaceful part.
Where does it say that those assemblies are allowed to break laws, and affect other people to their detriment.
Where does it allow this freedom of speech, and peaceful assembly to ruin the livelihood of those people who do not give free food to these people.
Where does it allow for destruction of property, arson, murder, and the many other violations of law these people have committed.
Quite frankly, as soon as they fire a shot at the police, I would take an M-14 or M-16 and open up, rock and roll, and clean up the corpses once completed. The Police are performing a JOB they are TOLD to do, the individual officers didn't come to some hidden conclusion to join forces and move these people, they are following orders, legally issued, so what gives the protestors the right to endanger our public servants?
I cant agree with you there
The cops start killing people and gun nuts like me get agitated
The Tea Party Folks were not breaking any laws and paid for permits to protest. Unlike these laws breaking hooligans that are disrupting peoples lives and costing TAXPAYERS millions of dollars.
So why do you have a problem with them exercising their second amendment rights?
So why do you have a problem with them exercising their second amendment rights?
Didn't know the first or second amendment protected the right to rape, use illegal drugs, trespassing, destruction of private property, and many other crimes they committed.
The Tea Party Folks were not breaking any laws and paid for permits to protest. Unlike these laws breaking hooligans that are disrupting peoples lives and costing TAXPAYERS millions of dollars.
Hows that different from TEA party protestors going to rallies with guns strapped across their back?
Shield vs. Gun, you tell me whats worse? Were you outraged when folks exercised their second amendment rights? You sure seem outraged about people exercising their first amendment rights, when they disagree with you.
Huge difference is that the Tea Party wasn't breaking any laws. Can you really not see the difference.
I am a staunch supporter of both the first and second amendments. What is going on at many of these OWS protest sites nationwide is about destruction of public property, assault, arson, and other unlawful activities.
Most thinking people can tell the difference between the exercise of Constitutionally affirmed rights and anarchical behavior.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
