Posted on 05/20/2015 8:39:04 AM PDT by Enlightened1
“I never laid out the facts jackhole, you don’t know what you are assuming in the first place.’
You are accusing me of saying something I didn’t say. I made no assumptions. I merely stated what I see.
And could have arrested him quietly on any day that he came into town.
But that’s not how massacres happen.
” Gator, just go away and pull that broad brush out of your ass.’
I made no broad-brush statement. I stated only what I see.
It really “bets” the question of why you have such problems with reading comprehension and linear thought.
“Or a Patriot standing up for and defending the Constitution.’
Tell a Hells Angel to F#$# off and see if he will defend your right to free speech!
” I merely stated what I see.”
Well, there’s the answer, then.
You’re obviously seeing things.
We've seen this before.
“It was kind of like how the Romans used to, you know, conquer villages in the Mediterranean. They’d go in to a little Turkish town somewhere, they’d find the first five guys they saw and they’d crucify them. “Then, you know, that town was really easy to manage for the next few years.”
“You’re obviously seeing things.”
Yep! My driver’s side mirror got cracked but it was quite a site to see the motorcyclist lose it while whitelining a traffic jam ...
“Freedom of speech is the political right to communicate one’s opinions and ideas.
The term freedom of expression is sometimes used synonymously, but includes any act of seeking, receiving and imparting information or ideas, regardless of the medium used.”
“Free speech” does not legally include verbal assault of anyone.
In the [bizarre] example you used, you would be solely responsible for any reaction to an overtly rude utterance.
The fight that began in the parking lot was stopped by other bikers...it resumed in the bathroom, spilled over into the restaurant where shots were fired, then spilled back out to the parking lot.
When the bikers opened fire...of course the police are going to shoot...I would expect them to do so in a public restaurant with gang thugs swinging guns.......and they did. I have no problem with that.
““Free speech” does not legally include verbal assault of anyone.”
ROTFLMAO!
And you claim to be a defender of the constitution!
A chilling parallel.
Wow - I'm almost speechless. You just voiced support for summary execution for "disregard to peace" or "disregard for the sanctity of human life".
Summary execution - no trial, no evidence, but just gun 'em down!
Wow.
“In the [bizarre] example you used, you would be solely responsible for any reaction to an overtly rude utterance.”
And if the other dude physically assaulted me he would be the one going to jail.
DUH ...
That horse is dead.
No one else applauded your efforts to ride him, the other three times.
Might want to try a new trigger phrase.
Too many sane people, here, for that one.
Open your door on him, did you?
“Wow - I’m almost speechless. You just voiced support for summary execution for “disregard to peace” or “disregard for the sanctity of human life”.”
He clearly stated that the first act was a violation of the sanctity of life. If anyone endangers another’s life then it is legal to use deadly force against them.
You honestly just don’t get real, constitutional “free speech”, do you?
You seem to mistake it for something more akin to liberal screeds and looting.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.