Live Stream-Dallas Texas-Anti White Supremacy Rally

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: Grambler

But remember 20000 thousand people protested against free speech in Boston today.

I had not heard that those protesters were advocating for the government to curtail free speech.

Have a link?

No they used violence and intimidation to stop people who wanted to attend a free speech rally.

As I feared. You don't understand the 1st amendment.

I understand it just fine.

Where did I mention it?

I said they had a protest against free speech.

They used violence to stop people from attending.

Again, you appear to not understand what free speech is and how it is protected by the Constitution.

I had not seen one person protest in favor of the government suppressing free speech.

That is what the 1st amendment is about.

Free speech does not mean you can say anything you want and people can't counter that with their own speech.

So it appears you are simply complaining about people using their speech, which you disagree with, to counter those that you do.

No. I am comparing that they used violence and intimidationmidation to stop speech they didn't like.

Also many said the rally was hate speech and should not have been allowed to happen.

Both are acts of censorship.

Not allowed to happen by whom? The government?

Even hate speech should be allowed without government interference, even if it's a bunch of WS-Nazis.

Like I said, you don't know jack about free speech and constitutional rights.

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: Grambler

But remember 20000 thousand people protested against free speech in Boston today.

I had not heard that those protesters were advocating for the government to curtail free speech.

Have a link?

No they used violence and intimidation to stop people who wanted to attend a free speech rally.

As I feared. You don't understand the 1st amendment.

I understand it just fine.

Where did I mention it?

I said they had a protest against free speech.

They used violence to stop people from attending.

Again, you appear to not understand what free speech is and how it is protected by the Constitution.

I had not seen one person protest in favor of the government suppressing free speech.

That is what the 1st amendment is about.

Free speech does not mean you can say anything you want and people can't counter that with their own speech.

So it appears you are simply complaining about people using their speech, which you disagree with, to counter those that you do.

No. I am comparing that they used violence and intimidationmidation to stop speech they didn't like.

Also many said the rally was hate speech and should not have been allowed to happen.

Both are acts of censorship.

Not allowed to happen by whom? The government?

Even hate speech should be allowed without government interference, even if it's a bunch of WS-Nazis.

Like I said, you don't know jack about free speech and constitutional rights.

So if I punch you so that you can't give a speech, I have not attacked your freedom of speech?

I've watched a lot of live "protests" of varying types in the last few years and the police just told them it's over, leave.

They usually do that several times, a bunch of people don't listen. Then it starts getting ugly. Just while typing this I see people refusing to leave and needing to be moved.

Hopefully tonight ends differently but so far it's pretty status quo.

My high points so far, horses with protective shields on their eyes and the lady yelling something along the lines of "there ain't gon be no United States no more". Also, marching through a graveyard yelling. Classy.

Does anybody know how the 'time to go' part actually works? When one files to have a protest is a time frame needed or is it solely when the police decide it's over or too unruly?

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: Grambler

But remember 20000 thousand people protested against free speech in Boston today.

I had not heard that those protesters were advocating for the government to curtail free speech.

Have a link?

No they used violence and intimidation to stop people who wanted to attend a free speech rally.

As I feared. You don't understand the 1st amendment.

I understand it just fine.

Where did I mention it?

I said they had a protest against free speech.

They used violence to stop people from attending.

Again, you appear to not understand what free speech is and how it is protected by the Constitution.

I had not seen one person protest in favor of the government suppressing free speech.

That is what the 1st amendment is about.

Free speech does not mean you can say anything you want and people can't counter that with their own speech.

So it appears you are simply complaining about people using their speech, which you disagree with, to counter those that you do.

No. I am comparing that they used violence and intimidationmidation to stop speech they didn't like.

Also many said the rally was hate speech and should not have been allowed to happen.

Both are acts of censorship.

Not allowed to happen by whom? The government?

Even hate speech should be allowed without government interference, even if it's a bunch of WS-Nazis.

Like I said, you don't know jack about free speech and constitutional rights.

So if I punch you so that you can't give a speech, I have not attacked your freedom of speech?

No. You've committed a crime by physically attacking me.

Your motive in attacking me does not apply to the constitutional concept of free speech. Again, it's a restriction on the government and what it can do.

