Are aggressive acts legitimate forms of protest and do you believe they are protected free speech?

[poppopfox]

Oh I agree, critics of President Trump have incessantly complained his straightforward speeches are too extreme. Even trying to disqualify him from seeking office for exercising his 1A rights.

Your straightforward speeches are incorent ramblings to the rest of us.

 

[reinaert]

Your straightforward speeches are incorent ramblings to the rest of us.

That's not especially fair to rambling or incoherence.

 

[SkyChief]

Beating cops half to death is a celebrated American tradition

How do y'all feel about America's decision to commemorate the occasion when​

CITIZENS GANGED UP AND DISGUISED THEMSELVES TO RAID A COP'S PLACE WHILE HE WAS STILL ASLEEP AND BEAT THE CRAP OUT OF HIM​

​

That is some really unhinged crap right there.

 

[trixare4kids]

Yeah. I should refrain from stating the truth and just stick with the liberal narrative. it's the only "right" thing to do.

'Step outta line, the man come and take you away'.

 

[Absentglare]

I've witnessed multiple posters in threads on this topic recently defending aggressive acts as a legitimate form of protest. What is everyone's position on this idea?

I like how your implied premise is that you can infringe on our right to protest if you believe that the protest is ‘aggressive’

 

[Absentglare]

That depends on what you're protesting. If you're advocating for a liberal cause then vandalism, arson, throwing rocks and terrorizing motorists is all protected PEACEFUL speech. If you're advocating somethingthat ISN'T a liberal cause then holding signs and wearing patriotic gear is domestic terrorism. Finally, if you're protesting abortion then sitting silently in prayer then you are among the worst of the worst and need to be removed from society permanently.

It’s funny you bring that up.

George Floyd was choked to death for over 9 minutes, but you suggest that was a bad reason.

Trump lost in 2020, yet you suggest that was a good reason.

 

[Hello My Son]

I like how your implied premise is that you can infringe on our right to protest if you believe that the protest is ‘aggressive’

Perhaps you missed it, but this is a poll thread. You’re completely free to answer the question and elaborate on the topic while defining your own meaning of terminologies instead of complaining about imaginary things.

 

[Absentglare]

Perhaps you missed it, but this is a poll thread. You’re completely free to answer the question and elaborate on the topic while defining your own meaning of terminologies instead of complaining about imaginary things.

Your poll is either asking if it’s illegal to break the law, which is trivially yes, or you’re suggesting that libs don’t have the right to protest when you believe those protests are “aggressive”

 

[Lovebug]

I abhor violence. Period.

 

[Hello My Son]

Your poll is either asking if it’s illegal to break the law, which is trivially yes, or you’re suggesting that libs don’t have the right to protest when you believe those protests are “aggressive”

Incorrect, as usual. There are two options of “other” and “sometimes,” which completely disproves your either/or claim.

This is basic logic and not difficult at all. You’re free to answer the question in a completely open-ended way because “other” literally means “anything you want to say.” This shouldn’t need to be explained because even a young child can understand what “other, please elaborate” means.

 

[Absentglare]

Incorrect, as usual. There are two options of “other” and “sometimes,” which completely disproves your either/or claim.

This is basic logic and not difficult at all. You’re free to answer the question in a completely open-ended way because “other” literally means “anything you want to say.” This shouldn’t need to be explained because even a young child can understand what “other, please elaborate” means.

You shouldn’t be able to take away my right to protest by setting fire to a car.

 

[Maidenrules29]

Another one whining about the left leaning members of this forum. JAYSUS, this has recently become a new theme. You aren't the first. The new grievance is too many leftists on here. I mean, do folks on the Right ever do ANYTHING but moan and groan? It's getting pathetic, it really is.

Both sides moan and groan. Get it straight. The difference is that the left considers itself "smarter". That is condescending, and it’s a big reason why the right doesn't like them.

 

[Hello My Son]

You shouldn’t be able to take away my right to protest by setting fire to a car.

So you’re saying that destroying someone else’s private property is a legitimate form of protest.

Is burning someone else’s car legally protected speech in your opinion?

 

[Absentglare]

So you’re saying that destroying someone else’s private property is a legitimate form of protest.

Is burning someone else’s car legally protected speech in your opinion?

No, protest and burning cars are two different things.

I want you to explain to me how you burning a car should in any way interfere with my right to protest.

 

[CANON]

So you’re saying that destroying someone else’s private property is a legitimate form of protest.

Is burning someone else’s car legally protected speech in your opinion?

Where in that response does it say that destroying someone else's property is a legitimate form of protest?

If you are protesting against something, and I show up and set a car on fire, should you lose your right to protest?

Because you are no longer just at a protest, you are now part of a riot and terrorism.

 

[Hello My Son]

Where in that response does it say that destroying someone else's property is a legitimate form of protest?

If you are protesting against something, and I show up and set a car on fire, should you lose your right to protest?

Because you are no longer just at a protest, you are now part of a riot and terrorism.

The way that it was worded could be interpreted in two different ways. The poster isn't posting in good faith, as per usual, so I was being a smart ass.

 

[Hello My Son]

No, protest and burning cars are two different things.

I want you to explain to me how you burning a car should in any way interfere with my right to protest.

I don't burn cars.

And why would I explain that to you? No where have I made any comment indicating that me "burning a car should in any way interfere with [your] right to protest."

Why are you making up fake things I never said and attributing it to me? Do you always lie in your posts like this?

 

[SNOWFLAKE]

Both sides moan and groan. Get it straight. The difference is that the left considers itself "smarter". That is condescending, and it’s a big reason why the right doesn't like them.

Two points: The left IS smarter and we don't give a rat's ass if the right doesn't like us.

 

[Simon W. Moon]

That is some really unhinged crap right there.

It is a CELEBRATED American tradition.

 

[Slartibartfast]

That is some really unhinged crap right there.

Dude, if you don't think people are going to take advantage of how ICE is operating, then you don't know human nature. They are absolutely leaving a huge question that can be exploited for people's personal revenge. On top of that, its simple American tradition that if the government becomes a tyranny, the people rise up. If that happens, then the OP's question becomes moot.

 

[AZRWinger]

Your straightforward speeches are incorent ramblings to the rest of us.

You are clueless about the meaning of the words you tried to read. You have to edit out all but the first few sentences then make up a word to describe them.

Any comment on the thread?

 

[Blue Dog]

“Aggressive acts” is a subjective term.

Blocking bridges, streets and highways I consider aggressive.

Others may not.

 

[Visbek]

Both sides moan and groan. Get it straight. The difference is that the left considers itself "smarter"....

Please. The right has spent centuries insisting that it is superior, and attempting to impose its own morality on the entire population... while often hypocritically violating its own moral code... and forgiving the transgressors that are on "their team." If that isn't condescension, nothing is.

 

[j brown's body]

Your poll is either asking if it’s illegal to break the law, which is trivially yes, or you’re suggesting that libs don’t have the right to protest when you believe those protests are “aggressive”

What goes unremaked upon these days is the militarization of law enforcement and how that leads to more aggressive violence towards protesters.

When we were younger, there was some effort to portray the police as members of the community, someone you might relate to on a personal level. Someone who would de-escalate a situation before people let it get out of hand.

Now they are masked and militarized and it is up to the people to keep cops for escalating things.

 

[BirdinHand]

Good government listens to people and their wishes and makes changes before things escalate to the point of violence.

Ineffective government and a government designed to keep the people captive to a system that benefits the few at the expense of the many often finds itself in the receiving end of violence from the people



That’s the course of human history.