Unmasking Antifa Act of 2018

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: chibsonguitarplayer
Enough is enough. Let's fight fire with fire and start a 'Profa' movement ;-)

We did, it's called the Tea Party.

Tea Party didn't wear masks and did not protest violently. Picked up after themselves too, unlike Occupy...

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.

It demonstrates the level headedness of the right overall. Sure there are some crazies, but mostly they are intelligent and well-reasoned people. It's naive and ignorant of world history to think we don't need guns to protect again both the future prospects of a foreign enemy and a tyrannica domesticl government. The need for armed citizens will arise at some point in the probably distant future in one capacity or another.

At the same time the right as a whole also understands the need to assemble peacefully and lawfully. I've heard it said many times at various protests and rallies when the few crazies in the bunch wanted to get crazy that, "it isn't time for civil disobedience." When that time comes and how it will be decided I'm not sure, but... I am sure that your statement as quoted above shows the rational of the right as a whole.

originally posted by: chibsonguitarplayer
Enough is enough. Let's fight fire with fire and start a 'Profa' movement ;-)

We got that but it is being called "anti" when it is "pro".....Antifa are pro Fascists using the anti word to discredit the fact they are really socialist/fascist.

originally posted by: Justoneman

originally posted by: chibsonguitarplayer
Enough is enough. Let's fight fire with fire and start a 'Profa' movement ;-)

We got that but it is being called "anti" when it is "pro".....Antifa are pro Fascists using the anti word to discredit the fact they are really socialist/fascist.

You have no idea what you are talking about. They are ANARCHISTS. In certain respects they are no different from the Montana ranchers who despoil Federal lands.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: DJW001

Yeah how dare he use his CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT and voice a differing opinion.

So what exactly was his crime that makes you cheer the fact he was almost murdered?

When you see an angry mob headed your way the wise thing to do is get out of the way. Instead, this idiot chose to antagonize it. Antagonize, because calm, rational discourse with an angry mob is impossible. The immediate prelude has been edited out, but it is safe to assume he was hurling racial/misogynistic epithets. ANTIFA is wrong to be acting violently, but I have about as much sympathy for the aggressive "Trump supporter" as I have for the idiots who get mauled trying to take selfies with grizzly bears.

Funny how some people conflate verbal violence with "voicing a different opinion." ANTIFA members should be prosecuted for vandalism, not their politics. The proposed amendment stirs politics into the mix.

originally posted by: ThirdEyeofHorus

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: chibsonguitarplayer
Enough is enough. Let's fight fire with fire and start a 'Profa' movement ;-)

We did, it's called the Tea Party.

Tea Party didn't wear masks and did not protest violently. Picked up after themselves too, unlike Occupy...

None of which refutes the fact that they're a bunch of fundamentalist extremists whose preferred form of government is fascism.

Oh, and they made plenty of violent threats. Up to and including civil war if they lost in 2016.

a reply to: filthyphilanthropist

It demonstrates the level headedness of the right overall. Sure there are some crazies, but mostly they are intelligent and well-reasoned people. It's naive and ignorant of world history to think we don't need guns to protect again both the future prospects of a foreign enemy and a tyrannica domesticl government. The need for armed citizens will arise at some point in the probably distant future in one capacity or another.

The "distant future" has arrived. Our military is supposed to be controlled by the civilian government. This cabinet has several generals in it. The cabinet also contains civilians who have pledged to destroy the departments they head. The president lacks a popular mandate, yet his party now controls all three branches of government. For years, the right has been warning about a "left wing coup." Guess what? The coup is here and it came from the right.

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).

True but ANTIFA falls under the definition of sedition. anyone calling for or by action calling for unlawful change is a seditious traitor.Time to start prosecuting.

originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: Xcalibur254

just so I completely understand your position here, you are advocating for the right to harm others during a protest?

Because that is what this is about.

To be fair a mask protects protesters from govt retribution later down the road. Many govts are known to track down and knock off dissidents.

I think 15 years is tyranny by the way.

I am very unhappy with how this is playing out.

a reply to: muzzleflash

"I think 15 years is tyranny by the way."

