It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Irony alert: U.S. calls on Russia to respect peaceful protests

page: 5
40
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 11 2011 @ 01:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by aching_knuckles

Originally posted by macman

Originally posted by aching_knuckles

Originally posted by macman

Originally posted by aching_knuckles

Originally posted by charles1952
By the way, here's my appeal to authority argument: if beezzer, Slayer69, seabag, and macman all told me my thinking was off I would take some time for serious re-examination. These guys are not idiots. I might not agree with them, but I would sure listen and re-think my position.


I see...so if someone told you to give up your rights as an American citizen because they do not agree with your ideology, you "might not agree with them, but I would sure listen and re-think my position."? Well, you do that. I, however, will see their arguments as fallacious and bound to some blind allegiance to something I do not even recognize as being even remotely American.


Very funny retort.
In one hand, like every typical Liberal I have ever encountered, you preach tolerance. Until it comes to those with opposing view points, like a conservative.

Your retort is akin to poop telling vomit it stinks.


Ah, so now I am a liberal?

No, I am an American. If Tea Partiers want to demonstrate for months on end, let them. If Communists want to, let them. If Nazis want to, let them.

What I will not stand for is anti-American citizen and Bill of Rights speech that tells me that the basic rights that I have, which have been handed down for over 200 years, do not exist or only exist subject to local laws and regulations. That is not what the Founding Fathers meant, and the fact that you are arguing against it, and now just trying to be insulting, just shows that you seriously lack the basic concepts of freedom.

The Founding Fathers gave right to everyone, even those you dont agree with. If you cant handle that, maybe you cant handle America.



Hence the reason why I am all for protests and assembling.
When the rights of the individual are encroached by the protesters, then the protest needs to go bye bye.

Again, your retort is basically offering 1+ spoon = SSPLFFTT!

A simple test, if I may.
Are you for the Govt taxing the rich more so then others?
Are you for centralized Govt?
Are you for Govt intrusion of private property?
and finally, who would make a better widget, a private company or the Govt?

Just wondering.



Take this issue at face, no other factors. What if those were Tea Partiers there camping for months, against Obama, would you have decided they needed their skulls cracked? If not, why?
edit on 11-12-2011 by aching_knuckles because: (no reason given)


If they violated the camping laws, then they need to leave as well.
What one must follow, others must as well.

I am no Liberal. It is not different for groups or people that I lean towards. That is saved for Liberals.




posted on Dec, 11 2011 @ 01:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by macman

Originally posted by aching_knuckles

Originally posted by macman

Originally posted by aching_knuckles

Originally posted by macman

Originally posted by aching_knuckles

Originally posted by charles1952
By the way, here's my appeal to authority argument: if beezzer, Slayer69, seabag, and macman all told me my thinking was off I would take some time for serious re-examination. These guys are not idiots. I might not agree with them, but I would sure listen and re-think my position.


I see...so if someone told you to give up your rights as an American citizen because they do not agree with your ideology, you "might not agree with them, but I would sure listen and re-think my position."? Well, you do that. I, however, will see their arguments as fallacious and bound to some blind allegiance to something I do not even recognize as being even remotely American.


Very funny retort.
In one hand, like every typical Liberal I have ever encountered, you preach tolerance. Until it comes to those with opposing view points, like a conservative.

Your retort is akin to poop telling vomit it stinks.


Ah, so now I am a liberal?

No, I am an American. If Tea Partiers want to demonstrate for months on end, let them. If Communists want to, let them. If Nazis want to, let them.

What I will not stand for is anti-American citizen and Bill of Rights speech that tells me that the basic rights that I have, which have been handed down for over 200 years, do not exist or only exist subject to local laws and regulations. That is not what the Founding Fathers meant, and the fact that you are arguing against it, and now just trying to be insulting, just shows that you seriously lack the basic concepts of freedom.

The Founding Fathers gave right to everyone, even those you dont agree with. If you cant handle that, maybe you cant handle America.



Hence the reason why I am all for protests and assembling.
When the rights of the individual are encroached by the protesters, then the protest needs to go bye bye.

Again, your retort is basically offering 1+ spoon = SSPLFFTT!

A simple test, if I may.
Are you for the Govt taxing the rich more so then others?
Are you for centralized Govt?
Are you for Govt intrusion of private property?
and finally, who would make a better widget, a private company or the Govt?

