Controversial Wi Bill Calling For Expulsion Of Strudents Who Interupt Speakers Moves Forward

[AsianTrumpSupporter]

Obama's America:

 

[iceberg]

All six Democrats on the committee voted against the bill, warning it would chill free speech on campus and infringe on regents' authority to govern their institutions themselves."

how in the unholy hell would ensuring all sides have a chance to speak "chill" free speech? hate speech sure. but then again, the left is the one saying NO HATE SPEECH so they should be included in their own rules.

for a change.

 

[Crixus]

Wisconsin bill that would expel or suspend students who disrupt speakers moves forward

"Assembly Republicans moved closer to creating tougher penalties for University of Wisconsin student protesters Tuesday, advancing a bill that would suspend or expel students who disrupt speakers.

The Assembly Committee on Colleges and Universities approved the bill on an 8-6 vote. This sends the bill to the Assembly floor, which hopes to take it up in June, said Kit Beyer, a spokeswoman for Speaker Robin Vos, who is also one of the measure's co-sponsors.

All six Democrats on the committee voted against the bill, warning it would chill free speech on campus and infringe on regents' authority to govern their institutions themselves."


This bill almost demands a debate and decision on what is legally protected Free Speech in regards to interrupting speaking events, lectures, etc.

Most assuredly this bill was created in response to the disrespectful interruptions and criminal actions violent riots, destruction of property, arson, looting, and threats) perpetrated by Berkley and other students on other campuses to successfully shut down Constitutionally Protected Free Speech simply because the 'voices' they were shutting down did not agree with their views. Such behavior / acts must not be tolerated and be deemed as 'criminal'.

I have no problem with legal, non-violent, law-abiding protests being considered as 'Free speech'. The moment you break the law, however, your actions and speech are no longer entitled to be protected. The blatant disrespect and disregard for the law as well as others' right to free speech while criminally projecting their own speech / acts upon others must not be allowed.

Furthermore, I do not agree with the Democrats that demanding liberal / progressive students be tolerant, that they adhere to the LAW rather than violently rioting/burning/destroying/looting as a tool to shut down the free speech of others will 'chill free speech on campus. If anything, the only thing that will hopefully be 'chilled' is the violence, crimes, and unacceptable intolerance demonstrated by liberal student so far.

In regards to the Berkley students who took their violent anti-free speech riots off-campus to prevent a Conservative speaker from being allowed to speak, for those students who illegally engaged in violence, arson, rooting, destruction of property, etc, expulsion from school might be deemed the right course of action if this bill passes, but it should be far from the only thing these law breakers should have to worry about. They should also be prosecuted to the full extent of their laws.


Such criminal intolerants MUST learn that such illegal behavior in an attempt to silence the freedom of speech of those who hold opposing views will NOT be allowed and will come with repercussions.

College campuses are places of higher learning, an institution that prepares student to go out into the 'real world' and thrive. While allowing students to carry out criminal activity such as was seen at Berkley might be preparing students to become thugs,, looters, and criminals seen in cities like Ferguson, being allowed to illegally, violently, even disrespectfully silence freedom of speech is NOT preparing them to be successful, upstanding, legal / Constitution-obeying/protecting citizens in the real world.

Expulsion is kind of extreme. What not just put out an announcement telling the graduates a week before the ceremony, "you will sit quietly. Any bad behavior and the ceremony is over and your deplores will be mailed. If they do Berkeley shit fine, expel and jail them. But not for yelling or walking out.

 

[easyt65]

Wisconsin bill that would expel or suspend students who disrupt speakers moves forward

"Assembly Republicans moved closer to creating tougher penalties for University of Wisconsin student protesters Tuesday, advancing a bill that would suspend or expel students who disrupt speakers.

The Assembly Committee on Colleges and Universities approved the bill on an 8-6 vote. This sends the bill to the Assembly floor, which hopes to take it up in June, said Kit Beyer, a spokeswoman for Speaker Robin Vos, who is also one of the measure's co-sponsors.

All six Democrats on the committee voted against the bill, warning it would chill free speech on campus and infringe on regents' authority to govern their institutions themselves."


This bill almost demands a debate and decision on what is legally protected Free Speech in regards to interrupting speaking events, lectures, etc.

