What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

POTUS 45.18 - Who Run Derpertown? McMasterBlaster Run Derpertown.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: POTUS 45.18 - Who Run Derpertown? McMasterBlaster Run Derpertown.

There are some very fine people on the right.

Vandals who threw paint on a Confederate statue in Springfield, Missouri should be "hung from a tall tree with a long rope," {State Representative Warren Love (R-Osceola)} wrote on Facebook earlier today.
Click to expand...

With pic looking exactly as you assume he does.

Love told the Post-Dispatch that he didn't literally want the vandals lynched.

"That was an exaggerated statement that, you know, a lot of times is used in the Western world when somebody does a crime or commits theft. ... That's just a Western term and I'm very much a Western man. You know, I wear a coat. You know, I dress Western. And, you know, I'm the cowboy of the Capitol."
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
trixR4kids said:
Right so for example shouting racial epithets toward a crowd of people over the course of a protest... might not be legally protected free speech? If it is I'd argue it shouldn't be.
Click to expand...

One protest is not a course of conduct over a period of time. It's one protest.

Using your logic, every protest ever would be considered harassment, since they all involve shouting words that some will disagree with/find offensive (I particularly get offended at the banality of "hey hey, ho ho, this one thing has got to go" protests).

Laws governing speech and speech related conduct have to be content neutral with rare exceptions (obscenity being the primary one). A good rule of thumb is to replace whatever word you find offensive with some nonsense word. If it would still be harassment at that point, the person can be arrested. If not, then they can't, even if you find their words to be despicable.
 
Re: POTUS 45.18 - Who Run Derpertown? McMasterBlaster Run Derpertown.

trixR4kids said:
Meh, it's pretty obvious what is meant to anyone who has half a brain.
Click to expand...


No... it's not.

You and other apologists are not all that different.


You have your pet movement and others have theirs.
 
Re: POTUS 45.18 - Who Run Derpertown? McMasterBlaster Run Derpertown.

unofan said:
I particularly get offended at the banality of "hey hey, ho ho, this one thing has got to go" protests
Click to expand...

God, I'm glad you mentioned this. This has to be the dumbest thing we do, and we do so many dumb things. Liberals are supposed to read books -- FFS, put a little effort into it people.
 
Re: POTUS 45.18 - Who Run Derpertown? McMasterBlaster Run Derpertown.

unofan said:
One protest is not a course of conduct over a period of time. It's one protest.
Click to expand...
Fair enough, like I said I wasn't familiar with the legal framework of what constitutes harassment.

Using your logic, every protest ever would be considered harassment, since they all involve shouting words that some will disagree with/find offensive (I particularly get offended at the banality of "hey hey, ho ho, this one thing has got to go" protests).
Click to expand...
No not really.

Laws governing speech and speech related conduct have to be content neutral with rare exceptions (obscenity being the primary one). A good rule of thumb is to replace whatever word you find offensive with some nonsense word. If it would still be harassment at that point, the person can be arrested. If not, then they can't, even if you find their words to be despicable.
Click to expand...
Right, there are exceptions and in this case I think you can reasonably make one. Shouting fire in a crowded theater isn't a whole lot worse than calling the other side of a protest that isn't all that far away from you the N word or something along those lines. (Especially when you or they have guns, pretty sure you're not allowed to start confrontations and then end them with guns except in Florida)
 
trixR4kids said:
Meh, it's pretty obvious what is meant to anyone who has half a brain. I guess it's possible people don't know about the electric chair but that seems like concern trolling. The only people getting offended by this are the usual suspects who are pout-raging.
Click to expand...

The reason the "fighting words" exception to the first amendment is all but officially overruled is because one person's fighting words is another's political speech. And you don't want the government making that determination because your party might wind up on the losing side of that argument at some point.

Edit: the textbook case on "fighting words" involved a guy in the 70s wearing a jacket that said "(Fark) the Draft" into a courthouse who got arrested for disturbing the peace. The Court ultimately overturned it, but it illustrates my point.
 
Last edited:
Re: POTUS 45.18 - Who Run Derpertown? McMasterBlaster Run Derpertown.

trixR4kids said:
Hahahaha ok.


Yeah I'm sure that's what South Park told you, thanks Brent.
Click to expand...


I don't watch South Park.

And you've been cop hating on here for a few years now.


On the one hand, you decry certain speech and think it maybe shouldn't be protected - shouting slurs, etc.

On the other, you explain away speech that could (and likely has) incite(d).

Best part is... you don't even see that you're doing it.


And I lean towards punching Nazis in the face, so no... Brent and I don't see this the same.

Nazis have a right to say what they want and I can want to punch them for it.

Of course, if I do, I should be held legally responsible for my actions.
 
Re: POTUS 45.18 - Who Run Derpertown? McMasterBlaster Run Derpertown.