Just wondering.


What does this have to do with the issue at hand? Quit deflecting and using nonsense terms such as "spoon +1" to make it seem your point point is extrememly logical and well thought out. It is obvious it is not, if you need to know how I feel about everything else in order to justify your thought on what I feel about this. That kind of thinking is extremely low brow and 1 dimensional.
edit on 11-12-2011 by aching_knuckles because: (no reason given)


I was trying to understand you, as an ATS'er.
But, no sweat off my butt.
Liberal it looks and sounds.....Liberal it is.



Exactly, deflect another rational question, and call all those who oppose you a "liberal". Now that I have been labeled a "liberal", you dont have to think about my words anymore, and they can just be dismissed as "liberal propaganda", no matter how much truth rings within them.

Way to deny ignorance, brother.



posted on Dec, 11 2011 @ 01:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by aching_knuckles

Originally posted by macman

Originally posted by aching_knuckles

Originally posted by macman

Originally posted by aching_knuckles

Originally posted by macman

Originally posted by aching_knuckles

Originally posted by charles1952
By the way, here's my appeal to authority argument: if beezzer, Slayer69, seabag, and macman all told me my thinking was off I would take some time for serious re-examination. These guys are not idiots. I might not agree with them, but I would sure listen and re-think my position.


I see...so if someone told you to give up your rights as an American citizen because they do not agree with your ideology, you "might not agree with them, but I would sure listen and re-think my position."? Well, you do that. I, however, will see their arguments as fallacious and bound to some blind allegiance to something I do not even recognize as being even remotely American.


Very funny retort.
In one hand, like every typical Liberal I have ever encountered, you preach tolerance. Until it comes to those with opposing view points, like a conservative.

Your retort is akin to poop telling vomit it stinks.


Ah, so now I am a liberal?

No, I am an American. If Tea Partiers want to demonstrate for months on end, let them. If Communists want to, let them. If Nazis want to, let them.

What I will not stand for is anti-American citizen and Bill of Rights speech that tells me that the basic rights that I have, which have been handed down for over 200 years, do not exist or only exist subject to local laws and regulations. That is not what the Founding Fathers meant, and the fact that you are arguing against it, and now just trying to be insulting, just shows that you seriously lack the basic concepts of freedom.

The Founding Fathers gave right to everyone, even those you dont agree with. If you cant handle that, maybe you cant handle America.



Hence the reason why I am all for protests and assembling.
When the rights of the individual are encroached by the protesters, then the protest needs to go bye bye.

Again, your retort is basically offering 1+ spoon = SSPLFFTT!

A simple test, if I may.
Are you for the Govt taxing the rich more so then others?
Are you for centralized Govt?
Are you for Govt intrusion of private property?
and finally, who would make a better widget, a private company or the Govt?

Just wondering.


What does this have to do with the issue at hand? Quit deflecting and using nonsense terms such as "spoon +1" to make it seem your point point is extrememly logical and well thought out. It is obvious it is not, if you need to know how I feel about everything else in order to justify your thought on what I feel about this. That kind of thinking is extremely low brow and 1 dimensional.
edit on 11-12-2011 by aching_knuckles because: (no reason given)


I was trying to understand you, as an ATS'er.
But, no sweat off my butt.
Liberal it looks and sounds.....Liberal it is.



Exactly, deflect another rational question, and call all those who oppose you a "liberal". Now that I have been labeled a "liberal", you dont have to think about my words anymore, and they can just be dismissed as "liberal propaganda", no matter how much truth rings within them.

Way to deny ignorance, brother.


Hey, I offered you a chance to clarify, but your knee jerk Alinsky thinking kicked in.
I offered, and the offer still stands.
Not my fault you glossed over my questions and went to the above method.



posted on Dec, 11 2011 @ 01:58 PM
link   
reply to post by aching_knuckles
 


Apparently our definition of "peacefully assembling" differs.

I do not think those OWS people who had surrounded the police were peacefully protesting. Apparently you do.

To compare that situation to the Boston Massacre....really? Pepper spray on college students compared to killing people?