Most assuredly this bill was created in response to the disrespectful interruptions and criminal actions violent riots, destruction of property, arson, looting, and threats) perpetrated by Berkley and other students on other campuses to successfully shut down Constitutionally Protected Free Speech simply because the 'voices' they were shutting down did not agree with their views. Such behavior / acts must not be tolerated and be deemed as 'criminal'.

I have no problem with legal, non-violent, law-abiding protests being considered as 'Free speech'. The moment you break the law, however, your actions and speech are no longer entitled to be protected. The blatant disrespect and disregard for the law as well as others' right to free speech while criminally projecting their own speech / acts upon others must not be allowed.

Furthermore, I do not agree with the Democrats that demanding liberal / progressive students be tolerant, that they adhere to the LAW rather than violently rioting/burning/destroying/looting as a tool to shut down the free speech of others will 'chill free speech on campus. If anything, the only thing that will hopefully be 'chilled' is the violence, crimes, and unacceptable intolerance demonstrated by liberal student so far.

In regards to the Berkley students who took their violent anti-free speech riots off-campus to prevent a Conservative speaker from being allowed to speak, for those students who illegally engaged in violence, arson, rooting, destruction of property, etc, expulsion from school might be deemed the right course of action if this bill passes, but it should be far from the only thing these law breakers should have to worry about. They should also be prosecuted to the full extent of their laws.


Such criminal intolerants MUST learn that such illegal behavior in an attempt to silence the freedom of speech of those who hold opposing views will NOT be allowed and will come with repercussions.

College campuses are places of higher learning, an institution that prepares student to go out into the 'real world' and thrive. While allowing students to carry out criminal activity such as was seen at Berkley might be preparing students to become thugs,, looters, and criminals seen in cities like Ferguson, being allowed to illegally, violently, even disrespectfully silence freedom of speech is NOT preparing them to be successful, upstanding, legal / Constitution-obeying/protecting citizens in the real world.

Expulsion is kind of extreme. What not just put out an announcement telling the graduates a week before the ceremony, "you will sit quietly. Any bad behavior and the ceremony is over and your deplores will be mailed. If they do Berkeley shit fine, expel and jail them. But not for yelling or walking out.

Expulsion too strict?
How about all students identified get marked down 1 letter grade in every class that term?!

 

[Crixus]

Wisconsin bill that would expel or suspend students who disrupt speakers moves forward

"Assembly Republicans moved closer to creating tougher penalties for University of Wisconsin student protesters Tuesday, advancing a bill that would suspend or expel students who disrupt speakers.

The Assembly Committee on Colleges and Universities approved the bill on an 8-6 vote. This sends the bill to the Assembly floor, which hopes to take it up in June, said Kit Beyer, a spokeswoman for Speaker Robin Vos, who is also one of the measure's co-sponsors.

All six Democrats on the committee voted against the bill, warning it would chill free speech on campus and infringe on regents' authority to govern their institutions themselves."


This bill almost demands a debate and decision on what is legally protected Free Speech in regards to interrupting speaking events, lectures, etc.

Most assuredly this bill was created in response to the disrespectful interruptions and criminal actions violent riots, destruction of property, arson, looting, and threats) perpetrated by Berkley and other students on other campuses to successfully shut down Constitutionally Protected Free Speech simply because the 'voices' they were shutting down did not agree with their views. Such behavior / acts must not be tolerated and be deemed as 'criminal'.

I have no problem with legal, non-violent, law-abiding protests being considered as 'Free speech'. The moment you break the law, however, your actions and speech are no longer entitled to be protected. The blatant disrespect and disregard for the law as well as others' right to free speech while criminally projecting their own speech / acts upon others must not be allowed.

Furthermore, I do not agree with the Democrats that demanding liberal / progressive students be tolerant, that they adhere to the LAW rather than violently rioting/burning/destroying/looting as a tool to shut down the free speech of others will 'chill free speech on campus. If anything, the only thing that will hopefully be 'chilled' is the violence, crimes, and unacceptable intolerance demonstrated by liberal student so far.

In regards to the Berkley students who took their violent anti-free speech riots off-campus to prevent a Conservative speaker from being allowed to speak, for those students who illegally engaged in violence, arson, rooting, destruction of property, etc, expulsion from school might be deemed the right course of action if this bill passes, but it should be far from the only thing these law breakers should have to worry about. They should also be prosecuted to the full extent of their laws.


