In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.
Is There a Redneck Shortage?
Wyatt Earp
Member Posts: 5,871
If that union thug woulda smacked a lady's camera around these parts, he'd be passing tooth fragments for a week...I'd like to think so anyway.
When I see these dimwits, and the Westboro lunatics protesting soldiers' funerals, I wonder where all the good ol' American made rednecks are??? Where are all the good guys who think that spending a day or 2 in jail is preferrable to letting these guys get away with their nonsense?
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/thats-assault-union-protester-whacks-young-freedomworks-activist/
When I see these dimwits, and the Westboro lunatics protesting soldiers' funerals, I wonder where all the good ol' American made rednecks are??? Where are all the good guys who think that spending a day or 2 in jail is preferrable to letting these guys get away with their nonsense?
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/thats-assault-union-protester-whacks-young-freedomworks-activist/
Comments
I was at a Soldiers funeral and the westboro people were there. After getting over the initial impulses I started to think about it. I was sworn to uphold and defend the Constitution. These people have a 1st Ammd right to do what they do. It is not the speech we agree with that needs protection but the speech that makes our skin crawl.
It is yet to be settled by SCOTUS if what they do falls under 1A. Many legal scholars believe it does not because its intended purpose is to inflict pain and suffering.
Since 90%+ of this countrys problems can be traced back to the "legal" profession, not many can afford to be a "redneck" any longer![:D][:D]
Irregardless of the source, you are correct, many redneck solutions have become too expensive. That 2 or 3 days in jail with a wink and a nod, have become felonies and 8-10 in the pen. Too bad, most were pretty simple and often correct, though almost never PC.
The Founders knew that sharing ideas (discussion, debate, respectful argument) is essential to the operation of a democracy. Hence the "free speech" language of the First Amendment. This has been shamefully corrupted over the years to include "freedom of expression," re: art, even offensive art, and actions such as burning the flag. If that is true, then why is my punching out the flag-burner (or funeral protester) also not protected free speech?
I agree 100 percent with Judge Bork that the First Amendment was never intended to protect actions. An action is not speech (His statement was made in reference to burning the American flag -- he argued it is not protected free speech).
The Founders knew that sharing ideas (discussion, debate, respectful argument) is essential to the operation of a democracy. Hence the "free speech" language of the First Amendment. This has been shamefully corrupted over the years to include "freedom of expression," re: art, even offensive art, and actions such as burning the flag. If that is true, then why is my punching out the flag-burner (or funeral protester) also not protected free speech?
I read something years ago when flag burning was in with all the Libs. Some small town down south (I think Alabama) made it a misdemeanor to assault a flag burner. Convictions carried a $10 fine. [8D]
quote:Originally posted by River Rat
I agree 100 percent with Judge Bork that the First Amendment was never intended to protect actions. An action is not speech (His statement was made in reference to burning the American flag -- he argued it is not protected free speech).
The Founders knew that sharing ideas (discussion, debate, respectful argument) is essential to the operation of a democracy. Hence the "free speech" language of the First Amendment. This has been shamefully corrupted over the years to include "freedom of expression," re: art, even offensive art, and actions such as burning the flag. If that is true, then why is my punching out the flag-burner (or funeral protester) also not protected free speech?
I read something years ago when flag burning was in with all the Libs. Some small town down south (I think Alabama) made it a misdemeanor to assault a flag burner. Convictions carried a $10 fine. [8D]
Delivered with a grin and a wink. [:D]
If you really want to beat on people and get away with it, join the Black Panthers.
In this day and age, if you put your hands on someone you'll be charged with terrorism and do 25 to life. If the guy you put your hands on is black, or turns ou to be queer, you'll get the chair for a 'hate crime'.
If you really want to beat on people and get away with it, join the Black Panthers.
Pretty much. Now, around here it's common to get in a fight and end up vein best buddies with the guy you beat the crap out of. At the bonfires and other functions, it's common courtesy not to call police unless things go down hill fast.
posseing up and going to have a chat with someone who just cant seem to get the message about the standards of conduct for a particular place used to be ok. now its domestic terrorism, hate crime etc.
sadly, you just cant get away with some of the more effective methods of motivation towards proper conduct these days.
its an unfortunate day when your first thought before committing any action has to be "is this legal".
as others have said, vigilante justice was once dismissed or glossed over with minimal punishment. today, not so much. a fistfight between to able bodied men to settle a dispute(no weapons or friends adding to the chaos) used to be perfectly acceptable. now its mutual combat assault.
posseing up and going to have a chat with someone who just cant seem to get the message about the standards of conduct for a particular place used to be ok. now its domestic terrorism, hate crime etc.
sadly, you just cant get away with some of the more effective methods of motivation towards proper conduct these days.
its an unfortunate day when your first thought before committing any action has to be "is this legal".
