Dogmaphobe
Diamond Member
Well, if a person supports arson, looting and attempts to murder as protected free speech, then it would follow that the Republican party is opposing free speech.Smashing in windows in government offices and trying to set fires inside is hardly legal or peaceful.
Leftists say they understand the difference between peaceful protesting and violent arson attacks
and other forms of leftist "redress of grievances".
But they don't act like it.
And no one says they are. Nice straw man.
wrong----in my town THE MAYOR endorses it and police do what the mayor wants them to do----nothing. If the police do something---then the prosecutor takes up the MAYORAL dictum---release without so much as bail. It is called "REFORM OF THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM
love how you say not to go after the rioters also. you mix words around but always to your gain or benefit in a discussion. you show when something bad happens to someone ripping off SAY ANYTHING and feel that counters the people beating the shit out of everyone, throwing paint on old ladies, burning down buildings after trying to trap officers inside...What was he doing there ?? Viewing the war from a dangerous position ?? Oh well.No. He was standing across the street from holding up a speaker. Caught on video. No one, not even the feds stated he was rioting. Try again.He was in a riot when he caught one in the foreheadProve he was rioting.
what was his day job?
During the civil war when it started, the town's people took up position's on the hill in order to watch the insuing battle. Well they sure got more than they bargained for.
Protesting is a free speech right. He was on a public street. He was not engaging in an illegal act such as rioting. Love how you justify this.
you excuse a shitton of illegal events so you can rush to lloyd here and cry about him getting hit with riot control in a riot.
sympathy gone. no one gives a shit anymore. they need to calm the fuck down and find better ways to deal with differences than playing peter gabriel in a riot.
Love how you always turn this around to me. No one here is excusing riots and rioters. They should feel the full affect of the law. But you keep conflating peaceful protests with rioters. The majority of protests have been peaceful - there was no rioting, arson, or assaults in my city, or the surrounding towns that had protests. Cities are not burning down - for the most part, the violent activity is confined to certain sectors of a city, when it does occur. But there sure is need by the right to come down on ALL protesters - I mean if they were within a ten block radius, they must have been rioting. Amazing. The party that has reformed itself into the party of lengthy grievances and victims of unfairness, is quite happy to squash free speech where it suits them, and I don't mean rioting.
what do you mean? Can your name "the party" that is "happy to squash free speech"? and provide some examples thereof?
if a person supports property rights and the right to one's own life, not so much.