“Libertarian” Rand Paul Calls for National Crackdown Over Charlie Kirk

The New Republic ^ | Sep 16 | Malcolm Ferguson

[RandFan]

The GOP has turned so hard on free speech that now even “libertarian” Rand Paul is calling for a “crackdown” on those using their First Amendment rights.

“I was assaulted six, seven years ago, attacked from behind, had six ribs broken and part of my lung removed, and still online, on a daily basis people say they wish that it would happen to me all over again,” Paul said Tuesday on Fox Business. “And by sort of making light of what I suffered, they are encouraging other people to do it. That oughta be taken down, and social media oughta be able to take that down.

“People say, ‘Oh people have a right to say things.’ Well, actually, they don’t necessarily have a right to say things; many people have in their contract what we call a morals clause … or a conduct clause,” Paul continued, as he compared the First Amendment to a military conduct code. “I think it is time for this to be a crackdown on people.”

---

TOPICS: Chit/Chat; Conspiracy
KEYWORDS: 123oclock4oclockzot; leftistsource; liberaltarian; malcolmferguson; multiplenicks; randpaulsucks; thenewrepublic; trollfarm

[RandFan]

This is from an albeit un-Friendly source (I cannot change the headline...)

However, focus on the quotes Rand made on Fox News since they're reporting on them. Thoughts?

[Petrosius]

The is no First Amendment right to advocate for violence.

[proxy_user]

The argument is all mixed up. Platforms like Reddit and Facebook may certainly have whatever speech policies they like, but the government cannot arrest you and take you to jail for speech.

[Jim W N]

People and free enterprise can sanction those who dishonor Charlie Kirk.

But it is utterly unconstitutional for the federal gov’t to do so.

Shame on you Rand Paul.

[JSM_Liberty]

“And by sort of making light of what I suffered, they are encouraging other people to do it. That oughta be taken down, and social media oughta be able to take that down. “

Would this also include people making light of what Paul Pelosi suffered?

[TauntedTiger]

I have no problem with what he said because none of it involves the government getting involved. What I’m hearing is he’s defending private property rights by saying that employers should be able to fire employees for their speech (which they should) and owners of private websites should be able to remove posts (which they should).

My only regret is that he didn’t preface it by saying something like “I’m saying this as a private citizen concerned about our society, not as a politician or legislator.”

[FreedomPoster]

They can for non-protected speech.

Inciting violence is not protected.

[ClearCase_guy]

The UK has lost its guns and lost its Speech.

The Left here in the US want the same for us. Let’s not give it to them.

[TTFX]

But it is utterly unconstitutional for the federal gov’t to do so.

Shame on you Rand Paul

- - - - - - -

I couldn’t find where Rand Paul said the government should do it.

[RandFan]

Ironic those 2 are the 1st and 2nd

i.e the most important they considered at least in the 1700s

Nothing changes... !

[backpacker_c]

grandstanding rand paul is taking up the tradition of chafettez and gowdy

making a lot of noise for attention,

but never gets anything done

[RandFan]

He’s pontificating is a better word

Remember he’s a backbench senator who votes no on nearly everything on principle

Even as a chairman they undermine him

[OrangeHoof]

I appreciate his comments. It shows the Left’s reactions to Kirk are not just a one-off. There was the Paul beating and the Scalise shooting. It’s time to get serious with the loons.

And when has firing a bullet become “free speech” and not “attempted murder”?

[proxy_user]

According to the Supreme Court, generalized calls for armed struggle are permissible.

Maybe they will change their minds?

[TexasFreeper2009]

yep, and even saying “punch a Nazi” is promoting assault and if done while colluding with others it even might be open to RICO charges.

[Navy Patriot]

Screw The New Republic and Malcolm Ferguson, Good and Hard.

Then do it again.

[Sarah Barracuda]

Nah it’s cool we are gonna continue doing what we are doing if commies want to spew their bike online they can deal with the consequences they just can’t stand it when we throw their sh*t back in their faces

[TheDon]

When they call you Nazi they’re inciting violence including murder against you. That is not protected speech and there must be legal consequences.

[Jim W N]

I couldn’t find where Rand Paul said the government should do it.

Did he call for a "national crackdown"? If so, he needs to clarify exactly what he means since there are many that would advocate unconstitutional federal gov't crackdown.

[KrisKrinkle]

“…the government cannot arrest you and take you to jail for speech.”

1.There is no “the government”. We have Federal, State, and Local governments.

2. Ohio Revised Code, Section 2909.23 | Making terroristic threat.
(A) No person shall threaten to commit or threaten to cause to be committed a specified offense when both of the following apply:
(Skip)
(C) Whoever violates this section is guilty of making a terroristic threat, a felony of the third degree. Section 2909.25 of the Revised Code applies regarding an offender who is convicted of or pleads guilty to a violation of this section.

I skipped part of it but the whole thing is here: https://codes.ohio.gov/ohio-revised-code/section-2909.23

Correct me if I’m wrong (politely please) but it looks like a government can arrest ypu and take you to jail for at least some speech.