Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Range
Law & Order
It is NOT the same
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="dugby" data-source="post: 2078620" data-attributes="member: 7393"><p>I grow tired of hearing about how current restrictions on our freedom of speech are not a problem with anyone and therefore we should be willing to accept "reasonable" restrictions on our 2nd amendment rights.</p><p></p><p>To make a 1st amendment restriction comport with all the restrictions we presently suffer on our 2nd amendment rights it would go something like this:</p><p></p><p>Assault Talkers Ban</p><p></p><p>1. Slander is a crime.</p><p></p><p>2. Lets make a law that makes it illegal for a private citizen to make any comment about a public figure. This will keep the incidence of slander down.</p><p></p><p>The fallacy of their argument is that the current restrictions for speech are all retroactive. The constraints they are trying to foist on us are all preemptive. Give up your rights to prevent crimes. I am all for reasonable restrictions on our 2nd amendment rights. Discharging your gun negligently, Threatening people with it frivolously, etc. are things I am happy to draw the line on. Giving up my rights just in case I might participate in a crime is WAY over the top.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="dugby, post: 2078620, member: 7393"] I grow tired of hearing about how current restrictions on our freedom of speech are not a problem with anyone and therefore we should be willing to accept "reasonable" restrictions on our 2nd amendment rights. To make a 1st amendment restriction comport with all the restrictions we presently suffer on our 2nd amendment rights it would go something like this: Assault Talkers Ban 1. Slander is a crime. 2. Lets make a law that makes it illegal for a private citizen to make any comment about a public figure. This will keep the incidence of slander down. The fallacy of their argument is that the current restrictions for speech are all retroactive. The constraints they are trying to foist on us are all preemptive. Give up your rights to prevent crimes. I am all for reasonable restrictions on our 2nd amendment rights. Discharging your gun negligently, Threatening people with it frivolously, etc. are things I am happy to draw the line on. Giving up my rights just in case I might participate in a crime is WAY over the top. [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Range
Law & Order
It is NOT the same
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom
