The Berkeley Incident and Free Speech

[The Emerald Legion]

And your right to freedom of assembly only includes peaceable assembly. One person fucks that up and the assembly is over.

Besides your argument only works if the people objecting own the place. They clearly don't.

Tell that to Trump, who doesn't understand that Berkeley students don't own and run the campus.

How do you figure?

[Balkenreich]

Tell that to Trump, who doesn't understand that Berkeley students don't own and run the campus.

How do you figure?

Seems they had free reign of the whole area considering the cops didnt do jack.

[Liriena]

Consistency is for cucks.

My my, seems the poster above got the straw he lacked earlier for his mega strawman. Great job

I fail to see anything strawman-ish about suggesting that your statement in response to leftist militancy is rather disproportionate.

Minor vandalism is annoying, sure, but if it makes you think of radical leftists as "the west's greatest problem again", I would suggest that you use this opportunity to step back and take a long, hard look at the actions of radicals of different ideologies, including the recent white supremacist, Trump-loving mass murderer from Quebec.

[Liriena]

How do you figure?

Seems they had free reign of the whole area considering the cops didnt do jack.

You mean the police tried to avoid responding with violence?

Well, that's a nice and refreshing change of pace. :3

[Balkenreich]

Seems they had free reign of the whole area considering the cops didnt do jack.

You mean the police tried to avoid responding with violence?

Well, that's a nice and refreshing change of pace. :3

While white trash college kiddies turn the whole fucking place into anarchy?

call me a violent psychopath, but i think a few beanbags to the chest of a lot of them should keep them quiet.

[Liriena]

You mean the police tried to avoid responding with violence?

Well, that's a nice and refreshing change of pace. :3

While white trash college kiddies turn the whole fucking place into anarchy?

Ugh, more identity politics. x3

call me a violent psychopath, but i think a few beanbags to the chest of a lot of them should keep them quiet.

I don't do online diagnosis. And I'm not even a mental health professional, so it's a double no-no.

On a more serious note: I'm generally wary when it comes to giving the state the power to kill or seriously injure people.

[Balkenreich]

While white trash college kiddies turn the whole fucking place into anarchy?

Ugh, more identity politics. x3

call me a violent psychopath, but i think a few beanbags to the chest of a lot of them should keep them quiet.

I don't do online diagnosis. And I'm not even a mental health professional, so it's a double no-no.

On a more serious note: I'm generally wary when it comes to giving the state the power to kill or seriously injure people.

but youre totally fine with hate speech laws, wanting the state to force a business owner to bake someone a fucking cake all the meanwhile saying you dont want a state monopoly on violence?

The fuck is wrong with you.

[Hexgard]

My my, seems the poster above got the straw he lacked earlier for his mega strawman. Great job

I fail to see anything strawman-ish about suggesting that your statement in response to leftist militancy is rather disproportionate.

Minor vandalism is annoying, sure, but if it makes you think of radical leftists as "the west's greatest problem again", I would suggest that you use this opportunity to step back and take a long, hard look at the actions of radicals of different ideologies, including the recent white supremacist, Trump-loving mass murderer from Quebec.

It was strawmaning and missing the point too. The poster did attack me on a point I did not make: the one that I did not regard some events to be terrorism, to which they had no claim. Not just that, but the poster did pacify the radical left's action to just "burning bins".

I was saying that the far left is racing towards it, not that they are there, and I hope we never get back to the times where we have to dread communists. Any radicalism which leads to death is horrible and a danger to all of society.
But, do not try to make the far left seem as "minor vandals", these are terror tactics and a lower level, admittedly. And again, I stress how I do hope they never go beyond these levels of assault and vandalism.

[Liriena]

Ugh, more identity politics. x3


I don't do online diagnosis. And I'm not even a mental health professional, so it's a double no-no.

On a more serious note: I'm generally wary when it comes to giving the state the power to kill or seriously injure people.

but youre totally fine with hate speech laws, wanting the state to force a business owner to bake someone a fucking cake all the meanwhile saying you dont want a state monopoly on violence?

The fuck is wrong with you.

Not an awful lot, I'd hope.

