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.
"The First Amendment (Amendment I) to the United States Constitution prohibits the making of any law respecting an establishment of religion, impeding the free exercise of religion, abridging the freedom of speech, infringing on the freedom of the press, interfering with the right to peaceably assemble or prohibiting the petitioning for a governmental redress of grievances. It was adopted on December 15, 1791, as one of the ten amendments that constitute the Bill of Rights."
An extreme example would be Texas vs Johnson (1989)
Burning flag is legal now because it is protected by first amendment right. It is offensive to some people, but some people just have to deal with it because it is protected by constitution.
"The Second Amendment (Amendment II) to the United States Constitution protects the right of individuals[1][2] to keep and bear arms.[3][4][5][6] The Supreme Court of the United States has ruled that the right vests in individuals, not merely collective militias, while also ruling that the right is not unlimited and does not prohibit all regulation of either firearms or similar devices"
"Amazing the number of rules and requirements a state governments can put on a constitutional right. Let them try that with the 1st Amendment and see what happens."
I think there should be reasonible restrictions on both. You can't threaten to kill some one even though speech is free. I don't think people should have any firearm they wish if they see shapeshifting lizard people that aren't there, or are violent felons. The laws are on the books, but are not enforced.
What gets me is any time someone speaks about any restriction on gun purchases gun nuts like to start shrieking about Nazi's or that not letting unmedicated schizophrenics have any weapon they want (like Jared Lee loughner) somehow bans all weapons for everyone. So in pure volume and vitriol the discussion can never even take place. That discussions of that one subject are not free.
Usually it's people who wouldn't have guns if unmedicated mentally ill folks were restricted...like Alex Jones.
There are some good "limits" on free speech like being able to seek damages for defamation or repercussions for yelling fire in a crowded theater and such.
I'm pro-2nd amendment, probably more than most libs. Everyone* should have the right to keep and have firearms under the constitution. However, firearms can cause immediate harm to others and in that vein the mentally unstable and convicted violent criminals shouldn't have easy access to them. That is just a common-sense limitation. I'm more interested in why felons can lose the right to vote. I feel that is more of a constitutional violation than not allowing them free access to firearms.
There are restrictions to the first amendment, go into a crowded theater and yell "FIRE!" And you will see how quickly your freedom of speech is restricted when the police arrest you for that act.
There are restrictions to the first amendment, go into a crowded theater and yell "FIRE!" And you will see how quickly your freedom of speech is restricted when the police arrest you for that act.
I understand what you are saying. Another example is screaming "Fire" in a crowded movie theatre.
But "burning American flag" is protected by constitution although it is offensive to a lot of people
Second amendment right definitely has way more restrictions and regulations.
Can anyone come up with anything besides, "yelling 'fire' in a crowded theater" as their example? Surely if there many restrictions, we can show more than one.
I understand what you are saying. Another example is screaming "Fire" in a crowded movie theatre.
But "burning American flag" is protected by constitution although it is offensive to a lot of people
Second amendment right definitely has way more restrictions and regulations.
Burning a flag may be offensive, but is not likely to be lethal, unless gasoline is used or someone involved decides to attack someone else.
So yes, I do give someone speaking a lot more leeway than I give someone with a gun.
Also, I know some people think that the most fundamental civil right is gun ownership, but I think freedom of speech is the most fundamental. As examples, I give you places like Afghanistan, which are awash in guns, but where speaking your mind is dangerous. I would have a hard time agreeing that those places are "free" the way most Americans think of being free.
Can anyone come up with anything besides, "yelling 'fire' in a crowded theater" as their example? Surely if there many restrictions, we can show more than one.
It is a quick and easy example that requires no explaining for people to understand.
Can anyone come up with anything besides, "yelling 'fire' in a crowded theater" as their example? Surely if there many restrictions, we can show more than one.
It is a quick and easy example that requires no explaining for people to understand.
And it's completely inapplicable.
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.