I agree with those on here who are defending state and local laws about where you can assemble. Let's say I'd like to stage a peaceful protest on the median of I-20 going through Atlanta. It's public property. By your logic, that would be perfectly fine, right? I can camp out there on the median indefinitely, as long as I am peaceful? Why could't I camp out in the actually MIDDLE of the interstate, if I wanted to? It's my right as a citizen to peacefully assemble wherever I want, as long as it's public property, right?



posted on Dec, 11 2011 @ 01:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by aching_knuckles


I see...so if someone told you to give up your rights as an American citizen because they do not agree with your ideology, you "might not agree with them, but I would sure listen and re-think my position."? Well, you do that. I, however, will see their arguments as fallacious and bound to some blind allegiance to something I do not even recognize as being even remotely American.


Look, I’ve read some of your posts here and on other threads and I agree with a lot of things you’ve said. However, the OWS many of you support is simply a figment of your imagination IMO. The REAL OWS is has been hijacked by commies and fascists who are only looking to capitalize on your emotions. The result of OWS will be tearing down the system in America and replacing it with more tyrannical nut jobs that you oppose, which I don’t think any of us wants.

The system is broken, but you don’t repair it with a sledgehammer when a scalpel is required or you will do far more damage than good. OWS is a sledgehammer as far as I’m concerned.

I think you should take another (more honest) look at what you’re supporting. Follow the money…follow the groups that have joined in support of OWS lately and see what their agenda’s are. A lot of big power players behind OWS are the very groups that have been trampling on the constitution for years.

I think you have been duped but it’s not too late to wake up, friend.



posted on Dec, 11 2011 @ 02:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by seabag

Originally posted by aching_knuckles


I see...so if someone told you to give up your rights as an American citizen because they do not agree with your ideology, you "might not agree with them, but I would sure listen and re-think my position."? Well, you do that. I, however, will see their arguments as fallacious and bound to some blind allegiance to something I do not even recognize as being even remotely American.


Look, I’ve read some of your posts here and on other threads and I agree with a lot of things you’ve said. However, the OWS many of you support is simply a figment of your imagination IMO. The REAL OWS is has been hijacked by commies and fascists who are only looking to capitalize on your emotions. The result of OWS will be tearing down the system in America and replacing it with more tyrannical nut jobs that you oppose, which I don’t think any of us wants.

The system is broken, but you don’t repair it with a sledgehammer when a scalpel is required or you will do far more damage than good. OWS is a sledgehammer as far as I’m concerned.

I think you should take another (more honest) look at what you’re supporting. Follow the money…follow the groups that have joined in support of OWS lately and see what their agenda’s are. A lot of big power players behind OWS are the very groups that have been trampling on the constitution for years.

I think you have been duped but it’s not too late to wake up, friend.


The OWS protests make a HELL of a lot more sense to me than anything else anyone has said in a long time. If the OWS movement has been co-opted by "big money interests", why are they against corporations?

You say a sledgehammer is not needed, I disagree. Corporations may no longer be people, and a host of other laws need to be repealed/seriously analyzed, and it need to happen yesterday. Every 20 years or so, they steal a gigantic bubble of money....remember savings and loan in the 80s? Whatever, off topic.

But apparently realizing that the Fed is a scam and that banks have stolen all of the value our fathers worked so hard to provide makes me a liberal, and you people proabbaly think I get paid by George Soros to write this.

I think at this point, maybe you are the one who has been fooled by propaganda about this movement, and what is about. Always ask yourself, "Who benefits?" and 9 out of 10 times, youll find the scoundrel. Who benefits from the American public thinking that OWS is a bunch of dirty protestors that need to be beaten?



posted on Dec, 11 2011 @ 02:12 PM
link   
reply to post by Vitchilo
 


Anytime I see the United States or any other Western country (almost always Britain and France) calling for peaceful protests I think of a few things..

G8 protests.
WTO protests.
RNC, DNC protests.
And any other protests where police corner civilians into tight packs then rush in beating unarmed peaceful people in the face with shields and batons.




posted on Dec, 11 2011 @ 02:14 PM
link   
It is a reflection of Obama's towering ego to demand anything of a sovereign nation. He, his administration, and Congress, have lost complete sight of the fact that we just aren't all that anymore. Russia is working very hard to become relevant again, and they may just go to extremes to do so. The rhetoric coming from the White House is dangerous and has the capability to start something that I'm not sure we can finish.

