Thoughts about the protestors blocking CA freeway?

[Valerie]

maybe the inciter-in-chief can resolve this destructive violence with another vapid beer summit.

 

[Publius1787]

maybe the inciter-in-chief can resolve this destructive violence with another vapid beer summit.

The amount of Colt 45, King Cobra, and Olde English, it would take to pull that off would cost taxpayers millions. And then he would need to have enough Secret Service to prevent them from looting the White House.

 

[Valerie]

maybe the inciter-in-chief can resolve this destructive violence with another vapid beer summit.

The amount of Colt 45, King Cobra, and Olde English, it would take to pull that off would cost taxpayers millions. And then he would need to have enough Secret Service to prevent them from looting the White House.

besides, the looters stole all the beer anyway!!

 

[AgentSparky]

^ look what you idiots are defending...

I don't get it either.... but hopefully public opinion against them will continue to increase...

 

[DigitalDrifter]

That most on the right are frightened by acts of civil disobedience and dissent in accordance with the First Amendment, and seek to ridicule it comes as no surprise.

This also demonstrates the extent to which most on the right simply don't get it.

No one is frightened, but if I was caught in a long traffic jam and I found out it WASN'T due to an emergency, car wreck etc., and I found out it was because of a bunch of leftist loons, I would not be happy.

 

[dannyboys]

The clock is ticking. Virtually every negro in the country actually believe Wilson went hunting to murder a ****** and got away with it.
And people axe' why every other race on the planet despises the negro race.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Call the fire department. They have water cannons.

 

[Harry Dresden]

a whole bunch of people called Jones out on the shit he put up......but i will bet anyone here that he wont reply because.....



Jones dont do Questions.....

 

[JFK_USA]

^ look what you idiots are defending...

That's not protesting, that's looting. And no, people aren't defending the right to loot because there isn't one. But I will defend the right for a peaceful protest which, despite inconvenience of some motorists, is completely allowed by the 1st amendment. It is public property.

 

[Conservative65]

But I will defend the right for a peaceful protest which, despite inconvenience of some motorists, is completely allowed by the 1st amendment. It is public property.

I don't have a problem with a peaceful protest done under the local laws. I've had to detour around streets that were closed for such reasons but the people doing the protest went through the proper channels. Those blocking the roads in this situation didn't nor does their right without such approval mean they can cause me inconvenience.

 

[Roadrunner]

The clock is ticking. Virtually every negro in the country actually believe Wilson went hunting to murder a ****** and got away with it.
And people axe' why every other race on the planet despises the negro race.

You are wrong about that.

90% of black people know what went down.

The vocal minority is being guided by professional agitators, mostly white occupy type scum, who go back home to their rich families when the shit really hits the fan,

 

[JFK_USA]

But I will defend the right for a peaceful protest which, despite inconvenience of some motorists, is completely allowed by the 1st amendment. It is public property.

I don't have a problem with a peaceful protest done under the local laws. I've had to detour around streets that were closed for such reasons but the people doing the protest went through the proper channels. Those blocking the roads in this situation didn't nor does their right without such approval mean they can cause me inconvenience.

But that's allowed under the 1st amendment as long as the protest is not blocking but moving in unison. Police usually try to move the protest to the sidewalks if feasible.

The whole point of protesting is to make the community aware of a situation they may not be aware of. People can protest for any reason or no reason at all. I can start yelling nonsense on a street corner and that's protesting.

 

[Roadrunner]

But I will defend the right for a peaceful protest which, despite inconvenience of some motorists, is completely allowed by the 1st amendment. It is public property.

I don't have a problem with a peaceful protest done under the local laws. I've had to detour around streets that were closed for such reasons but the people doing the protest went through the proper channels. Those blocking the roads in this situation didn't nor does their right without such approval mean they can cause me inconvenience.

I drive a 4x4, have a 1911, two mags and 50 more rounds in the console, and a Sig M-400 and five 30 round mags behind the seat.

I don't plan to get cut off anywhere for very long.

Motherfucker with a hammer jump on my truck, and he better have 100 other motherfuckers with hammers backing him up.

 

[Conservative65]

But I will defend the right for a peaceful protest which, despite inconvenience of some motorists, is completely allowed by the 1st amendment. It is public property.

I don't have a problem with a peaceful protest done under the local laws. I've had to detour around streets that were closed for such reasons but the people doing the protest went through the proper channels. Those blocking the roads in this situation didn't nor does their right without such approval mean they can cause me inconvenience.

I drive a 4x4, have a 1911, two mags and 50 more rounds in the console, and a Sig M-400 and five 30 round mags behind the seat.

I don't plan to get cut off anywhere for very long.

Motherfucker with a hammer jump on my truck, and he better have 100 other motherfuckers with hammers backing him up.

Nor should you or I have to get cut off because people want to block our paths due to being mad. They have a right to peacefully protest but that right doesn't extend to where it violates mine.

