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

[The Sage of Main Street]

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.

Stolen Valor

During the Vietnam War, the National Guard and Reserves had their missions perverted into being hideouts for unpatriotic sissyboys who had connections.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

This is not a government issue. Should be handled by the universities. Personally, I don't think a bunch of college kids should be allowed to do this. But, it should be up to the discretion of the universities. Now, if we're talking a state university system, that's a different story.

 

[Coyote]

And this draconian bill is supported by the same people claiming to be proponents of free speech?

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

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.

No draft? True. That didn't stop me! Obama and I are almost exactly the same age.

 

[Moonglow]

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.

No draft? True. That didn't stop me! Obama and I are almost exactly the same age.

So?

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

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.

Stolen Valor

During the Vietnam War, the National Guard and Reserves had their missions perverted into being hideouts for unpatriotic sissyboys who had connections.

That was possible because LBJ would not call up National Guard or Reserve units because it would not be popular as it was supposed to be a short conflict.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

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.

No draft? True. That didn't stop me! Obama and I are almost exactly the same age.

So?

His not serving because there was no draft means little.

 

[JoeMoma]

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.

Because it's not just graduation commencement speeches that are being interrupted/shouted down.

 

[IsaacNewton]

This is how it happens, a slow march to totalitarianism and end of democracy.

This is outright denial of 1st amendment rights. Conservatives really hate it when others exercise their rights. It sticks in their craw, and they have a humungous craw!

 

[Jimmy_Chitwood]

Oh please, the governments of federal and state have been violating asset forfeiture for years, yet they are not considered criminals.

That is a travesty if you look into it. Civil not criminal.

 

[Jimmy_Chitwood]

This is how it happens, a slow march to totalitarianism and end of democracy.

This is outright denial of 1st amendment rights. Conservatives really hate it when others exercise their rights. It sticks in their craw, and they have a humungous craw!

Right man! Screw the speakers right to free speech just let everybody yell whatever they want for as long as they want.

Sounds like Detroit.

 

[JoeMoma]

And this draconian bill is supported by the same people claiming to be proponents of free speech?

Yes, when an invited speaker has "the floor" that speaker should be allowed to speak without the threat of being shouted down or violently stopped by opposition. People with alternative opinions should be allowed to speak when it's their turn. People should be free to protest as long as they don't cross the line of "disturbing the peace". They can protest outside.

 

[JoeMoma]

Oh please, the governments of federal and state have been violating asset forfeiture for years, yet they are not considered criminals.

That is a travesty if you look into it. Civil not criminal.

It is also a different topic.

 

[JoeMoma]

This is how it happens, a slow march to totalitarianism and end of democracy.

This is outright denial of 1st amendment rights. Conservatives really hate it when others exercise their rights. It sticks in their craw, and they have a humungous craw!

What about the scheduled speaker's rights and the rights of people that invited the speaker?

 

[IsaacNewton]

This is how it happens, a slow march to totalitarianism and end of democracy.

This is outright denial of 1st amendment rights. Conservatives really hate it when others exercise their rights. It sticks in their craw, and they have a humungous craw!

What about the scheduled speaker's rights and the rights of people that invited the speaker?

How have such things been handled in the last 240 years.

Conservatives are slowly pushing the democracy to the edge of the cliff. At some point no more pushing will be needed, it will just fall off the edge.

 

[JoeMoma]

This is how it happens, a slow march to totalitarianism and end of democracy.

This is outright denial of 1st amendment rights. Conservatives really hate it when others exercise their rights. It sticks in their craw, and they have a humungous craw!

What about the scheduled speaker's rights and the rights of people that invited the speaker?

How have such things been handled in the last 240 years.

Conservatives are slowly pushing the democracy to the edge of the cliff. At some point no more pushing will be needed, it will just fall off the edge.

Kick out the disruptive people. They can speak when they pay for the microphone.