If you read my early posts, you will see I also believed that. After thinking about it, I now support it.

Imagine someone gets badly hurt, crippled maybe even killed. The mask prevents a successful prosecution on a local level. Then the FBI develops more evidence and they can now get this guy. Not for murder, which would be double jeopardy but for this civil rights law. Exactly analogous to the way civil rights laws were used against the KKK in the 60's. For lesser offenses it can be a fine or short sentence.

I've been thinking this way because there really is very little difference between Antifa and the KKK. They haven't developed to the actual lynch mob phase yet, nor should they be permitted to.

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: filthyphilanthropist

The "distant future" has arrived.

It has for you and maybe your wanna be bolshevik friends. The thousands of people that attend all these protests do not show up looking for a street fight. Neither do they believe we live in a military dictatorship.

a reply to: Xcalibur254
We do believe in the second amendment what makes you think that we also believe in armed insurrection. The second amendment is for when government goes bad that we can protect ourselves. Now if those ANTIFA F*#ks and their communist minions get into power then it is time to take arms. As long as the constitution stands it is all peaceful demonstrations WITHOUT HARASSMENT. I have yet to see any conservatives attack,burn or destroy property like the left has repeatedly done.

originally posted by: Ansuzrune
a reply to: Xcalibur254
We do believe in the second amendment what makes you think that we also believe in armed insurrection. The second amendment is for when government goes bad that we can protect ourselves. Now if those ANTIFA F*#ks and their communist minions get into power then it is time to take arms. As long as the constitution stands it is all peaceful demonstrations WITHOUT HARASSMENT. I have yet to see any conservatives attack,burn or destroy property like the left has repeatedly done.

So if side you don't like wins an election, you want to take up arms and forcibly change who is in power? Got it.

a reply to: toms54

So you support the coup?

a reply to: DJW001

"The immediate prelude has been edited out, but it is safe to assume he was hurling racial/misogynistic epithets."

You assumed wrong. Not only did he not saying anything, he was putting himself in between both groups to keep violence from happening. Then he was whacked on the head with a bike lock. The offender turned out be a college professor who was unmasked by 4chan. He was charged with four counts of assault with a deadly weapon. The guy was trying to keep the peace, which is what police officers should have been doing, but were not because they were told to stand down.

www.youtube.com...

"ANTIFA is wrong to be acting violently, but I have about as much sympathy for the aggressive "Trump supporter" as I have for the idiots who get mauled trying to take selfies with grizzly bears."

You are basing your flawed statements on assumptions. The Trump supporters did nothing justify that kind of violence. You clearly condone the violence while trying to claim you don't. Your thinking is horrifically irrational and biased.

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: toms54

So you support the coup?

That idea is coup coup.

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 are confusing protests with revolution.
If you want a revolution, arm yourselves and go for it. I doubt Antifa would have the guts as they prefer to find smaller groups to attack and run away if they don't have a 10-1 advantage.

a reply to: kyosuke

You assumed wrong. Not only did he not saying anything, he was putting himself in between both groups to keep violence from happening.

I distinctly heard the words "b----" and "f-----." Again, got what he deserved.

I don't believe there should be a "federal law" depriving the wearing of "mask".
Many, if not most states and localities have law, regulations against wearing mask in public. Protesters that feel they need to not,
put their face on their "protest". Should not protest. Protesting is a risky business. Especially when you think you're a "revolutionary".

The right to "peacefully assemble" doesn't require hiding your face.
Anybody that has something they feel is important enough to protest about, should put their name and face on it!

And not be a coward about it.
Zorro and the Lone Ranger are exempt. Lol!

If you feel you need to hide your identity about your beliefs. Nothing you/they have to say is worth an audience.
And should be considered a threat to public peace and civility.

These masked protesters need to man up! If you are fearful of any residual effects for "standing" for your "rights".
They need to check their emotions and rethink what they're "protesting" about.

Can they use this law to stop people using things to hide their face from CCTV etc?.
Plenty of new tech clothing helps you stop face recognition etc.
Will it be illegal?.