Yeah because thinking cops should be held legally responsible for unlawful killings means I hate all of them :rolleyes:

And yeah you're trying to draw some parallel that is non-existent here. It's not even remotely the same and it's basically Sica-lite.
 
Re: POTUS 45.18 - Who Run Derpertown? McMasterBlaster Run Derpertown.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Discussing these two cartoon now <a href="https://twitter.com/SXMPOTUS">@SXMPOTUS</a> 124 re <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/HurricaineHarvey?src=hash">#HurricaineHarvey</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/Charlie_Hebdo_">@Charlie_Hebdo_</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/wuerker">@wuerker</a> <a href="https://t.co/72eQIyhOjo">pic.twitter.com/72eQIyhOjo</a></p>— Michael Smerconish (@smerconish) <a href="https://twitter.com/smerconish/status/903249452022067204">August 31, 2017</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

I'm not sure how I feel about these cartoons. On one hand, great points. On the other, *cringe*...

ETA: I can't figure out how to embed tweets directly from twitter apparently...
 
Re: POTUS 45.18 - Who Run Derpertown? McMasterBlaster Run Derpertown.

Gurtholfin said:
cop hating
Click to expand...

Holding bad cops accountable for when they indiscriminately murder unarmed and innocent people is not "hating." Good cops should be against those bad cops, too.

The problem is that far too often good cops reflexively defend bad cops no matter what horrific sh-t they've done out of misplaced loyalty and solidarity. This is exactly what happens when minority communities defend gangs, soldiers defend rapists and murderers in their ranks, and the Church defends pedophiles. Blind loyalty is ape behavior.

Now add that conservative political correctness dictates it is anathema to ever criticize the police, and we wind up with the accusation of "cop hating."
 
Last edited:
Re: POTUS 45.18 - Who Run Derpertown? McMasterBlaster Run Derpertown.

trixR4kids said:
Yeah because thinking cops should be held legally responsible for unlawful killings means I hate all of them :rolleyes:

And yeah you're trying to draw some parallel that is non-existent here. It's not even remotely the same and it's basically Sica-lite.
Click to expand...


"Fry like bacon" can be inflammatory.

"Cops should be held legally responsible for unlawful killings" cannot be inflammatory.


Anyone with half a brain can see the difference.

;)
 
Re: POTUS 45.18 - Who Run Derpertown? McMasterBlaster Run Derpertown.

Kepler said:
Holding bad cops accountable for when they indiscriminately murder unarmed and innocent people is not "hating." Good cops should be against those bad cops, too.

The problem is that far too often good cops reflexively defend bad cops no matter what horrific sh-t they've done out of misplaced loyalty and solidarity. This is exactly what happens when minority communities defend gangs, soldiers defend rapists and murderers in their ranks, and the Church defends pedophiles. Blind loyalty is ape behavior.

Now add that conservative political correctness dictates it is anathema to ever criticize the police singularly or individually, and we wind up with the accusation of "cop hating."
Click to expand...



I agree with all of that and support the BLM movement, if not all of their tactics.

I'm only speaking to what I remember as Trixie's bias from the Ferguson threads. He wasn't objective on this matter.
 
Re: POTUS 45.18 - Who Run Derpertown? McMasterBlaster Run Derpertown.

Gurtholfin said:
"Fry like bacon" can be inflammatory.

"Cops should be held legally responsible for unlawful killings" cannot be inflammatory.


Anyone with half a brain can see the difference.

;)
Click to expand...
The first is inflammatory to those who may or may not have a learning disability, sure ;)

Gurtholfin said:
I agree with all of that and support the BLM movement, if not all of their tactics.

I'm only speaking to what I remember as Trixie's bias from the Ferguson threads. He wasn't objective on this matter.
Click to expand...

Yes we know you're still butt hurt about that, never forget! :D

Not making a ton of racist assumptions about Mike Brown's motives meant I was being biased.
 
Kepler said:
Holding bad cops accountable for when they indiscriminately murder unarmed and innocent people is not "hating." Good cops should be against those bad cops, too.

The problem is that far too often good cops reflexively defend bad cops no matter what horrific sh-t they've done out of misplaced loyalty and solidarity. This is exactly what happens when minority communities defend gangs, soldiers defend rapists and murderers in their ranks, and the Church defends pedophiles. Blind loyalty is ape behavior.

Now add that conservative political correctness dictates it is anathema to ever criticize the police, and we wind up with the accusation of "cop hating."
Click to expand...

Couldn't agree more with this post. The good cops need to wake up.
 
Re: POTUS 45.18 - Who Run Derpertown? McMasterBlaster Run Derpertown.

Gurtholfin said:
I agree with all of that and support the BLM movement, if not all of their tactics.

I'm only speaking to what I remember as Trixie's bias from the Ferguson threads. He wasn't objective on this matter.
Click to expand...

OK, that's between you two. Thank you for giving my post a fair reading. I'll have you know I started out being more of an ironic punk but rewrote it because I didn't want to just be a dick like usual. Baby steps.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top