Charlottesville riots

[pinstripers]

I cannot imagine any community would allow marchers with flaming torches. Not anywhere, even without the symbolism.

[wufan]

1) I voted for Trump. I probably would not do it now, but I did vote for him. Having said that, I am concerned about his embrace of dictators such as Dueterte in the Phillipines.
2) I believe in freedom of speech, but disagree with anyone's right to yell 'fire' in a crowded theater just for the hell of it. Same with the people who were looking for trouble in Charlotteville this weekend on both sides.
If Canada, Europe and Australia can put sensible limits on what we might lump into the worst of "free speech", then we should be able to do it, too.
3) I don't always agree with the ACLU. I back probably 50 percent of their causes, but reject the other 50%. The ACLU does exist to defend our constitutional rights. I may only agree with about half the stuff they do, but
I believe they are a necessary evil.

I don't believe in limiting free speech, with the exception of speech that causes bodily harm or calls for bodily harm. When you limit free speech or freedom of assembly you push dangerous people under ground. You don't allow bad ideas (white nationalism) to be struck down by good ideas (individual freedom).

[shockmonster]

When David Duke shows up with 100 white guys marching through a Southern town at night carrying torches...that is absolutely begging for a confrontation.

That's what the Klan used to do back in the days when the march sometimes ended up with a lynching. The symbolism of carrying torches at night is one of the most provocative things that can be done in the South.

We have a right to expression, but we need to remember that the exercise of our rights can have consequences. In this case the consequences were predictable. If a peaceful protest was the intention, then this was the most poorly planned protest in history.

Who believes that their intention was peaceful and who believes that the ANTIFA had hoped that the altercation would end well. The ANTIFA usually wears masks to hide their faces but their intentions are noble?

[wufan]

And while I don't think we necessarily need to remove monuments of founding fathers, we also need to stop circle jerking about them and the constitution as if they were some nobler breed of human. They had flaws, they had slaves, and they put into the constitution one of the most reprehensible pieces of legislation our nation has ever owned.

Yes slavery is morally reprehensible, but I'm going to have to bring up moral equivalency between slavery and abortion. I'm not going to argue beyond this statement, but I think it is worth some critical thinking on the value of life.

[Aargh]

No. Another one of the dumbass national narratives going on right now. You can't justify physical violence simply because another person's words hurt your damn feelings or personal inclinations. Not now; not ever.

We obviously had a huge misconnect. The point I was trying to make was that the protest was planned in a way that would be the absolutely most likely way to create a conflict. At no time did I attempt to justify throwing the first punch because of a perception.

It was a certainty that a first punch would be thrown based on the planning of the protest.

My criticism is that the protest was planned in a way that reeks of "Let's go do this - it's certain to create a confrontation". I can't excuse someone looking for trouble, and in my opinion the original protesters were doing that. Then if there is a question of who threw the first punch the protest planners point to the other side and say, "See, they started it. It's all their fault". That's just plain chicken ****.

[shockmonster]

We obviously had a huge misconnect. The point I was trying to make was that the protest was planned in a way that would be the absolutely most likely way to create a conflict. At no time did I attempt to justify throwing the first punch because of a perception.

It was a certainty that a first punch would be thrown based on the planning of the protest.

My criticism is that the protest was planned in a way that reeks of "Let's go do this - it's certain to create a confrontation". I can't excuse someone looking for trouble, and in my opinion the original protesters were doing that. Then if there is a question of who threw the first punch the protest planners point to the other side and say, "See, they started it. It's all their fault". That's just plain chicken ****.

You continue to defend the ANTIFA professional organization. They don't hold jobs except to go around looking to sew seeds of trouble.

[Aargh]

You continue to defend the ANTIFA professional organization. They don't hold jobs except to go around looking to sew seeds of trouble.

You seem to want to force everyone into one of two camps. I haven't defended anybody. I am critical of the original protesters. They went looking for a fight and found one. To me, that's more significant than who threw the first punch.

Just because I'm critical of some white supremacists doesn't mean that I support the people on the other side of the conflict.

I'm reminded of the guy from Illinois State who repeatedly kneed Garrett Stutz in the grapes in St. Louis. He knew there would be a reaction. As long as he got away with the provocation, when Stutz retaliated, he could play the victim, point to Stutz, and say, "look what he did to me".