Such criminal intolerants MUST learn that such illegal behavior in an attempt to silence the freedom of speech of those who hold opposing views will NOT be allowed and will come with repercussions.

College campuses are places of higher learning, an institution that prepares student to go out into the 'real world' and thrive. While allowing students to carry out criminal activity such as was seen at Berkley might be preparing students to become thugs,, looters, and criminals seen in cities like Ferguson, being allowed to illegally, violently, even disrespectfully silence freedom of speech is NOT preparing them to be successful, upstanding, legal / Constitution-obeying/protecting citizens in the real world.

Expulsion is kind of extreme. What not just put out an announcement telling the graduates a week before the ceremony, "you will sit quietly. Any bad behavior and the ceremony is over and your deplores will be mailed. If they do Berkeley shit fine, expel and jail them. But not for yelling or walking out.

Expulsion too strict?
How about all students identified get marked down 1 letter grade in every class that term?!

And or a real nice letter stapled to any individual who is cought being disrespectful and disrupting the ceremony as well.

 

[Darkwind]

I would create a list of those who act in such a manner as to deny someone their right to speak, and then publish that list of names to any employer who asks for it. Good luck finding an employer who will take on someone who will organize protests for their every decision.

 

[Crixus]

I would create a list of those who act in such as manner as to deny someone their right to speak, and then publish that list of names to any employer who asks for it. Good luck finding an employer who will take on someone who will organize protests for their every decision.

Pretty much. I am blown away at how selfish these kids and the administrators are. Do any of these people think there may be a few kids out there with their families who just want to commerate a mile stone day in there Childs lives, but instead have to see these hood rats act like animals. I would be possed. I have been looking HARD at private school for my girl child. I would have to work until I am 70 to pay for it, but I'm thinking that's what I'll do next year/

 

[candycorn]

Trump managed to avoid the draft.

Remind me again which branch of service Slick Willie was in...or about Barry's impressive military record. (For someone who never served and who won the Nobel Peace Prize, Barry sure did start a lot of wars and killed a lot of people...)

Now who is president?
A. Al Gore
B. Ted Danson
C. John Glenn
D. The ghost of Christmas past

Trump also lost by 3,000,000 votes!!!!

 

[Crixus]

Trump managed to avoid the draft.

Remind me again which branch of service Slick Willie was in...or about Barry's impressive military record. (For someone who never served and who won the Nobel Peace Prize, Barry sure did start a lot of wars and killed a lot of people...)

Now who is president?
A. Al Gore
B. Ted Danson
C. John Glenn
D. The ghost of Christmas past

Trump also lost by 3,000,000 votes!!!!

Not really. See what you got there is an example of why we do elections like we do. We don't want to be ruled by moonbat she in New York and Kalifornia

 

[candycorn]

Trump managed to avoid the draft.

Remind me again which branch of service Slick Willie was in...or about Barry's impressive military record. (For someone who never served and who won the Nobel Peace Prize, Barry sure did start a lot of wars and killed a lot of people...)

Now who is president?
A. Al Gore
B. Ted Danson
C. John Glenn
D. The ghost of Christmas past

Trump also lost by 3,000,000 votes!!!!

Not really. See what you got there is an example of why we do elections like we do. We don't want to be ruled by moonbat she in New York and Kalifornia

iceberg see what I mean?

 

[candycorn]

Trump managed to avoid the draft.

Remind me again which branch of service Slick Willie was in...or about Barry's impressive military record. (For someone who never served and who won the Nobel Peace Prize, Barry sure did start a lot of wars and killed a lot of people...)

Now who is president?
A. Al Gore
B. Ted Danson
C. John Glenn
D. The ghost of Christmas past

Trump also lost by 3,000,000 votes!!!!

Not really. See what you got there is an example of why we do elections like we do. We don't want to be ruled by moonbat she in New York and Kalifornia

Thanks, I just threw that in there to show iceberg how you guys can’t admit anything if it’s remotely derogatory about your messiah.

 

[Crixus]

Trump managed to avoid the draft.

Remind me again which branch of service Slick Willie was in...or about Barry's impressive military record. (For someone who never served and who won the Nobel Peace Prize, Barry sure did start a lot of wars and killed a lot of people...)

Now who is president?
A. Al Gore
B. Ted Danson
C. John Glenn
D. The ghost of Christmas past

Trump also lost by 3,000,000 votes!!!!

