Zone1 So, Why Is This Okay?

[IM2]

Apparently, they think blacks are incapable of getting and producing a valid ID. OR they are making excuses so illegals can vote. Or both. They really want to dilute the legal vote.

The Brennan Center for Justice published a report called “The Truth About Voter Fraud.” Here is what the study says about voter I.D:

"The most common example of the harm wrought by imprecise and inflated claims of “voter fraud” is the call for in-person photo identification requirements. Such photo ID laws are effective only in preventing individuals from impersonating other voters at the polls — an occurrence more rare than getting struck by lightning.

By throwing all sorts of election anomalies under the “voter fraud” umbrella, however, advocates for such laws artificially inflate the apparent need for these restrictions and undermine the urgency of other reforms.

Moreover, as with all restrictions on voters, photo identification requirements have a predictable detrimental impact on eligible citizens. Such laws are only potentially worthwhile if they clearly prevent more problems than they create. If policymakers distinguished real voter fraud from the more common election irregularities erroneously labeled as voter fraud, it would become apparent that the limited benefits of laws like photo ID requirements are simply not worth the cost."

 

[IM2]

I never have, but you sure can!

I've never used a racial slur. White is not a slur no matter how much you want to be a victim.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

1. Jan 6th protestors
2. BLM rioters protestors

You got it backwards:
1. Jan 6th rioters (smashing in windows to gain access, threatening Congressional members, assaulting police officers ultimately causing the death or one or more of them)
2. BLM protestors marching in protest of Chauvin murdering George Floyd (the people engaging in rioting were doing so using the BLM protests as cover)

And before you even get started, there were a lot of white people rioting, looting and setting police vehicles on fire here in Seattle and also in the Fairfax district of Los Angeles on that first Saturday

 

[Coyote]

The right to protest is guaranteed in the constitution.

Yup. Sure is.

You probably assume that everyone that was at the Capital on Jan 6th is a rioter.

Nope. I’ve repeatedly made distinctions, the same distinctions I made with the Floyd protests.

I'm willing to bet that the riot that took place outside the WH May 2020 you don't consider that a riot.

The moment protesters attack police or intentionally destroy property they become rioters and the protest a riot.

Can you say the same?

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

There was no riot on Jan 6th and no one is charged with rioting, it was a protest and it was NOTHING like the BLM riots that the Democrat-media called 'mostly peaceful' while parts of cities burned, cops were killed, cop cars smashed along with other cars, rioters claiming part of a City, and Kamala Harris was instrumental in bailing them out. FYI, charges against Jan 6 protestors: obstructing official proceeding, entering in restricted buildings, civil disorder.....Many rotting in jail. Meanwhile BLM rioters go mostly scott free.

The difference is people (not the BLM protectors) attacking and/or destroying property versus people gaining unlawful access by breaking into certain areas of the U.S. Capitol, and making threats of bodify harm (or worse) against the leaders of the U.S. government - the nation's vice president and members of Congress.

We knew in grade school that it was against the law to make threats against the president of the United States. Why didn't these grown ass people attacking the Capital not know the same things as 7 & 8 year olds?

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

Go ahead then and use the 'n' word, see what happens. Coyote said USMB would bring pain. (disclaimer; I am not urging you do to it) even though you called me a liar. Which is technically against Forum rules.

Ever heard of the "fighting words" doctrine? Certain words are so antagonistic that they cause an immediate breach of the peace and therefore are not Constitutionally protected as "freedom of speech".

Fighting Words | The First Amendment Encyclopedia​

https://www.mtsu.edu › first-amendment › article › figh...​

The fighting words doctrine allows government to limit speech when it is likely to incite immediate violence or retaliation by the recipients of the words.​

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

You are a liar,

You are a liar, you are the most protected poster on this board free to post your racist views for all to see while most that disagree with you are slapped around by biased mods,

Reported

 

[Dogmaphobe]

I've never used a racial slur. White is not a slur no matter how much you want to be a victim.

If a person were to use terms like "blacky" or "darky" like you do "whitey" as well as "black boy" like you do "white boy", they would not be tolerated, much less be made the single most favored poster in this entire forum.

 

[mudwhistle]

Yup. Sure is.




Nope. I’ve repeatedly made distinctions, the same distinctions I made with the Floyd protests.



The moment protesters attack police or intentionally destroy property they become rioters and the protest a riot.

Can you say the same?

Yeah.
So why is it everyone who was at the Capital on Jan 6th....and even people who weren't there like myself are being accused of being insurrectionists? Even people who weren't within a mile of the Capital are being accused of insurrection.
Why is it that the May 2020 rioters weren't accused of insurrection?
Why weren't the rioters all over the country (that were practically paid by the Democrats after Trump won in 2016) accused of insurrection?

 

[Uncensored2008]

What law would he be charged under for using the n word?

Hate crime.

In Biden's America - just being white is a felony.

 

[Uncensored2008]

The Brennan Center for Justice published a report called “The Truth About Voter Fraud.” Here is what the study says about voter I.D:

"The most common example of the harm wrought by imprecise and inflated claims of “voter fraud” is the call for in-person photo identification requirements. Such photo ID laws are effective only in preventing individuals from impersonating other voters at the polls — an occurrence more rare than getting struck by lightning.

By throwing all sorts of election anomalies under the “voter fraud” umbrella, however, advocates for such laws artificially inflate the apparent need for these restrictions and undermine the urgency of other reforms.

Moreover, as with all restrictions on voters, photo identification requirements have a predictable detrimental impact on eligible citizens. Such laws are only potentially worthwhile if they clearly prevent more problems than they create. If policymakers distinguished real voter fraud from the more common election irregularities erroneously labeled as voter fraud, it would become apparent that the limited benefits of laws like photo ID requirements are simply not worth the cost."

