To: Mad Dawgg
So, what the ‘Authorities’ are saying, in effect, is that you can have *either* the First Amendment, *or* the Second - but not both.....
6 posted on
01/19/2011 7:21:39 AM PST by
Uncle Ike
(Rope is cheap, and there are lots of trees...)
To: Uncle Ike
Additionally, the former gun owner stated, “It is absolutely, absolutely unacceptable to shoot indiscriminately. Target only politicians and their staff and leave regular citizens alone.”
The first amendment gave this cretin enough rope to hang himself.
13 posted on
01/19/2011 7:25:13 AM PST by
NautiNurse
(ObamaCare uses Bernie Madoff theory of economics)
To: Uncle Ike
1st Amendment never granted a right to threaten or incite. This guy is an idiot and deserves it.
16 posted on
01/19/2011 7:26:25 AM PST by
Melas
To: Uncle Ike
The First Amendment does not give one the right to threaten to kill anyone, including member of Congress.
Now, this may have been merely a very, dumb comment, as opposed to a real threat, but an investigation into it seems totally appropriate to me.
To: Uncle Ike
Who are the brain police?
35 posted on
01/19/2011 7:53:19 AM PST by
Gasshog
(going to get what all those libs asked for, but its not what they expected.)
To: Uncle Ike
Really they’re just saying what’s been the case for a while, if you make a statement that’s deemed as threatening to government officials you’ll get a visit from some well dressed people. Threatening speech isn’t protected.
49 posted on
01/19/2011 9:16:56 AM PST by
discostu
(this is defninitely not my confused face)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson