Charlottesville

Statement by the Freedom Caucus lightweight representing our district:

In the wake of the continuing national discussions surrounding the events in Charlottesville, Congressman Perry offered additional comments:

“The White Supremacist groups who went to Charlottesville did so prepared for a fight, and they’re absolutely accountable for the violence and loss of life there. I have a visceral disdain for the goals/actions of White Supremacists and Neo-Nazis - as I do for all hate groups. It's a sad day, indeed, when we must all, once again, condemn the rhetoric and ideology of hatred - which, frankly, should go without saying.

The event in Charlottesville didn’t happen in a vacuum, and isn't the first type of incendiary riot rooted in hatred that we’ve seen recently - which, in and of itself, should be alarming to all Americans.

We can’t let our national discourse fall into the trap of picking and choosing sides to blame. We need to choose rational discourse, debate, agree to disagree, defend the First Amendment and compromise for the good of our Country. White supremacists, anti-fascists and other extremist groups are becoming increasingly active and attempting to hijack our democracy. The cowards who perpetrate such acts of violence must be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, and we must be united against bigotry and hatred - in ALL forms and guises.”
Click to expand...

Fuck this guy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tig
Can I be more basic?

Every time -- every time -- I encounter this neocon / alt-right type of thinking, two huge problems immediately jump out at me:

* Emotional damage / anger management
* Stupidity / Ignorance

It's like night follows day.

Honestly don't see a cure, except for future prevention and outnumbering.
 
Danhedonia said:
Can I be more basic?

Every time -- every time -- I encounter this neocon / alt-right type of thinking, two huge problems immediately jump out at me:

* Emotional damage / anger management
* Stupidity / Ignorance

It's like night follows day.

Honestly don't see a cure, except for future prevention and outnumbering.
Click to expand...

eliminating all the alt-right hate tv/radio, etc. would drastically reduce the brain washing, but then you run into that pesky 1st amendment thing.
as long as people WANT to hate (for whatever reason) they will find a cause that allows & encourages it.
 
Johnny N. said:
But I think what gets missed is to those who are proud of being southern for the reasons mentioned above might feel like the act of removing these things is chipping away at their culture. It doesn't mean they support slavery.
Click to expand...

I think it does. I realize most confederate flag wavers are realistic about not being able to turn back the hands of time. But it is a symbol that they still support the cause that that war was originally about. Hopefully everyone by now has read the writings floating around on social media from the leaders of the confederacy stating slavery was the central issue of that war. It is busting a myth started by southerners (war was about states rights apart from slavery). And politeness was the order of the day on the plantations. Slaves were beaten for not complying with those rules of etiquette.
 
The idea that free speech is in opposition to reducing the amount of hate speech is IMO a false dichotomy.

I don't see a radically suppressed populace in Europe, where there are hate-speech laws. Another thought is that actionable speech is simply not at all addressed by law enforcement, because law enforcement is less threatened by white oppression than they are by social justice.

Basically, you really shouldn't be allowed to walk around with guns and torches, chanting about killing other people. I'm a big free-speecher, but that's something else.
 
Danhedonia said:
Basically, you really shouldn't be allowed to walk around with guns and torches, chanting about killing other people. I'm a big free-speecher, but that's something else.
Click to expand...
Threatening others with a gun can be aggravated assault in Idaho.

As one cop put it:
"If someone believes that another person has an actual gun and they're about to commit some serious bodily harm, injury, or death to someone else, and if they use some sort of deadly instrument, even if the firearm is unloaded or doesn't work anymore, they can still be charged with that felony," said Sgt. Bryan Lovell of the Bonneville County Sheriff's Department.

And I recall my local judge focusing on the "about to commit some serious bodily harm" part. Like a starting to point it, etc. So that might not apply. And there could be some tricky proof issues. And prosecutors generally don't like those cases with the weird proof issues.

But it also seems like these mass demonstrations with weapons that may or may not be loaded should be regulated in some way. But that would be impacting 1st and 2nd Amendments, and we know how people love that 2nd Amendment.
 
Danhedonia said:
The idea that free speech is in opposition to reducing the amount of hate speech is IMO a false dichotomy.
Click to expand...

I'm trying to deconstruct that sentence. Free speech isn't trying to control any speech. It's allowing anyone to say whatever they believe, including racial superiority which is hate (unless there are humble superior races that aren't trying to rub their superiority in anyone's face). Free speech supports hate. It doesn't support any speech or actions that would cause harm to others. Open carry laws are a huge problem for the backwards BFE states that have them. Provoking other people and staking out Jewish temples is a huge problem. None of that is speech, it's physically threatening and should be illegal. The reluctance of law enforcement to intervene in any preventive manner also reflects their own racism. As everyone pointed out, if Black Lives Matter were armed and were pushing against police lines there would have been many dead (black) people. The ACLU has historically fought for the right of American Nazis to hold rallies, just to protect the free speech rights of all people. This rally was way beyond speech and should have been shut down much earlier than it was.
 
True. Everyone is free to think and say what they wish, not free to DO anything they want. But the constitution says the government will not discriminate or punish you with government sanctions for speech. The public can choose not to do business etc with you but the government won't.
My 6th grade teacher taught us. "my freedom ends at the end of your nose" and " my freedom ends where yours begins". Meaning I can be free until I curtail your freedom. I have always tried to live where that thought helps direct my actions.

Now, just to show one side doesn't have the market cornered on ignorance - I posted above the link to the protestors who destroyed the peace monument, now I read in Chicago a bust of Abe Lincoln was burnt with "f---- law" written in red paint on it.
Some people hate by race, some want to tear down specific things that link to a certain event, and some people just want to destroy.

This discussion has been mostly very civil, but there are a lot of people hat we just can't trust to hold a rational discussion it seems.
 
A message from the children of Johnny Cash:

We were alerted to a video of a young man in Charlottesville, a self-proclaimed neo-Nazi, spewing hatred and bile. He was wearing a t-shirt emblazoned with the name of Johnny Cash, our father. We were sickened by the association.

Johnny Cash was a man whose heart beat with the rhythm of love and social justice. He received humanitarian awards from, among others, the Jewish National Fund, B’nai Brith, and the United Nations. He championed the rights of Native Americans, protested the war in Vietnam, was a voice for the poor, the struggling and the disenfranchised, and an advocate for the rights of prisoners. Along with our sister Rosanne, he was on the advisory board of an organization solely devoted to preventing gun violence among children. His pacifism and inclusive patriotism were two of his most defining characteristics. He would be horrified at even a casual use of his name or image for an idea or a cause founded in persecution and hatred. The white supremacists and neo-Nazis who marched in Charlottesville are poison in our society, and an insult to every American hero who wore a uniform to fight the Nazis in WWII. Several men in the extended Cash family were among those who served with honor.
Our dad told each of us, over and over throughout our lives, ‘Children, you can choose love or hate. I choose love.’

We do not judge race, color, sexual orientation or creed. We value the capacity for love and the impulse towards kindness. We respect diversity, and cherish our shared humanity. We recognize the suffering of other human beings, and remain committed to our natural instinct for compassion and service.

To any who claim supremacy over other human beings, to any who believe in racial or religious hierarchy: we are not you. Our father, as a person, icon, or symbol, is not you. We ask that the Cash name be kept far away from destructive and hateful ideology.

We Choose Love.

Rosanne Cash
Kathy Cash
Cindy Cash
Tara Cash
John Carter Cash

August 16, 2017

‘Not one of us can rest, be happy, be at home, be at peace with ourselves, until we end hatred and division.’ Rep. John Lewis
 
sunvalleylaw said:
Threatening others with a gun can be aggravated assault in Idaho.

As one cop put it:
"If someone believes that another person has an actual gun and they're about to commit some serious bodily harm, injury, or death to someone else, and if they use some sort of deadly instrument, even if the firearm is unloaded or doesn't work anymore, they can still be charged with that felony," said Sgt. Bryan Lovell of the Bonneville County Sheriff's Department.

And I recall my local judge focusing on the "about to commit some serious bodily harm" part. Like a starting to point it, etc. So that might not apply. And there could be some tricky proof issues. And prosecutors generally don't like those cases with the weird proof issues.

But it also seems like these mass demonstrations with weapons that may or may not be loaded should be regulated in some way. But that would be impacting 1st and 2nd Amendments, and we know how people love that 2nd Amendment.
Click to expand...

i don't recall reading in the 2nd amend. where it says the people have the right to keep and bear arms WHILE INCITING A RIOT.
just sayin'
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top