To answer your question: Yes, I am fine with hate speech laws, in terms of them being an extension of hate crime laws (that is, much in the same way that a homophobic assault would be a hate crime, incitement to homophobic violence would be hate speech). And yes, I am in favor of anti-discrimination policies in general (and the cake issue, much like the bathroom issue, is a secondary consequence of prohibiting discrimination in general, not my primary target). It's not that I specifically want bakers to be forced to make wedding cakes for LGBT people (or that they be imprisoned if they refuse), but rather that I wouldn't want anyone who provides a service or a product to the general public to be able to refuse service (or employment) due to prejudice, because it helps perpetuate discrimination on a social and cultural scale (and, if there are no laws against refusing basic services, like health care and education, due to prejudice, because it puts innocent people in danger).

[Sack Jackpot Winners]

From a legal perspective free speech has been unmolested. From a moral perspective, the protesters need to take a chill pill.

On the other hand, this is Berkeley. We were expecting this.

[Liriena]

From a legal perspective free speech has been unmolested. From a moral perspective, the protesters need to take a chill pill.

On the other hand, this is Berkeley. We were expecting this.

I'm rather lukewarm on that, given the fact that Yiannopoulos supposedly intended to publicly name undocumented immigrants among the students at Berkeley. While this may not have been true, it would have been perfectly in line with his past behavior.

Morally speaking, I can't say I would condemn the protesters for trying to protect their fellow students from being doxxed by a public figure with a following.

[Sack Jackpot Winners]

From a legal perspective free speech has been unmolested. From a moral perspective, the protesters need to take a chill pill.

On the other hand, this is Berkeley. We were expecting this.

I'm rather lukewarm on that, given the fact that Yiannopoulos supposedly intended to publicly name undocumented immigrants among the students at Berkeley. While this may not have been true, [url=mediamilwaukee.com/top-stories/milo-yiannopoulos-milwaukee-tour-twitter-uw-uwm-transgender-lockerroom-policy-breitbart-alt-right]it would have been perfectly in line with his past behavior.[/url]

Morally speaking, I can't say I would condemn the protesters for trying to protect their fellow students from being doxxed by a public figure with a following.

If he was going to do that then the protests had a silver lining. From what I see there is no primary evidence of it, plus the protestors didn't seem to know that until after they started, unless I'm missing something.

[Hexgard]

From a legal perspective free speech has been unmolested. From a moral perspective, the protesters need to take a chill pill.

On the other hand, this is Berkeley. We were expecting this.

I'm rather lukewarm on that, given the fact that Yiannopoulos supposedly intended to publicly name undocumented immigrants among the students at Berkeley. While this may not have been true, [url=mediamilwaukee.com/top-stories/milo-yiannopoulos-milwaukee-tour-twitter-uw-uwm-transgender-lockerroom-policy-breitbart-alt-right]it would have been perfectly in line with his past behavior.[/url]

Morally speaking, I can't say I would condemn the protesters for trying to protect their fellow students from being doxxed by a public figure with a following.

Actually, Milo did clear it out as a falsehood (the thing with the public naming). Oddly enough, that is somewhat similar to that one list the far left wanted to compose of "neo-nazi supporters" aka students who would go to his speech.

[Liriena]

I'm rather lukewarm on that, given the fact that Yiannopoulos supposedly intended to publicly name undocumented immigrants among the students at Berkeley. While this may not have been true, [url=mediamilwaukee.com/top-stories/milo-yiannopoulos-milwaukee-tour-twitter-uw-uwm-transgender-lockerroom-policy-breitbart-alt-right]it would have been perfectly in line with his past behavior.[/url]

Morally speaking, I can't say I would condemn the protesters for trying to protect their fellow students from being doxxed by a public figure with a following.

If he was going to do that then the protests had a silver lining. From what I see there is no primary evidence of it, plus the protestors didn't seem to know that until after they started, unless I'm missing something.

Agreed.

[Liriena]

I'm rather lukewarm on that, given the fact that Yiannopoulos supposedly intended to publicly name undocumented immigrants among the students at Berkeley. While this may not have been true, [url=mediamilwaukee.com/top-stories/milo-yiannopoulos-milwaukee-tour-twitter-uw-uwm-transgender-lockerroom-policy-breitbart-alt-right]it would have been perfectly in line with his past behavior.[/url]

Morally speaking, I can't say I would condemn the protesters for trying to protect their fellow students from being doxxed by a public figure with a following.

Actually, Milo did clear it out as a falsehood (the thing with the public naming). Oddly enough, that is somewhat similar to that one list the far left wanted to compose of "neo-nazi supporters" aka students who would go to his speech.

Forgive me if I don't take that fraud's denial seriously, specially given his past behavior. While the accusation that he intended to name undocumented students may not actually be true, there's a precedent that makes me believe it is quite plausible, and Yiannopoulos doesn't have much credibility.