/TOA



posted on Dec, 11 2011 @ 02:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by GeorgiaGirl
Let's say I'd like to stage a peaceful protest on the median of I-20 going through Atlanta. It's public property. By your logic, that would be perfectly fine, right? I can camp out there on the median indefinitely, as long as I am peaceful? Why could't I camp out in the actually MIDDLE of the interstate, if I wanted to? It's my right as a citizen to peacefully assemble wherever I want, as long as it's public property, right?



Yes. If you can get a march on I-20 going, without using violence to stop traffic, then it is fair game. If the march is started by some men firing rifles to stop traffic, maybe then it is a problem. Without permits and legal red tape that would be denied, effectively ending our rights.

Protesters have as much a right to the public property as you, no? Rights do not go away because some of the population is inconvenienced, even though that is how modern power structures interperet the Constitution.

I understand this is a foreign and strange concept for you to follow, and thats because youve been conditioned to accept the pressure of "social norms" and anything outside of that is foreign and not even a comprehensible plan of action. But that is what a protest is SUPPOSED to do, is interrupt and make people aware.

Listen, I understand it is radical and a hard concept to grasp, but that is what the Founding Fathers intended. The Founding Fathers were radicals who got sick of getting ripped off by England and stood up for themselves.



posted on Dec, 11 2011 @ 02:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by GeorgiaGirl

I agree with those on here who are defending state and local laws about where you can assemble.


So then, technically, you agree that the Bill of Rights can be superceded by your local Town Mayor. That is lunacy to me.



posted on Dec, 11 2011 @ 02:29 PM
link   
reply to post by aching_knuckles
 



The OWS protests make a HELL of a lot more sense to me than anything else anyone has said in a long time. If the OWS movement has been co-opted by "big money interests", why are they against corporations?


What YOU believe in makes sense to you, not what OWS stands for. I have heard 700 different explanations about what OWS stands for and many are contradictory. I’ve also heard some say OWS stands for whatever you want it to stand for…how can that be?


You say a sledgehammer is not needed, I disagree. Corporations may no longer be people, and a host of other laws need to be repealed/seriously analyzed, and it need to happen yesterday. Every 20 years or so, they steal a gigantic bubble of money....remember savings and loan in the 80s? Whatever, off topic.


I agree with you…Big change is needed. Let me rephrase my statement - When a sledgehammer is needed you don’t bring a wrecking ball or TNT. A lot of things need to change but a bunch of people holding signs, inciting violence and destroying property will only cause more damage. Tell me how the things you want will be accomplished by OWS tactics?? Do you think it will affect the decisions of those in power?? Are they going to just say, “Ya know…those OWS’ers are right. We need to change our ways!” Not Hardly!!



But apparently realizing that the Fed is a scam and that banks have stolen all of the value our fathers worked so hard to provide makes me a liberal, and you people proabbaly think I get paid by George Soros to write this.

I think at this point, maybe you are the one who has been fooled by propaganda about this movement, and what is about. Always ask yourself, "Who benefits?" and 9 out of 10 times, youll find the scoundrel. Who benefits from the American public thinking that OWS is a bunch of dirty protestors that need to be beaten?


I never labeled you a liberal or anything else for that matter. I agree with your stand on protecting the constitution and your disgust with the crooks among us. I disagree that OWS is somehow a vehicle for change. I also disagree that OWS’s actions fall under the “right to peacefully assemble” because it’s been far from “peaceful” in many instances.

I can tell you that MediaMatters, the SEIU, MoveOn.org, the Tides Center, American Nazi Party, Hugo Chavez, Communist Party USA et al who support OWS have NEVER done anything that serves my interests or the interests of the majority in America! Never! The list of supporters tells me ALL I NEED TO KNOW about OWS and why it doesn’t represent me.



posted on Dec, 11 2011 @ 02:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by aching_knuckles

Originally posted by GeorgiaGirl
Let's say I'd like to stage a peaceful protest on the median of I-20 going through Atlanta. It's public property. By your logic, that would be perfectly fine, right? I can camp out there on the median indefinitely, as long as I am peaceful? Why could't I camp out in the actually MIDDLE of the interstate, if I wanted to? It's my right as a citizen to peacefully assemble wherever I want, as long as it's public property, right?



Yes. If you can get a march on I-20 going, without using violence to stop traffic, then it is fair game.


