Republicans are destroying their own party.

[kentonio]

[emphasis mine]

What exactly was evil about the ACLU?

Dear god, you really are too stupid to be alive.

The point was that waving an organizations name around as if that immediately tells you whether something is right or wrong is silly. If you mention the Klan's involvement in something people will immediately assume they are on the side of wrong, yet in the ACLU case that was shown to be incorrect. By the same rationale, just going 'HA the ACLU support it!' doesn't mean that Citizens United was a good decision.

Please avoid emphasizing your stupidity in future, it's completely unnecessary.

[kentonio]

I'll tell you all what's evil. The Public Order Act 1986. Section 5 effectively destroys the right to free speech, while Section 14 allows the police to put a limit on how many people may attend a peaceful political assembly.

Kentonio's country doesn't just lack a written Constitution. It doesn't have freedom of speech or freedom of assembly. Britain is openly hostile to the values that America holds most dear.

That's hilarious, your rights to free speech are frequently limited as is your 'freedom of assembly'. Try telling Occupy how free they are to assemble and speak publicly. Britain has always had freedom of speech and assembly, we just choose to apply common sense limits on that, because we have no desire to live in a country where its ok to scream hate at the parents of dead children at their funeral.

As for a written constitution, I wouldn't wipe my ass on yours. Your country is based around the idea of the near infallibility of a group of slave owners from centuries ago, whose ideas are apparently more important than the needs of the country today. When tens of thousands of people die from gunshots every year the first question people ask about control isn't 'Is this good for America?' but rather 'Is this allowed by the constitution?'. The truly hilarious part is that you've become the complete antithesis of everything early America stood for.

It's also pretty funny that you'd chose a week when the NSA has been shown to be freely tapping anyone the hell they please, to lecture other countries on rights and freedom. Enjoy your police state *****.

[giblets]

Dear god, you really are too stupid to be alive.

The point was that waving an organizations name around as if that immediately tells you whether something is right or wrong is silly. If you mention the Klan's involvement in something people will immediately assume they are on the side of wrong, yet in the ACLU case that was shown to be incorrect. By the same rationale, just going 'HA the ACLU support it!' doesn't mean that Citizens United was a good decision.

Please avoid emphasizing your stupidity in future, it's completely unnecessary.

If you're trying to discredit an endorsement by the ACLU, and you bring up defending the KKK's right to free speech as an example, people are going to think you don't support free speech.

[giblets]

That's hilarious, your rights to free speech are frequently limited as is your 'freedom of assembly'. Try telling Occupy how free they are to assemble and speak publicly. Britain has always had freedom of speech and assembly, we just choose to apply common sense limits on that, because we have no desire to live in a country where its ok to scream hate at the parents of dead children at their funeral.

I remember Occupy Wall Street having plenty of freedom, until the privately owned public park they were occupying needed to be cleaned, which sounds like a rather reasonable restriction.

As for a written constitution, I wouldn't wipe my ass on yours. Your country is based around the idea of the near infallibility of a group of slave owners from centuries ago, whose ideas are apparently more important than the needs of the country today.

This isn't really accurate since the Constitution has been amended since then in ways that did not suit the needs of slave owners.

When tens of thousands of people die from gunshots every year the first question people ask about control isn't 'Is this good for America?' but rather 'Is this allowed by the constitution?'. The truly hilarious part is that you've become the complete antithesis of everything early America stood for.

Yes, it's true that public safety generally can't be used as an excuse to ignore the Constitution (well except for the PATRIOT Act, that might unconstitutional.)

It's also pretty funny that you'd chose a week when the NSA has been shown to be freely tapping anyone the hell they please, to lecture other countries on rights and freedom. Enjoy your police state *****.

When thousands of people die in a terrorist act and people talk of ways to control terrorism I'm shocked that anyone's first thought would be "is this allowed by the constitution?"

[Sava]

As for a written constitution,

Does anyone actually think that a piece of paper protects us from anything?

here... from the North Korean constitution:

Article 67. Citizens are guaranteed freedom of speech, of the press, of assembly, demonstration and association.

https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Constitution_of_North_Korea_%281972%29

[Imran Siddiqui]

Dear god, you really are too stupid to be alive.

The point was that waving an organizations name around as if that immediately tells you whether something is right or wrong is silly. If you mention the Klan's involvement in something people will immediately assume they are on the side of wrong, yet in the ACLU case that was shown to be incorrect. By the same rationale, just going 'HA the ACLU support it!' doesn't mean that Citizens United was a good decision.

Please avoid emphasizing your stupidity in future, it's completely unnecessary.

I'd argue it is you being more obtuse here. The ACLU's defending of the KKK's right to free speech most definitely shows that the ACLU is for the cause of a freedom of speech (a good thing) regardless of who is wronged. It makes their defenses more based on principle than partisanship and therefore for them to defend conservative groups here indicates that there was some right and good here.