Not really. See what you got there is an example of why we do elections like we do. We don't want to be ruled by moonbat she in New York and Kalifornia

Thanks, I just threw that in there to show iceberg how you guys can’t admit anything if it’s remotely derogatory about your messiah.

Admit what ?

 

[toomuchtime_]

Trump managed to avoid the draft.

Remind me again which branch of service Slick Willie was in...or about Barry's impressive military record. (For someone who never served and who won the Nobel Peace Prize, Barry sure did start a lot of wars and killed a lot of people...)

Now who is president?
A. Al Gore
B. Ted Danson
C. John Glenn
D. The ghost of Christmas past

Trump also lost by 3,000,000 votes!!!!

lol What did he lose? The president is elected by the states, not by a national popular vote, and Trump won the popular vote in 30 states so he is president and Clinton is just Bill's wife again.

 

[candycorn]

Trump managed to avoid the draft.

Remind me again which branch of service Slick Willie was in...or about Barry's impressive military record. (For someone who never served and who won the Nobel Peace Prize, Barry sure did start a lot of wars and killed a lot of people...)

Now who is president?
A. Al Gore
B. Ted Danson
C. John Glenn
D. The ghost of Christmas past

Trump also lost by 3,000,000 votes!!!!

lol What did he lose? The president is elected by the states, not by a national popular vote, and Trump won the popular vote in 30 states so he is president and Clinton is just Bill's wife again.

@iceberg…it just keeps on going. 007, hadit PredFan CrusaderFrank BluesLegend aren’t even awake yet….

 

[easyt65]

Trump managed to avoid the draft.

Remind me again which branch of service Slick Willie was in...or about Barry's impressive military record. (For someone who never served and who won the Nobel Peace Prize, Barry sure did start a lot of wars and killed a lot of people...)

Now who is president?
A. Al Gore
B. Ted Danson
C. John Glenn
D. The ghost of Christmas past

Trump also lost by 3,000,000 votes!!!!

Yeah, how is that 'popularity contest win' working out for you and Hillary, snowflake?



Hillary should not have even been allowed to stay in the race, being under multiple FBI investigations of crimes we now know she commotted, thanks to Comey's testimony.

 

[BuckToothMoron]

We have enough rules and regulations. This should be addressed at the college level. Universities should set the standards and penalties.
Respect campus rules or be removed from academia. Student's choice.

No, not when they receive money and support from the state tax payers. This is well within the purview of the state government.

 

[BuckToothMoron]

Wisconsin bill that would expel or suspend students who disrupt speakers moves forward

"Assembly Republicans moved closer to creating tougher penalties for University of Wisconsin student protesters Tuesday, advancing a bill that would suspend or expel students who disrupt speakers.

The Assembly Committee on Colleges and Universities approved the bill on an 8-6 vote. This sends the bill to the Assembly floor, which hopes to take it up in June, said Kit Beyer, a spokeswoman for Speaker Robin Vos, who is also one of the measure's co-sponsors.

All six Democrats on the committee voted against the bill, warning it would chill free speech on campus and infringe on regents' authority to govern their institutions themselves."


This bill almost demands a debate and decision on what is legally protected Free Speech in regards to interrupting speaking events, lectures, etc.

Most assuredly this bill was created in response to the disrespectful interruptions and criminal actions violent riots, destruction of property, arson, looting, and threats) perpetrated by Berkley and other students on other campuses to successfully shut down Constitutionally Protected Free Speech simply because the 'voices' they were shutting down did not agree with their views. Such behavior / acts must not be tolerated and be deemed as 'criminal'.

I have no problem with legal, non-violent, law-abiding protests being considered as 'Free speech'. The moment you break the law, however, your actions and speech are no longer entitled to be protected. The blatant disrespect and disregard for the law as well as others' right to free speech while criminally projecting their own speech / acts upon others must not be allowed.

Furthermore, I do not agree with the Democrats that demanding liberal / progressive students be tolerant, that they adhere to the LAW rather than violently rioting/burning/destroying/looting as a tool to shut down the free speech of others will 'chill free speech on campus. If anything, the only thing that will hopefully be 'chilled' is the violence, crimes, and unacceptable intolerance demonstrated by liberal student so far.

In regards to the Berkley students who took their violent anti-free speech riots off-campus to prevent a Conservative speaker from being allowed to speak, for those students who illegally engaged in violence, arson, rooting, destruction of property, etc, expulsion from school might be deemed the right course of action if this bill passes, but it should be far from the only thing these law breakers should have to worry about. They should also be prosecuted to the full extent of their laws.