Um, no!!!!
Then the mob tramples on the rights of others.
No longer a peaceful protest.



posted on Dec, 11 2011 @ 02:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by macman

Originally posted by aching_knuckles

Originally posted by GeorgiaGirl
Let's say I'd like to stage a peaceful protest on the median of I-20 going through Atlanta. It's public property. By your logic, that would be perfectly fine, right? I can camp out there on the median indefinitely, as long as I am peaceful? Why could't I camp out in the actually MIDDLE of the interstate, if I wanted to? It's my right as a citizen to peacefully assemble wherever I want, as long as it's public property, right?



Yes. If you can get a march on I-20 going, without using violence to stop traffic, then it is fair game.


Um, no!!!!
Then the mob tramples on the rights of others.
No longer a peaceful protest.


you DO NOT have a RIGHT to drive fast on I-20. That is what local laws regulate it as, and it is therefore a PRIVILEGE granted to you.

you DO have a RIGHT to peacably assemble on I-20. The fact that people cant grasp this concept as Americans frightens and upsets me. YOU ARE ALL ARGUING IN FAVOR OF YOUR SERVITUTDE! DONT YOU SEE? If the Founding Fathers were alive they would laugh at you.



posted on Dec, 11 2011 @ 02:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by seabag

Look, I’ve read some of your posts here and on other threads and I agree with a lot of things you’ve said. However, the OWS many of you support is simply a figment of your imagination IMO. The REAL OWS is has been hijacked by commies and fascists who are only looking to capitalize on your emotions. The result of OWS will be tearing down the system in America and replacing it with more tyrannical nut jobs that you oppose, which I don’t think any of us wants.


Is it possible for a communist to capitalize?


The emotions that OWSers are real, a lot of people hold the same feelings. They were created by Capitalism. The problems we have today weren't created by communists. If communist groups join in on the OWS movement, it's because they want to voice their self, as it's a opportunistic time, BECAUSE the OWS have a lot of bad feelings towards capitalism. That doesn't mean they are anti-capitalism, they are against where capitalism is leading us.


The system is broken, but you don’t repair it with a sledgehammer when a scalpel is required or you will do far more damage than good. OWS is a sledgehammer as far as I’m concerned.

I think you should take another (more honest) look at what you’re supporting. Follow the money…follow the groups that have joined in support of OWS lately and see what their agenda’s are. A lot of big power players behind OWS are the very groups that have been trampling on the constitution for years.

I think you have been duped but it’s not too late to wake up, friend.


What do you suggest? A peaceful takeover of the government?


Where are the government protests at? They don't exist.

OWSers are protesting because they can feel what is coming and it's not going to be pretty. How could a sane person that understands what could be in store for us stand and do nothing?
edit on 11-12-2011 by satron because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 11 2011 @ 02:48 PM
link   
hahahaha - yes Irony indeed.

Cause the USA is sooooooo respectful of its own internal peaceful protestors.



posted on Dec, 11 2011 @ 02:50 PM
link   
reply to post by aching_knuckles
 




Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.


All it says is that the Congress can't make a law abridging the right of the people to assemble peaceably.

CONGRESS can't.



The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.


The STATES can make laws about where, when, and how you can assemble within those states.

That is RIGHT THERE in the Bill of Rights.

There is nothing in the Bill of Rights that says "people can assemble whenever, wherever, and however they want." It really isn't there. Under the Bill of Rights, people do NOT have the rights that you are saying they do. Sorry. States do have the authority to make these laws.


The Opening Phrase of the 1st Amendment says "Congress shall make no law." This specifically prohibits Congress from making laws interfering with the rights mentioned in this amendment. It does not however, prohibit the states from making such laws, nor does it prohibit individuals from restricting these rights to those who may be under their influence.

Read more: www.revolutionary-war-and-beyond.com...


And some more:


The right to assemble is not an absolute right. There are some restrictions on this right as there are with other rights. The right to assemble is not as strongly protected by the government as other rights, such as the freedom of speech. This is because groups that assemble often do so, not with just speech, but with some type of conduct, such as picketing, protesting, marching or gathering in a park, which may disrupt the peace.

The courts have ruled that, while it is the responsibility of the government to protect the people's right to assemble, it is also the government's responsibility to keep the peace. Because of this, the courts have allowed governments to make reasonable restrictions on the time, place and manner of these assemblies. The government may place restrictions on the right to assemble that will maintain law and order, facilitate traffic, protect private property and reduce noise congestion.

