Remix.run Logo
paulddraper an hour ago

An attendee interrupted the discussion on the law being passed, flipped off the council, and refused to leave.

How is that First Amendment rights?

pixl97 an hour ago | parent | next [-]

Looking at the the wrong way, what the citizenship in mass should be doing is surrounding the meeting with torches and making said council fear for their lives.

Aurornis 41 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

Violent threats only sound like a good idea if you can only imagine them being used by people you agree with.

A society that let small mobs carrying torches dictate your laws would not be good for you, me, or anyone other than the most violent vocal minority.

ashkankiani 17 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

You might want to look at how a small mob orchaestrated and comprised of Bush's campaign flooded a voting offices to stop a recount, as part of a successful effort to steal the election from Gore https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brooks_Brothers_riot

They didn't even need torches to subvert democracy. I think a majority of Americans are under the misconception that they live in a civilized democracy, and that they have been for a while. But if you look under the covers (or if you're a minority), or just learn history, then you'll find that it's not.

terminalbraid 9 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

You might be shocked to learn how "society" has been forged over history.

jst1fthsdys 15 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

>A society that let small mobs carrying torches dictate your laws would not be good for you, me, or anyone other than the most violent vocal minority.

We talking about the oligarchs here or?

30 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]
[deleted]
cucumber3732842 38 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

>Violent threats only sound like a good idea if you can only imagine them being used by people you agree with.

You mean like how they used the "you can't speak on an issue because we've decided we're not talking about that" rule to have this lady hauled off?

gruez 29 minutes ago | parent [-]

>You mean like how they used the "you can't speak on an issue because we've decided we're not talking about that" rule to have this lady hauled off?

It's not open Q&A. There's nothing preventing them from speaking on their preferred issue online, or even outside. Otherwise public meetings quickly devolve into anarchy. If a specific time was allocated to talk about speed limits, do you think it's fair game for TERFs to use that time to complain about gendered bathrooms?

That's not to say the mayor/council is in the right either, but we also can't have "if you think the debate was shut down too early you can do whatever you want".

dekhn 39 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Threaten elected officials with violence to achieve political aims? That seems counterproductive.

jst1fthsdys 16 minutes ago | parent [-]

Voting seems counterproductive too. Time for a change.

elzbardico 40 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

And please make Bastille Day from Rush to be the soundtrack for this.

paulddraper an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Imminent threats of violence are not covered by the First Amendment.

Peaceful gatherings are covered.

G0lg0thvn an hour ago | parent [-]

Middle fingers are and imminent threat of violence now?

scottyah 44 minutes ago | parent [-]

If you read the thread, you might be able to parse out what the user you responded to is commenting on...

> what the citizenship in mass should be doing is surrounding the meeting with torches and making said council fear for their lives

pesus 43 minutes ago | parent [-]

Please engage in good faith and write comments that contribute, rather than taking away, from the conversation.

dekhn 13 minutes ago | parent [-]

Please engage in good faith and write comments that contribute, rather than taking away, from the conversation.

cucumber3732842 39 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

Gather up a dozen friends, dress like Indians and throw the politician in the harbor. Yes I know I'm mixing and matching historical references, that's the point. Have one guy dressed as Elizabeth Warren, another guy like the redskins mascot and a third guy as Abu from the Simpsons like they didn't understand the assignment. The point is to maximize the meme-ability of it so that you get a court of public opinion trial and not the usual kangaroo court trial that people who thumb their nose at government get.

an hour ago | parent | prev [-]
[deleted]