Also, I was not part of this supposed effort to make a list of "neo-nazi supporters", so I fail to see what you bringing it up has to do with what I said.

[The Holy Empire of the Spaghetti Monster]

Ugh, more identity politics. x3


I don't do online diagnosis. And I'm not even a mental health professional, so it's a double no-no.

On a more serious note: I'm generally wary when it comes to giving the state the power to kill or seriously injure people.

but youre totally fine with hate speech laws, wanting the state to force a business owner to bake someone a fucking cake all the meanwhile saying you dont want a state monopoly on violence?

The fuck is wrong with you.

Yeah.

That's TOTALLY equivalent to violence against protesters. *nod*

[Kaelis]

but youre totally fine with hate speech laws, wanting the state to force a business owner to bake someone a fucking cake all the meanwhile saying you dont want a state monopoly on violence?

The fuck is wrong with you.

Yeah.

That's TOTALLY equivalent to violence against protesters. *nod*

Yep, I see no difference either.

But in all seriousness, I like free speech too. Even if it must be given to groups like WBC, I say they're entitled to it.

[Saint Marguerite Academy]

Yeah.

That's TOTALLY equivalent to violence against protesters. *nod*

Yep, I see no difference either.

But in all seriousness, I like free speech too. Even if it must be given to groups like WBC, I say they're entitled to it.

Sorry, Sphagetti Monster. I meant to reply using this nation. XD

[Kollin]

While white trash college kiddies turn the whole fucking place into anarchy?

Ugh, more identity politics. x3

call me a violent psychopath, but i think a few beanbags to the chest of a lot of them should keep them quiet.

I don't do online diagnosis. And I'm not even a mental health professional, so it's a double no-no.

On a more serious note: I'm generally wary when it comes to giving the state the power to kill or seriously injure people.

Because feminism isn't identity politics?

But you're all for them doing nothing and allowing a bunch of rioters to vandalize property and assault people? Yanno, things it's the states job to it's citizens to prevent and protect them from? Or do you not grasp this set of basic duties for the state and police force? When these protesters turned violent, it wasn't a protest, it was a riot. The police should have done their job and shut them down. Do what they get paid for, which is not sitting back and tweeting warnings to people rather than taking care of the dangerous situation, as they should have.
By that i mean, they should've done it sooner.

but youre totally fine with hate speech laws, wanting the state to force a business owner to bake someone a fucking cake all the meanwhile saying you dont want a state monopoly on violence?

The fuck is wrong with you.

Yeah.

That's TOTALLY equivalent to violence against protesters. *nod*

They weren't protesters. Protest does not give you the right to damage property at will, or assault whomever you want. That's a riot, friend. Learn the difference, it's important.

[The Lone Alliance]

but youre totally fine with hate speech laws, wanting the state to force a business owner to bake someone a fucking cake all the meanwhile saying you dont want a state monopoly on violence?

The fuck is wrong with you.

Yeah.

That's TOTALLY equivalent to violence against protesters. *nod*

Rioters not protesters. As much as some people seem to believe that rioting is just another legitimate form of protesting it isn't.

[Wallenburg]

Tell that to Trump, who doesn't understand that Berkeley students don't own and run the campus.

How do you figure?

Trump has threatened to cut funds to Berkeley on the premise that the university itself oppressed Milo. On the contrary, it went out of its way to let him speak. The students, on the other hand, did not.

[Balkenreich]

How do you figure?

Trump has threatened to cut funds to Berkeley on the premise that the university itself oppressed Milo. On the contrary, it went out of its way to let him speak. The students, on the other hand, did not.

So the students decided to let their inner fucking savage out.

[Wallenburg]

Trump has threatened to cut funds to Berkeley on the premise that the university itself oppressed Milo. On the contrary, it went out of its way to let him speak. The students, on the other hand, did not.

So the students decided to let their inner fucking savage out.

Um...yeah. I just said that.

[Balkenreich]

So the students decided to let their inner fucking savage out.

Um...yeah. I just said that.

then again, its berkely, people wouldn't know proper civilized discussion from shit flinging to the roman forums.

[Patridam]

How do you figure?

Trump has threatened to cut funds to Berkeley on the premise that the university itself oppressed Milo. On the contrary, it went out of its way to let him speak. The students, on the other hand, did not.

If a university cannot guarantee the safety and security of its campus and the protection of constitutional rights on it, then it is not a university worthy of federal funds (or for that matter, paying the tuition).