Yeah.....when do you suppose would be a good time to take our country back?
quote:Originally posted by KEVD18
as others have said, vigilante justice was once dismissed or glossed over with minimal punishment. today, not so much. a fistfight between to able bodied men to settle a dispute(no weapons or friends adding to the chaos) used to be perfectly acceptable. now its mutual combat assault.
posseing up and going to have a chat with someone who just cant seem to get the message about the standards of conduct for a particular place used to be ok. now its domestic terrorism, hate crime etc.
sadly, you just cant get away with some of the more effective methods of motivation towards proper conduct these days.
its an unfortunate day when your first thought before committing any action has to be "is this legal".
Yeah.....when do you suppose would be a good time to take our country back?
Depends... Is it legal for us to take our country back? [;)]
Depends... Is it legal for us to take our country back? [;)]
I suppose if you ask most modern day politicians they say no. But if you asked Thomas Jefferson, I bet he'd say "Whattaya been waiting for?"
I have the feeling that the westboro group is hoping that someone will assault them. How can anyone do what they do and not expect to get assaulted? I'm sure they have an attorney on speed dial just itching to sue the crap outta somebody, the police for not protecting them, the city for not training the police properly, the ambulance for taking to long to get there, the hospital for improperly treating their bruises, the family of the fallen soldier for causing them emotional harm and the newspaper for printing photos of bystanders cheering on the assault. [}:)]
That's big part of their aim and their game.
you are unfortunately, most probably SPOT ON with that assessment. Those whackos just are ITCHING to provoke a conflict and then claim their "rights" are being infringed.
Especially since they have young children, young girls and women there too...probably HOPING some strong man slaps one of them so they can sue his butt off.
quote:Originally posted by River Rat
I agree 100 percent with Judge Bork that the First Amendment was never intended to protect actions. An action is not speech (His statement was made in reference to burning the American flag -- he argued it is not protected free speech).
The Founders knew that sharing ideas (discussion, debate, respectful argument) is essential to the operation of a democracy. Hence the "free speech" language of the First Amendment. This has been shamefully corrupted over the years to include "freedom of expression," re: art, even offensive art, and actions such as burning the flag. If that is true, then why is my punching out the flag-burner (or funeral protester) also not protected free speech?
I read something years ago when flag burning was in with all the Libs. Some small town down south (I think Alabama) made it a misdemeanor to assault a flag burner. Convictions carried a $10 fine. [8D]
I'd gladly pay that, and when he shows up to court I'd kick his * again, then apologize and hand over the $20.
quote:Originally posted by jev1969
quote:Originally posted by River Rat
I agree 100 percent with Judge Bork that the First Amendment was never intended to protect actions. An action is not speech (His statement was made in reference to burning the American flag -- he argued it is not protected free speech).
The Founders knew that sharing ideas (discussion, debate, respectful argument) is essential to the operation of a democracy. Hence the "free speech" language of the First Amendment. This has been shamefully corrupted over the years to include "freedom of expression," re: art, even offensive art, and actions such as burning the flag. If that is true, then why is my punching out the flag-burner (or funeral protester) also not protected free speech?
I read something years ago when flag burning was in with all the Libs. Some small town down south (I think Alabama) made it a misdemeanor to assault a flag burner. Convictions carried a $10 fine. [8D]
I'd gladly pay that, and when he shows up to court I'd kick his * again, then apologize and hand over the $20.
[:D]
I have the feeling that the westboro group is hoping that someone will assault them. How can anyone do what they do and not expect to get assaulted? I'm sure they have an attorney on speed dial just itching to sue the crap outta somebody, the police for not protecting them, the city for not training the police properly, the ambulance for taking to long to get there, the hospital for improperly treating their bruises, the family of the fallen soldier for causing them emotional harm and the newspaper for printing photos of bystanders cheering on the assault. [}:)]
Can't sue someone you can't identify and you can't get anything out of someone that has nothing, they can sue all they want but will be left with nothing but legal bills.
So if a bunch of rednecks with nothing to their names and wearing batman masks beat these westboro folks to to within an inch of their lives and ripped their van to shreds, there is really nothing they can do except call the police who would also have nothing to go on.