Because black people aren't smart enough to get ID?

 

[Calypso Jones]

People seem to believe a white guy would get arrested so,e,y for using the N word (or equivalent hate speech). Time to put that to to the test.

Anyone got an example?

Call a Black person the N-word at your own risk. You could be arrested

A suburban Phoenix man who directed the slur at a young Black man has been arrested for disorderly conduct. It's illegal to provoke a fight.

www.azcentral.com

 

[Leo123]

Ever heard of the "fighting words" doctrine? Certain words are so antagonistic that they cause an immediate breach of the peace and therefore are not Constitutionally protected as "freedom of speech".

Fighting Words | The First Amendment Encyclopedia​

https://www.mtsu.edu › first-amendment › article › figh...​

The fighting words doctrine allows government to limit speech when it is likely to incite immediate violence or retaliation by the recipients of the words.​

Tell Coyote.

 

[Leo123]

The difference is people (not the BLM protectors) attacking and/or destroying property versus people gaining unlawful access by breaking into certain areas of the U.S. Capitol, and making threats of bodify harm (or worse) against the leaders of the U.S. government - the nation's vice president and members of Congress.

We knew in grade school that it was against the law to make threats against the president of the United States. Why didn't these grown ass people attacking the Capital not know the same things as 7 & 8 year olds?

The lefties that threatened Trump aren’t in jail.

 

[Lisa558]

Yeah.
So why is it everyone who was at the Capital on Jan 6th....and even people who weren't there like myself are being accused of being insurrectionists? Even people who weren't within a mile of the Capital are being accused of insurrection.
Why is it that the May 2020 rioters weren't accused of insurrection?
Why weren't the rioters all over the country (that were practically paid by the Democrats after Trump won in 2016) accused of insurrection?

Because if Democrats didn’t have double standards they’d have no standards at all.

 

[AZrailwhale]

The Brennan Center for Justice published a report called “The Truth About Voter Fraud.” Here is what the study says about voter I.D:

"The most common example of the harm wrought by imprecise and inflated claims of “voter fraud” is the call for in-person photo identification requirements. Such photo ID laws are effective only in preventing individuals from impersonating other voters at the polls — an occurrence more rare than getting struck by lightning.

By throwing all sorts of election anomalies under the “voter fraud” umbrella, however, advocates for such laws artificially inflate the apparent need for these restrictions and undermine the urgency of other reforms.

Moreover, as with all restrictions on voters, photo identification requirements have a predictable detrimental impact on eligible citizens. Such laws are only potentially worthwhile if they clearly prevent more problems than they create. If policymakers distinguished real voter fraud from the more common election irregularities erroneously labeled as voter fraud, it would become apparent that the limited benefits of laws like photo ID requirements are simply not worth the cost."

That's a bunch of bull and you know it. Government issued IDs are ubiquitous almost everyone has one and they are either free or very cheap and easy to get. Now I could accept calling a requirement for ID as voter restriction if it was issued a month or even two before an election, but these requirements have been in place for years.

 

[IM2]

If a person were to use terms like "blacky" or "darky" like you do "whitey" as well as "black boy" like you do "white boy", they would not be tolerated, much less be made the single most favored poster in this entire forum.

Whites here have used the term whitey, and the word white is not a racial slur. You whine and call me a racist because you can't face the truth. You want an echo chamber where you can bitch about black peoples, hair, what we eat, our names or any other bit of trivial bs you decide to denigrate blacks about and the moderators now make you argue based on facts.

If you want to do different there is always the flame zone.

I am not protected. You're just an idiot who can't form an original thought or make a cogent argument. All you want to do is post anti black hate freely.

 

[Road Runner]

That’s funny.

Sure looked like a riot to me.

If I remember correctly some people were doing bad things but it seemed mostly peaceful to me. Unlike BLM.

 

[Uncensored2008]

That’s funny.

Sure looked like a riot to me.

We’ve lost any common ground for a discussion when we cannot even agree that a riot is a riot regardless of partisan affiliations.

Yeah, but you think looting a Target and burning it to the ground is "peaceful," so your judgement is questionable...

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

Yeah.
So why is it everyone who was at the Capital on Jan 6th....and even people who weren't there like myself are being accused of being insurrectionists? Even people who weren't within a mile of the Capital are being accused of insurrection.
Why is it that the May 2020 rioters weren't accused of insurrection?
Why weren't the rioters all over the country (that were practically paid by the Democrats after Trump won in 2016) accused of insurrection?

Because these are two DIFFERENT events entirely.

A few definitions:

insurrection: a violent uprising against an authority or government.

The U.S. Capitol: the meeting place of the United States Congress and the seat of the legislative branch of the U.S. federal government.

The January 6th participants used violence to attack the U.S. Capitol which is the meeting place of the United States Congress and the seat of the legislative branch of the U.S. federal government

Black Lives Matter and their allies on the other hand were engaged in the Constitutionally protected activity of protesting the violence and crime being perpetrated against black people, particularly black men by law enforcement as demonstrated by the murder of George Floyd. As criminals often do, they used the legitimate protests as cover for their lawlessness. Additionally there were people who engaged in unlawful behavior knowing that Black Lives Matter would be blamed for the rioting and destruction of property tarnishing the work that the movement has been attempting to accomplish.

People like this: Washington State woman sentenced to prison for setting 5 Seattle police vehicles on fire during 2020 protest

Did your teachers not EVER give you an exercise to do in Compare & Contrast?