Unless you think the ACLU does bad things, of course.

[Colon™]

This debate is impressively inane. Congratulations people.

[Felch]

Does anyone actually think that a piece of paper protects us from anything?

here... from the North Korean constitution:


https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Const...rea_%281972%29

Of course not. That's why we need guns!

[Felch]

Dear god, you really are too stupid to be alive.

The point was that waving an organizations name around as if that immediately tells you whether something is right or wrong is silly. If you mention the Klan's involvement in something people will immediately assume they are on the side of wrong, yet in the ACLU case that was shown to be incorrect. By the same rationale, just going 'HA the ACLU support it!' doesn't mean that Citizens United was a good decision.

Please avoid emphasizing your stupidity in future, it's completely unnecessary.

Your point would have been made a lot more clear if your syntax weren't so garbled. The bit I emphasized made it seem as though you thought the ACLU was doing something evil by defending the KKK.

And Citizens United was a good decision, because it cut down on the government's ability to restrict free speech. Free speech is this thing that we have in this country, that you don't have in Britain.

[Sava]

Of course not. That's why we need guns!

Yes. Because nothing says freedom like tens of thousands of murders, suicides, and accidental gun deaths.

Seriously. The government has jets, tanks, drones, nukes, missiles, etc... and you think small arms keeps us free from them?

You are ****ing retarded.

[kentonio]

I remember Occupy Wall Street having plenty of freedom, until the privately owned public park they were occupying needed to be cleaned, which sounds like a rather reasonable restriction.

Like those vicious students staging the sit down protest who were casually maced by cops for the crime of being annoying? To be fair though, there are bad cops everywhere and you can't point at isolated incidents and draw conclusions. What is sad though is how quickly half of America wrote off millions of people with perfectly legitimate concerns as a bunch of filthy hippy scum who deserved to be treated like **** by the law.

This isn't really accurate since the Constitution has been amended since then in ways that did not suit the needs of slave owners.

Sure it can be amended, but it rarely is because you have a national obsession with the thing. While other democracies are shaping and evolving their constitutions to suit the needs of their countries today, America acts as if the ideas of 200+ years ago are somehow sacred. I know America struggles with the idea, but you're not the only country with freedom of speech, democracy and human rights, and you haven't been for quite some time. While America continually shouts about how free and awesome and great it is, the rest of the western Democracies are actually shaping their countries to become more free and more democratic and more equal. Not so long ago, most of the western world dreamed of America, now there's a general air of 'WTF America?!'.

Yes, it's true that public safety generally can't be used as an excuse to ignore the Constitution (well except for the PATRIOT Act, that might unconstitutional.)

Yet it generally is anyway, in all our countries unfortunately.

When thousands of people die in a terrorist act and people talk of ways to control terrorism I'm shocked that anyone's first thought would be "is this allowed by the constitution?"

Plenty of people warned immediately after 9/11 that despite peoples understandable fear and confusion, that it was vitally important to guard against handing over civil rights for security. It's a shame Congress didn't listen.

[kentonio]

And Citizens United was a good decision, because it cut down on the government's ability to restrict free speech. Free speech is this thing that we have in this country, that you don't have in Britain.

It's an oft repeated claim, and it's still bull****. I can walk around and say whatever I like about my government. I wonder which of us is more likely to end up on a government watch list for doing that? Just remind me how many Americans are currently unable to fly anywhere due to their political opinions?

[regexcellent]

Yes. Because nothing says freedom like tens of thousands of murders, suicides, and accidental gun deaths.

Seriously. The government has jets, tanks, drones, nukes, missiles, etc... and you think small arms keeps us free from them?

You are ****ing retarded.

In this gun control debate I'm going to let Mix-a-lot do my talking.

(okay so I've been looking for a reason to post a mix-a-lot song for a while now and this was the first opportunity)

[Felch]

Yes. Because nothing says freedom like tens of thousands of murders, suicides, and accidental gun deaths.

Seriously. The government has jets, tanks, drones, nukes, missiles, etc... and you think small arms keeps us free from them?

You are ****ing retarded.

Small arms help keep the Afghans free. Unless you're retarded enough to think that we're winning over there.

[Felch]

It's an oft repeated claim, and it's still bull****. I can walk around and say whatever I like about my government. I wonder which of us is more likely to end up on a government watch list for doing that? Just remind me how many Americans are currently unable to fly anywhere due to their political opinions?

I've never been prevented from flying, and I say insane and ridiculous **** pretty much all the damn time. Also I can't be arrested for saying things that are insulting, and the police aren't allowed to restrict how many people attend political protests in my country.