 

[mdk]

That most on the right are frightened by acts of civil disobedience and dissent in accordance with the First Amendment, and seek to ridicule it comes as no surprise.

This also demonstrates the extent to which most on the right simply don't get it.

The 1st Amendment does not give you license to violate the rights of others. You would figure a guy with the Bill of Rights with his avatar would have known that.

Does it now? A whole bunch of Christan bakers and photographers would disagree with your statement.

 

[boedicca]

My thoughts. If they keep this ignorant crap up, it won't be long til 95% of public opinion will turn against them.

Agreed. Normal decent people are horrified at the Black Friday shopping attacks and the terrorizing of kids singing Christmas Carols.

As a resident of Oakland, I've seen how the anarchist hatred of civilization has affected my community (despite the news reports, most of the protests in Oakland are done by outside anarchist agitators). They want to see our society collapse. The sooner more people realize it and unite to stop them, the better.

 

[Conservative65]

But I will defend the right for a peaceful protest which, despite inconvenience of some motorists, is completely allowed by the 1st amendment. It is public property.

I don't have a problem with a peaceful protest done under the local laws. I've had to detour around streets that were closed for such reasons but the people doing the protest went through the proper channels. Those blocking the roads in this situation didn't nor does their right without such approval mean they can cause me inconvenience.

But that's allowed under the 1st amendment as long as the protest is not blocking but moving in unison. Police usually try to move the protest to the sidewalks if feasible.

The whole point of protesting is to make the community aware of a situation they may not be aware of. People can protest for any reason or no reason at all. I can start yelling nonsense on a street corner and that's protesting.

Their 1st amendment rights can violate my rights. If they are prohibiting my movement, they are violating my rights.

You seem to think 1st amendment rights are absolute. Most places have ordinances that required permits to do such things even in unison. Since their protests didn't meet them, they are in violation of the law.

 

[JFK_USA]

But I will defend the right for a peaceful protest which, despite inconvenience of some motorists, is completely allowed by the 1st amendment. It is public property.

I don't have a problem with a peaceful protest done under the local laws. I've had to detour around streets that were closed for such reasons but the people doing the protest went through the proper channels. Those blocking the roads in this situation didn't nor does their right without such approval mean they can cause me inconvenience.

But that's allowed under the 1st amendment as long as the protest is not blocking but moving in unison. Police usually try to move the protest to the sidewalks if feasible.

The whole point of protesting is to make the community aware of a situation they may not be aware of. People can protest for any reason or no reason at all. I can start yelling nonsense on a street corner and that's protesting.

Their 1st amendment rights can violate my rights. If they are prohibiting my movement, they are violating my rights.

You seem to think 1st amendment rights are absolute. Most places have ordinances that required permits to do such things even in unison. Since their protests didn't meet them, they are in violation of the law.

What amendment says you have the right of movement?

 

[Publius1787]

maybe the inciter-in-chief can resolve this destructive violence with another vapid beer summit.

The amount of Colt 45, King Cobra, and Olde English, it would take to pull that off would cost taxpayers millions. And then he would need to have enough Secret Service to prevent them from looting the White House.

besides, the looters stole all the beer anyway!!

If I were a smart man I would have invested in malt liquor before the riots.

That most on the right are frightened by acts of civil disobedience and dissent in accordance with the First Amendment, and seek to ridicule it comes as no surprise.

This also demonstrates the extent to which most on the right simply don't get it.

The 1st Amendment does not give you license to violate the rights of others. You would figure a guy with the Bill of Rights with his avatar would have known that.

Does it now? A whole bunch of Christan bakers and photographers would disagree with your statement.

I suppose they would. But that is a different scenario altogether. No one, as a condition of owning private property, should be forced to break their religious values.

 

[Publius1787]

But I will defend the right for a peaceful protest which, despite inconvenience of some motorists, is completely allowed by the 1st amendment. It is public property.

I don't have a problem with a peaceful protest done under the local laws. I've had to detour around streets that were closed for such reasons but the people doing the protest went through the proper channels. Those blocking the roads in this situation didn't nor does their right without such approval mean they can cause me inconvenience.

But that's allowed under the 1st amendment as long as the protest is not blocking but moving in unison. Police usually try to move the protest to the sidewalks if feasible.

The whole point of protesting is to make the community aware of a situation they may not be aware of. People can protest for any reason or no reason at all. I can start yelling nonsense on a street corner and that's protesting.

Their 1st amendment rights can violate my rights. If they are prohibiting my movement, they are violating my rights.

You seem to think 1st amendment rights are absolute. Most places have ordinances that required permits to do such things even in unison. Since their protests didn't meet them, they are in violation of the law.

What amendment says you have the right of movement?

Good then, I guess if the drivers don't have the right to movement then neither do the protestors who "moved" themselves onto the highway. How do you differentiate the two?