First Amendment Rights

[baddog]

Man, supposedly the First Amendment says it’s ok to burn and loot stores and businesses during “peaceful protests”, but if you slightly raise your voice at a school board meeting, the Gestapo police will escort you to jail. Glad this was all redorded by several sources….

 

[LumRaiderFan]

15 minutes ago, baddog said:

Man, supposedly the First Amendment says it’s ok to burn and loot stores and businesses during “peaceful protests”, but if you slightly raise your voice at a school board meeting, the Gestapo police will escort you to jail. Glad this was all redorded by several sources….

 

SMH

[tvc184]

The burn and loot stores under the First Amendment it’s a really ridiculous. Nobody has ever been allowed to commit a crime under the protection of the First Amendment. 

This guy violated the law, he was given opportunity to shut up and failed to do so. Maybe the DA for political purposes as well not accept charges. 

This is not rocket science. 

[baddog]

25 minutes ago, tvc184 said:

The burn and loot stores under the First Amendment it’s a really ridiculous. Nobody has ever been allowed to commit a crime under the protection of the First Amendment. 

This guy violated the law, he was given opportunity to shut up and failed to do so. Maybe the DA for political purposes as well not accept charges. 

This is not rocket science. 

I was being facetious with the rioting and looting comment, since our now VP put money up for their bail, but what law did this guy violate?

[tvc184]

8 minutes ago, baddog said:

I was being facetious with the rioting and looting comment, since our now VP put money up for their bail, but what law did this guy violate?

Obviously you didn’t think arson was covered under 1A. 

Disrupting a meeting as far as the crime. 

[baddog]

4 minutes ago, tvc184 said:

Obviously you didn’t think arson was covered under 1A. 

Disrupting a meeting as far as the crime. 

Here’s a disruption for the Governor of NH. The video showing people being arrested formdoing absolutely nothing has been taken down. Go figure.

 

[baddog]

Found the videos. Took me a while. People arrested for no reason. Cops apologizing after taking them outside.

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

[tvc184]

I found the follow up on your first post. The man sued the officer individually for violating his rights. The United States District Court gave a summary judgment that cleared the officer because the man’s rights we’re not violating. That was an easy call before  reading the article.

While this is hardly interesting, it is a seven year old case. Was it relevant or something happening now or did you just happen to see it?

[tvc184]

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

[tvc184]

24 minutes ago, baddog said:

Found the videos. Took me a while. People arrested for no reason. Cops apologizing after taking them outside.

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

You said it was taken down for no reason but  you found it? Maybe I’m missing that point.

You also drew the conclusion that they were arrested for no reason. There is nothing in the videos that shows that. The video starts after the arrests so it’s easy to write a news article which is obviously slanted (but I am not negating validity), that puts out an opinion piece and then  asks for donations.

Maybe it was wrongful arrests and maybe their rights were violated but that will shake out in court. Opinion articles are interesting but that is what they are, one person’s  opinion.

[tvc184]

Typical Republican governor…..

 White privilege…..

I was trying to preempt the liberal side. 😂

[baddog]

1 hour ago, tvc184 said:

You said it was taken down for no reason but  you found it? Maybe I’m missing that point.

You also drew the conclusion that they were arrested for no reason. There is nothing in the videos that shows that. The video starts after the arrests so it’s easy to write a news article which is obviously slanted (but I am not negating validity), that puts out an opinion piece and then  asks for donations.

Maybe it was wrongful arrests and maybe their rights were violated but that will shake out in court. Opinion articles are interesting but that is what they are, one person’s  opinion.

The original video that I saw was a good raw video shot by a woman attending the meeting. Still can’t find that one. These are excerpts from that video. Funny how in the original video, the narrator (yes, narrator) said that this would happen….. videos showing nothing but the people being escorted off. I’ll keep searching for it. 
Just about everything on this board is opinion. 

[baddog]

2 hours ago, tvc184 said:

I found the follow up on your first post. The man sued the officer individually for violating his rights. The United States District Court gave a summary judgment that cleared the officer because the man’s rights we’re not violating. That was an easy call before  reading the article.

While this is hardly interesting, it is a seven year old case. Was it relevant or something happening now or did you just happen to see it?

Stumbled on it. Thought it was interesting. Does age really matter?

[tvc184]

5 minutes ago, baddog said:

Stumbled on it. Thought it was interesting. Does age really matter?

No but if you want to go back almost a decade, we could be discussing all kinds of stuff. Heck, let’s go back and discuss Obama’s  first year….

It just does not seem relevant today.

[tvc184]

11 minutes ago, baddog said:

The original video that I saw was a good raw video shot by a woman attending the meeting. Still can’t find that one. These are excerpts from that video. Funny how in the original video, the narrator (yes, narrator) said that this would happen….. videos showing nothing but the people being escorted off. I’ll keep searching for it. 
Just about everything on this board is opinion. 

Most of our comments are opinions.

Most news articles are fact as best the reporter can tell. As examples, it is a fact that Alec Baldwin shot and killed a woman, Kyle Rittenhouse shot and killed a couple of people and used an AR-5, a crowd at a concert in Houston caused several deaths and injuries, etc. At this point whether criminal charges are valid, is an opinion.

