Unmasking Antifa Act of 2018

a reply to: Aazadan

We have a fascist government.

No, you are mistaken (unless you have evidence?).

We have a nationalist government, very different. MAGA = America/American Citizens first (before/over foreign countries and their citizens)

Nationalism is not fascism. It is not authoritarianism. It is not racism. It is common sense - your country should put your interests first.

Since you threw out the "fascist" canard, however, I can immediately infer you support a communist/socialist government. Sorry, but that is patently illegal (per Article 4 Section 4 US Constitution). Guess you won't get those open borders after all?

a reply to: Aazadan

We have a fascist government.

AKA you have a personal dislike of this government, and have taken to spreading lies/rumors and other lazy-minded drivel.

Hey, anything beats a socialist/communist government (just ask Venezuela about that). Fortunately, we're actually a Nationalist/Conservative/Libertarian government.

Not sure what your problem is with that, since individual rights and individual freedoms will prosper. That is the only thing that matters: ensuring Americans and our unalienable rights are defended (that is why we created government, after all)

Read the Constitution some time, especially amendments 1-10 (the BOR). Those are the real issues. Not these nonsensical and irrational wedge issues you all keep trying to insert. Go ahead and run a campaign on those fringe wedge issues though. We'll continue upholding the BOR/Constitution and ensuring each individual American achieves a state of maximum freedom/liberty/independence.

originally posted by: JBurns
AKA you have a personal dislike of this government, and have taken to spreading lies/rumors and other lazy-minded drivel.

It has nothing to do with my dislike for the current regime. We're not all the way there yet, but our government is behaving in a very fascist manner.

Read the Constitution some time, especially amendments 1-10 (the BOR). Those are the real issues. Not these nonsensical and irrational wedge issues you all keep trying to insert. Go ahead and run a campaign on those fringe wedge issues though. We'll continue upholding the BOR/Constitution and ensuring each individual American achieves a state of maximum freedom/liberty/independence.

I've read it a bunch. The Constitution is in need of some serious updates. It was good for it's time, but over the past 200+ years some cracks have developed in it. In terms of design it is a very deeply flawed document.

a reply to: Aazadan

Walking around with their faces covered, being intimidating hooligans, trying to prevent being videoed like Antifa?

This should just be called the "Make it easier for us to use our newly minted facial recognition technology law" because that is what it is...

a reply to: Variable7

I guessed you missed posts by the person with current specific laws regarding violent acts wearing a mask. Nobody cares if people are peaceful protesting with masks on. The issue is with Antifa wearing masks to hide identities while committing intimidation, violence, and acts of vandalism.

a reply to: Aazadan

What are thew flaws exactly?

a reply to: odd1out

There are infrared cameras that can be used to identify covered faces......

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: Aazadan

What are thew flaws exactly?

I'll give you 5 off the top of my head:
A lack of rights surrounding the concept of data.
A lack of ability for the legislative branch to enforce laws they pass.
A lack of consistency in the executive branch.
A lack of framework when dealing with interdependence between states.
An inability to scale to population size. The system as laid out, is only good up to about 100 million people, and unravels as you go past that especially in the House.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
Without reading the law, and I will when I have a moment, wouldn't being arrested for just wearing a mask be a "pre-crime" issue?

Do you mean “without reading the OP”? Because it says right there in the OP....

Under the act, anyone “wearing a mask” or in disguise who “injures, oppresses, threatens, or intimidates any person … in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege” would be subject to a fine or up to 15 years in prison.

That means that someone that is wearing a mask that is ALSO in the commission of the stated crimes would therefore be in violation of the proposed legislation.

originally posted by: Fools

originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: toms54

I hope so too. If you want to protest, do it peacefully. Otherwise, go to jail. Something everyone can agree on.

Although I agree with that in general, would the United States even exist if our founders only protested peacefully?

Our founders were also knowingly committing an illegal act and were willing to deal with the consequences of treason, and the slew of other crimes they knowingly committed.

When it gets bad enough for you that you are willing to declare independence and start your own country... protesting is no longer in the picture.

Are ANTIFA like the forefathers? That their cause is so important, and their opponents so oppressive and that they need to take over the country and kill anyone who stands in their way? Are they fighting for freedom and to prevent oppression?

Or are they just kids with too much hormonal influences and not enough guidance (from Real adults) to put it to good use?

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
a reply to: toms54

How do they define wearing a mask or in disguise? Couldn't posting anonymously on a website or using a VPN to hide your IP address also be considered a form of disguise?

As we've seen in the past, if we give the government an inch they'll always take a mile.

The law isn't against disguises. As long as you don't:

“injures, oppresses, threatens, or intimidates any person … in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege”

Then it doesn't matter what you wear.

originally posted by: Aazadan
An inability to scale to population size. The system as laid out, is only good up to about 100 million people, and unravels as you go past that especially in the House.