The courts allow these restrictions, as long as the restrictions are not aimed at squelching a particular group's free speech because it is unpopular or not liked. Reasonable restrictions would include such things as requiring permits to hold a large public gathering in a park or to hold a parade downtown, making local curfews for teenagers or preventing protesters from holding up traffic.

Read more: www.revolutionary-war-and-beyond.com...


I'm a big fan of the Constitution. But it doesn't give you freedom to do just whatever you want.

So no, I can't camp out on I-20, just because I want to exercise what I think are my rights.



posted on Dec, 11 2011 @ 02:50 PM
link   
It's more "Do as I say and not as I do" although It's also very ironic and hypocritical too....


Would anyone expect anything else?




posted on Dec, 11 2011 @ 02:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by aching_knuckles

Originally posted by macman

Originally posted by aching_knuckles

Originally posted by GeorgiaGirl
Let's say I'd like to stage a peaceful protest on the median of I-20 going through Atlanta. It's public property. By your logic, that would be perfectly fine, right? I can camp out there on the median indefinitely, as long as I am peaceful? Why could't I camp out in the actually MIDDLE of the interstate, if I wanted to? It's my right as a citizen to peacefully assemble wherever I want, as long as it's public property, right?



Yes. If you can get a march on I-20 going, without using violence to stop traffic, then it is fair game.


Um, no!!!!
Then the mob tramples on the rights of others.
No longer a peaceful protest.


you DO NOT have a RIGHT to drive fast on I-20. That is what local laws regulate it as, and it is therefore a PRIVILEGE granted to you.

you DO have a RIGHT to peacably assemble on I-20. The fact that people cant grasp this concept as Americans frightens and upsets me. YOU ARE ALL ARGUING IN FAVOR OF YOUR SERVITUTDE! DONT YOU SEE? If the Founding Fathers were alive they would laugh at you.


SO clueless.

Again, at the very basic level. Once the rights of others are trampled on by the protest, then it is in violation.
The use of the freeway is the rights of others. Once the mob stops others from using it, you have your violation.

And no, I agree in favor of the rights of the individual.
You want the rules bent or broken to achieve the holier then thou outcome.
BIG difference.



posted on Dec, 11 2011 @ 02:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by aching_knuckles

Originally posted by GeorgiaGirl

I agree with those on here who are defending state and local laws about where you can assemble.


So then, technically, you agree that the Bill of Rights can be superceded by your local Town Mayor. That is lunacy to me.


I didn't say that.

The Bill of Rights did.



posted on Dec, 11 2011 @ 02:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by macman

Originally posted by aching_knuckles

Originally posted by macman

Originally posted by aching_knuckles

Originally posted by GeorgiaGirl
Let's say I'd like to stage a peaceful protest on the median of I-20 going through Atlanta. It's public property. By your logic, that would be perfectly fine, right? I can camp out there on the median indefinitely, as long as I am peaceful? Why could't I camp out in the actually MIDDLE of the interstate, if I wanted to? It's my right as a citizen to peacefully assemble wherever I want, as long as it's public property, right?



Yes. If you can get a march on I-20 going, without using violence to stop traffic, then it is fair game.


Um, no!!!!
Then the mob tramples on the rights of others.
No longer a peaceful protest.


you DO NOT have a RIGHT to drive fast on I-20. That is what local laws regulate it as, and it is therefore a PRIVILEGE granted to you.

you DO have a RIGHT to peacably assemble on I-20. The fact that people cant grasp this concept as Americans frightens and upsets me. YOU ARE ALL ARGUING IN FAVOR OF YOUR SERVITUTDE! DONT YOU SEE? If the Founding Fathers were alive they would laugh at you.


SO clueless.

Again, at the very basic level. Once the rights of others are trampled on by the protest, then it is in violation.
The use of the freeway is the rights of others. Once the mob stops others from using it, you have your violation.

And no, I agree in favor of the rights of the individual.
You want the rules bent or broken to achieve the holier then thou outcome.
BIG difference.



Disagree. Those people still have the right to use the highway during the protest, it will just slow them down.

Once again, you have the RIGHT to be ON the highway, the SPEED at which you travel on the highway is the PRIVILEGE which is GRANTED to you.

Calling me clueless doesnt make your point more valid.

I assume that you identify as Conservative and for less government. So why are you arguing for more Government over the Individual right now? It makes no sense. You are arguing against your own ideology.



new topics

top topics



 
40
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join