I thought you knew this.

According to the one streaming, ANTIFA is getting booted from the activities.

a reply to: Noncents

I would think that they clear people out after the time allotted to the protestors by the permit (if they had one). The only reason the cops would clear it out early, is if they deem it a situation that has gotten out of control and there is a danger to them and others.

ATS

y u double post me?

a reply to: annoyedpharmacist
I've always assumed that's how it worked but never knew for sure. I figured here was a good place to ask since I know there police members and probably some protest everything types as well that might know for sure.

a reply to: JinMI

Yeah the guy making the stream said antifa got booed at till they left the area.
Antifa went over to a nearby cemetery and started some stuff with a blm group.

I have learned a lot about antifa today. They seem like nothing but a bunch of board
ignorant kids prone to violence when they don't get their way. Is it just me or is this
a group of people that just want trouble for the sake of trouble? What is their end game?

Where are their parents in all this I wonder?

Why do people constantly take their shirt off? Is that an american thing?

a reply to: Perfectenemy

Dallas is hot.

originally posted by: Perfectenemy
Why do people constantly take their shirt off? Is that an american thing?

I think so. It's a symbol of being a bad ass and trying to intimidate others before actually engaging in a real fight.

a reply to: scraedtosleep

You'd be correct in your assessment in my estimation. No clue on the parenting.

Hmm the designated Nazi line sounded scary.

a reply to: introvert

No one is allowed to physically stop someone from using there constitutional rights.

That includes threatening someone with violence or actually using violence to keep someone from freedom of expression.

It's the same thing as if someone were to physically restrain you, or block all attempts at you trying to cast a vote.

Using the "it's only bad if the government does it" argument does not work. Because, if that were the case, there is no reason why a private citizen could not stop you on the street and demand to search you......because only if the government tries is is it wrong? No.....it was wrong for the private citizen to do it too.

No one has the right to try and physically stop someone from their freedom of expression.

a reply to: introvert
Peacocking

a reply to: Perfectenemy

Yea, was a witch hunt there at the end.

Hopefully it's all over now.

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: Grambler

But remember 20000 thousand people protested against free speech in Boston today.

I had not heard that those protesters were advocating for the government to curtail free speech.

Have a link?

No they used violence and intimidation to stop people who wanted to attend a free speech rally.

As I feared. You don't understand the 1st amendment.

I understand it just fine.

Where did I mention it?

I said they had a protest against free speech.

They used violence to stop people from attending.

Again, you appear to not understand what free speech is and how it is protected by the Constitution.

I had not seen one person protest in favor of the government suppressing free speech.

That is what the 1st amendment is about.

Free speech does not mean you can say anything you want and people can't counter that with their own speech.

So it appears you are simply complaining about people using their speech, which you disagree with, to counter those that you do.

No. I am comparing that they used violence and intimidationmidation to stop speech they didn't like.

Also many said the rally was hate speech and should not have been allowed to happen.

Both are acts of censorship.

Not allowed to happen by whom? The government?

Even hate speech should be allowed without government interference, even if it's a bunch of WS-Nazis.

Like I said, you don't know jack about free speech and constitutional rights.

So if I punch you so that you can't give a speech, I have not attacked your freedom of speech?

No. You've committed a crime by physically attacking me.

Your motive in attacking me does not apply to the constitutional concept of free speech. Again, it's a restriction on the government and what it can do.

I thought you knew this.

You are just wrong.

The first amendment says that the government can not make laws against free speech.

However, a private individual can also stop your free speech.

What type of gymnastics are you playing that you say only the government can hurt your free speech?

The 4th amendment protects from unreasonable search and seizure.

So are you saying then no private person can unreasonably search or seize you stuff?

You are flat out wrong.

a reply to: JinMI

Because they're big. There may be a little more to it, but that is essentially it.

People sometimes don't realize just how big horses are, especially when there's someone riding it.

They're also well trained.

a reply to: eriktheawful

No one has the right to try and physically stop someone from their freedom of expression.

There is no right to expression in the US.
For example I would like to express my masculinity by walking around the mall nude.
I can not legally do that. Maybe I want to express my anger by hitting someone, can't do that ether.