Supreme Court Marshal Asks Officials to End Protests at Justices’ Homes

[FurriesRock]

So you would prefer militants to be protecting justice homes?

A private security company and a mercenary company are two different things.

 

[Slartibartfast]

A private security company and a mercenary company are two different things.

Please show the article that shows rittenhouse was a security guard.

Did he work for Wells Fargo or Securitas?

 

[Sand Castle]

They aren't harassing, they are protesting.

In the end "it comes with the job"!

Famous actors and athletes deal with mobs called fans.

If any SCOTUS doesn't like the pressure from making life changing decisions, then go back to a small town district court.

 

[OrphanSlug]

Democrats didn't seem to care with protecting federal buildings during the BLM riots. They were too busy trying to bail out rioters causing it.

Some Democrats were, and I recall calling them out for it. Where were you on the 6th?

 

[Gateman_Wen]

He was acquitted in court, so not a murderer.

Yeah, he is.

 

[Gateman_Wen]

According to congress, quite a bit.

Warner, Hagerty Send Letter to House Leadership Urging Immediate Passage of Emergency Funding Bill to Protect U.S. Supreme Court Justices

WASHINGTON—U.S. Sens. Mark R Warner (D-VA), Chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, and Bill Hagerty (R-TN), a member of the Senate Appropriations Committee today sent a letter to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy urging the House of Representatives to...

www.warner.senate.gov

How is that support for the protestors?

 

[FurriesRock]

Yeah, he is.

Well, the court says you're wrong, and that's all that matters.

 

[Sand Castle]

That was another leftist mob!

Epic Fail!

"Climate activists chained themselves to a pink sailboat parked at the end of Gov. Charlie Baker’s driveway Tuesday morning, placing the state’s chief executive under a so-called “house arrest” until protesters were cuffed."

https://www.bostonherald.com/2021/0...cking-charlie-bakers-driveway-with-pink-boat/

 

[FurriesRock]

Please show the article that shows rittenhouse was a security guard.

Did he work for Wells Fargo or Securitas?

Now you're trying to twist my words.

I said the Justices should help him start a security company, not that he already worked for one.

 

[Gateman_Wen]

Well, the court says you're wrong, and that's all that matters.

No, it's not. He's a murderer who got off on a couple of technicalities.

Deal with it.

 

[Slartibartfast]

Now you're trying to twist my words.

I said the Justices should help him start a security company, not that he already worked for one.

Oh so you just want a judicial conflict of interest then.

 

[Shrink726]

If they're peaceful and doing nothing to disturb the peace they should have every right to express their disgust with what these 19th century morons have done to our country.

 

[FurriesRock]

No, it's not. He's a murderer who got off on a couple of technicalities.

Deal with it.

Kyle's free! Deal with it!

 

[Gateman_Wen]

Kyle's free! Deal with it!

Oh, I have.

You on the other hand...

 

[Sand Castle]

Kyle's free! Deal with it!

His mother should drive him over to Kavanaugh's house

 

[FurriesRock]

His mother should drive him over to Kavanaugh's house

So, you going to comment on that link you tried to pass off as a right wing mob that was really another left wing mob?

 

[Josie]

On a philosophical level I would agree, it is poor taste to be in front of someone's home intentionally making their family uncomfortable.

However on a legal and Constitutional basis, something Conservatives care about when convenient, I take issue with the idea of removing everyone over the acts of a few that should be arrested the moment they cross the line. Protesting is one thing, threatening is another.

The idea of association, gathering, and protesting is fundamental. Constitutional conservatives used to care for these things until they became who was protested, and all of a sudden the Christian Taliban decided there was a different barometer for what is and is not Constitutional.

I agree that protesting is fundamental to the Constitution. That doesn't mean it should be "anything goes," right? We have limitations on protesting including permits for some instances, laws prohibiting certain non-violent actions, etc. I don't see any reason why one of those legal limitations can't coincide with your philosophical point.

 

[Josie]

They aren't harassing, they are protesting.

At what point is it harassing?

 

[ttwtt78640]

How is that support for the protestors?

The additional security spending was deemed necessary due to protestors.

 

[Linuxcooldude]

No, it's not. He's a murderer who got off on a couple of technicalities.

Deal with it.

If you call legal self defence a technicality.

 

[Sand Castle]

So, you going to comment on that link you tried to pass off as a right wing mob that was really another left wing mob?

New link presented. Didn't hear from you guys when the Right was going after Baker, Whitmer

 

[Gateman_Wen]

The additional security spending was deemed necessary due to protestors.

That's not supporting the protestors.

You wanna support protestors set up some porta potties and a concession stand.

 

[ttwtt78640]

No, it's not. He's a murderer who got off on a couple of technicalities.

Deal with it.

Self-defense is not a technicality.

 

[Gateman_Wen]

If you call legal self defence a technicality.

Lol, that's not what happened.

 

[Cardinal]

Yes, they are breaking the law. They are entitled to protest, but not at the justices homes.

Not much point in protesting if what they're protesting isn't anywhere around. That's a pretty good chunk of of how protests work, really.