It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: windword
a reply to: Xcalibur254
It's stunning how the the Trump Cult crowd is so willing to compromise their's, and their fellow Americans, 1st Amendment rights!
When Trump was running, and he promised to "change libel laws" so that he could sue the media. I warned people that he would attack the 1st Amendment as president. Several Trump supporters promised me that if that happened, they wouldn't blindly support him, and would speak out against any such movement in that direction from his administration.
I don't see that happening.
originally posted by: Lucidparadox
a reply to: seedofchucky
So I want to show you something.
You keep saying those who argue in favor of the protestors are ignorant to reality and "the facts"
There was another thread a while back where I actually brok down "the facts" for everyone.
1. The NFL players are not protesting ignorantly from a position of wealth and entitlement. they are using their platform and their voices for those who ARE NOT THAT LUCKY. They are speaking for those who dont have a voice. They are not kneeling for themselves, they are kneeling for other people who dont have the platform to do so.
2. I went through all of the US police shooting fatality statistics in a post. Its all fact. I will quote my post below for you. Im interested in your response.
This website here track police shootings by all different factors, race, gender etc... its pretty cool
It states as of this year there have been 721 people shot and killed by police this year
323 of them were white
164 were black
112 were hispanic
24 other non-white
Lets add up those totals shall we? 323 white vs a total of 300 non-white..
Ahh.. but you yourself will probably say "SEE!! MORE WHITE PEOPLE GET SHOT! THERE ISNT A RACE PROBLEM!" Wrong..
The US Population as shown here
So as I did above 72.4% white 27.6% not white Now here is the fun part where I prove what you didnt think I could prove... Whites make up 51.8% of the shootings per the stats above Non whites make up 48.2% of the shootings per the stats above.. Wait a minute... Our population is only made up of 27.6% non-white people yet... they account for 48.2% of those killed by police? ALMOST TWICE THE PERCENTAGE OF THEIR POPULATION!! non white citizens are killed by police at almost twice the rate. You saw it right there. Bazingaa! Wheres my medal>?>
and I continued here... after someone asked me.. "yeah, well how many of those people shot were armed" (because they assumed that the non-white population was more likely to be armed and dangerous..)
You can actually use that first site and filter by that statistic!
Its really cool actually of 721 total people shot and killed... 406 of them had a gun.. of the 406 194 white people had a gun 93 black people had a gun 59 hispanics had a gun and 13 others had a gun
Thats 194 white ppl with guns vs. 165
THAT MEANS NOT ONLY ARE MINORITIES KILLED AT A HIGHER RATE... THEY ARE KILLED AT A HIGHER RATE WHEN THEY DONT EVEN HAVE A GUN!
Tell me how ignorant I am when I side with the protestors?
How do you know Donald Trump, is he a friend, because you seem to know him really well, or is this just your opinion. Please clarify
originally posted by: Xcalibur254
The ongoing drama that is Trump using the NFL protests to distract from his failing presidency continues. In his latest Tweet on the matter Trump posted:
So here we have the sitting President demanding that US law be changed so people exercising their First Amendment right can be punished. There's no other way to take this other than Trump hates people expressing their views and he wants to use the government to make them stop.
It's one thing if the owners/NFL want to start levying punishments because of the actions of the players. The players are their employees and subject to their rules and regulations. The First Amendment doesn't protect against that.
It does however protect against the government curtailing free speech. Now while Trump's threat isn't directed at the players it is an attempt to curtail their free speech. He's attempting to blackmail the NFL into stopping the players from protesting.
The funny thing? The NFL gave up their tax exempt status two years ago. So Trump's threat is actually toothless.
That does not however change the fact that the President is going out of his way to stop people from speaking their mind. While some of what Trump has done in the past has been borderline this is a clear threat against the First Amendment. Anyone that defends this move is clearly just a Trump sycophant who will agree with anything he does regardless of the consequences.
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: seedofchucky
Oh really? There are a lot of "don'ts" that Trump has done anyways that I had and have problems with (like spending time tweeting about a peaceful protest instead of worrying about more pressing issues the government should be working on). Yet none of his supporters seem to care about that. The response has been that what he is doing is technically allowed so it is fine. Well now you got my answer for this issue. It is technically allowed and 100% covered by the First Amendment. Don't like it? Too effing bad.
PS: The only way upsetting the customer matters is if your boss cares. The NFL is for the most part condoning these activities, so the customer argument is moot.
originally posted by: Hazardous1408
originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: Hazardous1408
Consider myself corrected.
You're a good man. In fairness, I'm sure there is a segment of Trump's supporters that behave in a cult-like fashion.
You’re a man after my own heart.
Like yourself, I like to defend the unpopular, and liberalism seems to be that... on ATS at least.
I’m really not this passionate about politics in “real life”...
I like a debate though. So I get dragged in from time to time.
On topic (for the first time in this thread);
I really don’t think President Trump’s twitter ramblings are indicative of a nefarious plan to destroy the 1st Amendment.
originally posted by: loam
originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: loam
The President of the United States stifling political speech is another matter altogether.
Quite right. Only we aren't talking about the same president.
You Can’t Occupy This
H.R. 347, benignly titled the Federal Restricted Buildings and Grounds Improvement Act, passed the House 399-3. Such a lopsided vote suggests that nobody in Congress is bothered by this, on either side of the aisle. When President Obama signed it on March 8, almost nobody seems to have cared.
... the law makes it easier for the government to criminalize protest. Period.