It doesn't help that Congress stopped increasing the number of Representatives over 100 years ago as some sort of way to maintain political power for one party at the time. If we'd gone with something like the Wyoming Rule we'd have 545 representatives today. If Article the First had become an amendment we'd have over 6,000 representatives.

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
a reply to: network dude

It's funny how it's always the side that says we need the Second Amendment so we can defend ourselves from a corrupt government is the same side that demands protests against a corrupt government be peaceful.

You gotta be kidding me.

This is the problem with you people. You can't comprehend the responsible use of a gun. You don't use it to protest taxes or immigration...

You use it when they start shipping every ____ person to a concentration camp whether they broke a law or not.

You use it when a president declares themself dictator and ends elections, declaring a dynasty so their family rules forever.

You use it when life becomes unbearable with no foreseeable change and you've tried everything else.


You're just, being a contrarian or something. Nothing you say makes any sense.

wow such moving the goal posts, double speak and hypocrisy all rolled into one.

first your fighting that this law is unconstitutional, the government is facist and all your doing is fighting for constitutional rights.

then when facts and the constitution doesn't support your rant anymore THEN you claim the constitution is "old, has cracks and needs to be changed"

wow....just wow...

you cant have it both ways, defend it when it suits you then claim its "flawed " when it shoots you down.

you use fascism comparison incorrectly, you use the constitution only when convenient, misquote the constitution then claim it is flawed must be changed to meet your previous rants.

you expected to be taken seriously after that?

scrounger

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: JBurns
a reply to: yuppa

Yes, except we were morally right (a people righteously fighting for freedom/liberty) while antifa goons are squarely in the wrong.

antifa is unwanted, unnecessary and clearly only lashing out in anger at a political party they merely dislike. All their other fluff is just that: nonsensical irrational fluff. We don't want their solutions. We don't need their mob street violence. We certainly don't want their incorrect political ideology.

To be perfectly frank, I'd prefer they all packed their bags tonight and got the h### out of my beautiful country. Let them go live as an illegal alien in another country and see how many morons there come to their defense (hint: very few to zero, depending on the country).

It's in their name, anti-fascists.

We have a fascist government.

It should be no surprise they're speaking up.

They are anti fascist but they never harm corporations or governments. Just common people.

We have a fascist government and you all have not organized a true revolution with any strength behind it at all, other than hitting someone you don't even know while hiding your identity? And bitching online? What are you then, lazy or cowards?

Anyone who hides behind a mask to get their point across IMHO opinion is a coward. This includes the black masks of Antifa and the white hoods of the KKK.

originally posted by: 3n19m470

originally posted by: Fools

originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: toms54

I hope so too. If you want to protest, do it peacefully. Otherwise, go to jail. Something everyone can agree on.

Although I agree with that in general, would the United States even exist if our founders only protested peacefully?

Our founders were also knowingly committing an illegal act and were willing to deal with the consequences of treason, and the slew of other crimes they knowingly committed.

When it gets bad enough for you that you are willing to declare independence and start your own country... protesting is no longer in the picture.

Are ANTIFA like the forefathers? That their cause is so important, and their opponents so oppressive and that they need to take over the country and kill anyone who stands in their way? Are they fighting for freedom and to prevent oppression?

Or are they just kids with too much hormonal influences and not enough guidance (from Real adults) to put it to good use?

They are to me obviously ignorant, but that being said, they should have the same rights. I suppose if the bill did not single them out I would make a little more room.

I get the whole win the battle win the war thing, but there are points of contention in the American idea. Sure these communist dips use it against us, but I would prefer to defeat them soundly physically as well as philosophically.

a reply to: Aazadan No the Constitution is just fine. It's the politicians who try to run around it that's the problem.

originally posted by: Fools

originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: toms54

I hope so too. If you want to protest, do it peacefully. Otherwise, go to jail. Something everyone can agree on.

Although I agree with that in general, would the United States even exist if our founders only protested peacefully?

But the revolutionists fought the British army and navy, Antifa fights civilians which I believe is even an international crime you can be punished for if you do it as a soldier in a foreign land. At least it would violate the unspoken/unwritten rules of engagement. This is just civilians who have a tiff with a government (well, they imagine one anyway) and they allow it to extend to the general population as a means to induce a shock factor reaction that would have the nation give in to their demands. And I don't mean to be condescending or to educate you Fools, obviously you know this. I was just making a passing comment and happened to use the reply feature to your post.

Personally I am a bit torn by this. I feel that the dumb-wordfordonkeys who make up Antifa are the kind of people who would see getting Congress to have to resort to drafting a law devoted to their existence as a victory and a major effect they had produced through their efforts and it will encourage them since they will get a real burst of reassurance and energy by the government's acknowledging them as a real organization and Amy question they may just be running with a crowd of hoodlums will be squashed and their participation warranted.