I don't struggle to see people defending Neo-Nazis and white supremacists. I'm aware that we still have a large number of racists in this country. And I am aware that all racists are not white. It goes every direction.

[pinstripers]

I think you just let the Nazis have their parade or protest, or whatever. Have the police keep them straight and don't cover it with media, no cameras, no nuthin. Keep the alt-left away from them. No conflict, no news, no publicity.

[Aargh]

I think you just let the Nazis have their parade or protest, or whatever. Have the police keep them straight and don't cover it with media, no cameras, no nuthin. Keep the alt-left away from them. No conflict, no news, no publicity.

You have won the thread. trolls go away if you don't feed them.

[shockmonster]

I believe that the NAZIs are racist and looking for trouble in Charlottesville and the ANTIFA showed up and murder-mayhem broke out.

However, the ANTIFA showed up in the Ferguson RIOTS and there were no NAZIs. They showed up in the Baltimore RIOTS and there were no NAZIs. They showed in the RIOTS in DC after Pres. Trump was elected and no NAZIs. The ANTIFA showed up in the Berkely RIOTS and there was no NAZI. The ANTIFA showed up in the Wall Street sitin NY and the violence that followed and there were no NAZIs. The ANTIFA showed up at Trump campaign rallies and RIOTS/Violence broke out. There were no NAZIs. The ANTIFA are professionals. They don't have jobs but fly around the US to sew hate. Does anyone see a pattern yet?

[ShockingButTrue]

I believe that the NAZIs are racist and looking for trouble in Charlottesville and the ANTIFA showed up and murder-mayhem broke out.

However, the ANTIFA showed up in the Ferguson RIOTS and there were no NAZIs. They showed up in the Baltimore RIOTS and there were no NAZIs. They showed in the RIOTS in DC after Pres. Trump was elected and no NAZIs. The ANTIFA showed up in the Berkely RIOTS and there was no NAZI. The ANTIFA showed up in the Wall Street sitin NY and the violence that followed and there were no NAZIs. The ANTIFA showed up at Trump campaign rallies and RIOTS/Violence broke out. There were no NAZIs. The ANTIFA are professionals. They don't have jobs but fly around the US to sew hate. Does anyone see a pattern yet?

That's all I'm saying...

[jdshock]

That's impossible. If you support the ACLU, you support the entire enchilada. They are pretty consistent. They are anti-establishment, anti-government, anti-Christian, and anti-majority. It used to be that our shared values decided what communities would allow. The ACLU ended that.

I don't understand this point. Why couldn't someone support some of their cases but not others? It seems really easy to me to just say "yeah, I define free speech a little differently in this one example than they do."

Or like you could support most of their causes but you support for-profit prisons for whatever reason. It's not like the ACLU is made up of robots that cannot error. You can definitely support most of their causes and think they went too far on others.

[ShockCrazy]

Yes slavery is morally reprehensible, but I'm going to have to bring up moral equivalency between slavery and abortion. I'm not going to argue beyond this statement, but I think it is worth some critical thinking on the value of life.

I am opposed to abortion. Abortion isn't in the constitution. Slavery is. Also I am pro-life. I have no idea what your statement is trying to prove or accomplish.

[BOBB]

Uh, no.........about 20 seconds in, "Who threw the first punch or launched the first rock was, it seemed, impossible to say"

Nazis were marching in our streets. Why is who threw the first punch important to you? Both sides were armed and gunning for confrontation. If an Antifa commie tbrew the first punch does that excuse the Nazis somehow?

[ShockerPhi]

People need to go ahead and stop with the whole "Well if you're criticizing this one side, you clearly support the other side" thing when the two sides are radically far apart. This is the problem with the direction this country is headed. We keep demonizing everyone on the "other side" claiming they're racist, anarchist, etc. Realistically, I'm pretty sure we're all mostly in agreement here. Nazi white-supremacists = bad. ANTIFA = bad.

Also for the record, I personally wish that hate speech was NOT protected by the 1st amendment. I wish Nazis did not have the right to assemble and demonstrate in public venues. That's just my opinion and wanted to throw that out there.