Saying that the police were arresting someone without legal justification on a political website is speculation or wishful thinking. As I said in at least a couple of places, the accusation still might be true. I don’t know but the websites you posted don’t back up the accusations

I was mainly commenting on your statement that the police where arresting people “for doing absolutely nothing” which seems like a Who Wants To Be a Millionaire final answer based on a political opinion from a political website.

You’re entitled to it and I have no problem with it. I was just pointing out that there is nothing on the pages that backs up author’s beliefs. While that seems like my opinion, I will stick with it as a fact. Nothing in those videos shows that the arrests were unlawful.

[baddog]

1 hour ago, tvc184 said:

Most of our comments are opinions.

Most news articles are fact as best the reporter can tell. As examples, it is a fact that Alec Baldwin shot and killed a woman, Kyle Rittenhouse shot and killed a couple of people and used an AR-5, a crowd at a concert in Houston caused several deaths and injuries, etc. At this point whether criminal charges are valid, is an opinion.

Saying that the police were arresting someone without legal justification on a political website is speculation or wishful thinking. As I said in at least a couple of places, the accusation still might be true. I don’t know but the websites you posted don’t back up the accusations

I was mainly commenting on your statement that the police where arresting people “for doing absolutely nothing” which seems like a Who Wants To Be a Millionaire final answer based on a political opinion from a political website.

You’re entitled to it and I have no problem with it. I was just pointing out that there is nothing on the pages that backs up author’s beliefs. While that seems like my opinion, I will stick with it as a fact. Nothing in those videos shows that the arrests were unlawful.

I hope you don’t think my post was anti-police per se because it wasn’t. My purpose was to expose the possible liberal/communist mindset infiltrating police departments and supporting their agenda, or at least helping to silence Americans who voice their opinion when literally, I saw no law violations….or at least I though it a bit cheesy for an arrest.

[SmashMouth]

All of this could be handled if they would stop electing officials that don’t represent the majority. Unfortunately, in these liberal bastions of socialism, these officials DO reflect the will of the majority. It is called democracy. 

[tvc184]

6 hours ago, baddog said:

I hope you don’t think my post was anti-police per se because it wasn’t. My purpose was to expose the possible liberal/communist mindset infiltrating police departments and supporting their agenda, or at least helping to silence Americans who voice their opinion when literally, I saw no law violations….or at least I though it a bit cheesy for an arrest.

Not the least.

I have spent a lifetime trying to prove things. I have probably been to well over 30,000 crime scenes. When I asked questions like, how do you know that, I usually  got, “well because”. Great but did you see it or know somebody that saw it or have some kind of evidence who caused it? “No but I know…….”.

So I don’t take it is anti-police, which is okay too if that’s what you feel. Maybe I look at it from a different perspective but when somebody makes a claim and then shows a video as proof but the video does not show the proof…..

Some might disagree but I don’t think police departments have political agendas. Individuals do. I have worked with probably over 600 police officers that have opinions all over the spectrum (although most are in a police paradigm). In 37 years I have never seen a chief, deputy chief/division commander or even politician (like mayor) even suggest that we go to a certain direction other than concentrating on some types of crimes or local issues. There is obviously different opinions in “how” that should be accomplished. 

[tvc184]

4 hours ago, SmashMouth said:

All of this could be handled if they would stop electing officials that don’t represent the majority. Unfortunately, in these liberal bastions of socialism, these officials DO reflect the will of the majority. It is called democracy. 

That is true and maybe unfortunately, there is no requirement to back up our opinions.  

[CardinalBacker]

20 hours ago, tvc184 said:

Obviously you didn’t think arson was covered under 1A. 

Disrupting a meeting as far as the crime. 

Heck, burning an American flag is protected free speech.  Burning a lower case "t" is a federal crime.  Go figure. 

[SmashMouth]

1 hour ago, CardinalBacker said:

Heck, burning an American flag is protected free speech.  Burning a lower case "t" is a federal crime.  Go figure. 

I’m sure I’m out of the loop, but what does that mean?

[CardinalBacker]

2 hours ago, SmashMouth said:

I’m sure I’m out of the loop, but what does that mean?

It's from Southpark.  

The point being made is that you have free speech protection if you want to burn the American flag on the courthouse steps, but if you burn a cross in your own back yard you can go to prison for doing so. 

 

[SmashMouth]

14 minutes ago, CardinalBacker said:

It's from Southpark.  

The point being made is that you have free speech protection if you want to burn the American flag on the courthouse steps, but if you burn a cross in your own back yard you can go to prison for doing so. 

 

Lower case t… got it. Freakin hilarious. 

[tvc184]

2 hours ago, SmashMouth said:

I’m sure I’m out of the loop, but what does that mean?

Thanks for asking. 😀

[CardinalBacker]

It's from an episode of Southpark.  A minority family moved into town and somebody suggested burning a lower case t for "tolerance."  The stuff those guys get away with is unbelievable.