Such criminal intolerants MUST learn that such illegal behavior in an attempt to silence the freedom of speech of those who hold opposing views will NOT be allowed and will come with repercussions.

College campuses are places of higher learning, an institution that prepares student to go out into the 'real world' and thrive. While allowing students to carry out criminal activity such as was seen at Berkley might be preparing students to become thugs,, looters, and criminals seen in cities like Ferguson, being allowed to illegally, violently, even disrespectfully silence freedom of speech is NOT preparing them to be successful, upstanding, legal / Constitution-obeying/protecting citizens in the real world.

I wish we had the draft again; those expelled students would lose their 2-S deferment and get a letter the next day to report for induction. But the fact that we even had a class-biased 2-S deferment is why it actually turned out to be an exemption. Patriots must demand that 18-year-olds get drafted first and go to college after they do their military duty.

Trump managed to avoid the draft.

Yep, I think he and slick Willie hid out together. Trump is the first Republican (as much as he is a republican) without military service since Herbert Hoover.

 

[RightyTighty]

Wisconsin bill that would expel or suspend students who disrupt speakers moves forward

"Assembly Republicans moved closer to creating tougher penalties for University of Wisconsin student protesters Tuesday, advancing a bill that would suspend or expel students who disrupt speakers.

The Assembly Committee on Colleges and Universities approved the bill on an 8-6 vote. This sends the bill to the Assembly floor, which hopes to take it up in June, said Kit Beyer, a spokeswoman for Speaker Robin Vos, who is also one of the measure's co-sponsors.

All six Democrats on the committee voted against the bill, warning it would chill free speech on campus and infringe on regents' authority to govern their institutions themselves."


This bill almost demands a debate and decision on what is legally protected Free Speech in regards to interrupting speaking events, lectures, etc.

Most assuredly this bill was created in response to the disrespectful interruptions and criminal actions violent riots, destruction of property, arson, looting, and threats) perpetrated by Berkley and other students on other campuses to successfully shut down Constitutionally Protected Free Speech simply because the 'voices' they were shutting down did not agree with their views. Such behavior / acts must not be tolerated and be deemed as 'criminal'.

I have no problem with legal, non-violent, law-abiding protests being considered as 'Free speech'. The moment you break the law, however, your actions and speech are no longer entitled to be protected. The blatant disrespect and disregard for the law as well as others' right to free speech while criminally projecting their own speech / acts upon others must not be allowed.

Furthermore, I do not agree with the Democrats that demanding liberal / progressive students be tolerant, that they adhere to the LAW rather than violently rioting/burning/destroying/looting as a tool to shut down the free speech of others will 'chill free speech on campus. If anything, the only thing that will hopefully be 'chilled' is the violence, crimes, and unacceptable intolerance demonstrated by liberal student so far.

In regards to the Berkley students who took their violent anti-free speech riots off-campus to prevent a Conservative speaker from being allowed to speak, for those students who illegally engaged in violence, arson, rooting, destruction of property, etc, expulsion from school might be deemed the right course of action if this bill passes, but it should be far from the only thing these law breakers should have to worry about. They should also be prosecuted to the full extent of their laws.


Such criminal intolerants MUST learn that such illegal behavior in an attempt to silence the freedom of speech of those who hold opposing views will NOT be allowed and will come with repercussions.

College campuses are places of higher learning, an institution that prepares student to go out into the 'real world' and thrive. While allowing students to carry out criminal activity such as was seen at Berkley might be preparing students to become thugs,, looters, and criminals seen in cities like Ferguson, being allowed to illegally, violently, even disrespectfully silence freedom of speech is NOT preparing them to be successful, upstanding, legal / Constitution-obeying/protecting citizens in the real world.

The party of "smaller" government.

 

[kiwiman127]

Trump managed to avoid the draft.

Remind me again which branch of service Slick Willie was in...or about Barry's impressive military record. (For someone who never served and who won the Nobel Peace Prize, Barry sure did start a lot of wars and killed a lot of people...)

There were was no draft during Obama's youth or no wars.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

Obama's America:

Long Dong's Silver

Aid to Families with Dependent Children gets the clappers banging on the ding-dongs of the Bell Curve.