Yzermandius19

You do know the Nazi's banned the speech of their political opposition right? Just like you want to do with those you think are Nazi's. Don't be like the Nazi's thinking that's the only way to fight "Nazi's", that's bad juju. That is becoming the very thing you decry the most, meaning you are just projecting your own faults on everyone else, hence calling everyone and their mother a "White Supremacist".

I don't agree with racists either, I'd probably just troll the shit out of them, but you don't see me going around demanding their speech be silenced, because muh hate speech, now do I? What good would that do? None. Banning racist speech just makes the racists the taboo shine, and grows their popularity, would totally backfire, on top of being anti-free speech. Can't kill an idea, it's a fools errand to try.

The ostracized who don't have their free speech taken away will feel less ostracized than those who do. The right of people's feelings to not to be hurt is not more important than free speech, try again. Last I checked the former wasn't a constitutional right, while the latter is, and that isn't just a coincidence.

People who feel ostracized from society are more likely to lash out at society. It's called bottling up anger and leading to a point where the pressure blows without an outlet to let off steam, shutting down their speech is closing down the best outlet they have to let off that steam. Clearly you know nothing about humans, your common sense is simply based on ignorance of human nature.

The downside is that people who are silenced are more likely to lash out violently than those allowed to vent their offensive remarks. Since your whole goal by banning offensive speech is to reduce violence done in the wake of it, your plan fails miserably and makes the very problem you are trying to solve worse. Plus freedom of speech is important, and you need a good reason to infringe on it, and making the problem you want to solve worse, is not one of those reasons. That is, in fact, one of the worst reasons to infringe on free speech that you could ever come up with. Your plan is all downside with no upside, at least free speech has an upside, even if there are a few downsides to it as well, you can't fix those downsides by banning it, that's a fools errand. That is you having far too much faith in government regulation to solve the problems of the world, and paving the road to hell with your good intentions.

Sometimes, but it's not the fault of the offensive speech that someone got violent as a result, only if they were inciting violence should they be held legally accountable. The former is not a good reason to restrict free speech. There wouldn't need to be constitutional protection of free speech, if it only applied to inoffensive speech, because no would want to ban that speech. The whole point of free speech, is to protect offensive speech, because it's the kind of speech people want to ban. Speech that no one wants to ban does not require constitutional protection.

Driving drunk isn't the most important constitutional right there is. Apples and Oranges. Also the link between driving drunk and road traffic accidents is far higher than the link between offensive speech that doesn't incite violence, and violence. Pewdiepie should not be held responsible for the actions of a mass shooter, just because the mass shooter said "subscribe to pewdiepie" before committing mass murder. By your standard, you think Pewdiepie should be held accountable for the actions of all of his fans, because he "inspired" them, I don't.

Don't care, shouldn't be illegal. Just because bad things can happen as a result of free speech, that doesn't mean free speech needs to be restricted. Inciting hatred does not always lead to violence, and people inciting hatred should not be held legally accountable for people getting violent, if they didn't incite the violence themselves. Violent people often look for justifications for their violence, just because someone might take something you say as a justification for violence, doesn't mean you are in any way responsible for that violence.

Irrelevant. What people like you and jacee claim is "inciting hatred" should not be illegal, inciting violence is already illegal, libel and slander already illegal, going any further than that is pure folly. Making people feel bad with words should not be illegal, I don't care how offensive you find the speech to be or how many people agree with you that it's offensive, none of that matters.

I've read more of bush_cheney's posts than you ever have, your assumptions about their posts are based on cognitive dissonance to having your bullshit arguments attacked, and have nothing to do with reality.

Not seeing bush_cheney say Russia is an ally of the US, strawman. Criticizing NATO deadbeats is not siding with Russia, wanting America to pull out of Syria is not siding with Russia.

Meh, Babcock and Peters just deserve to be fired, teams are looking for excuses to justify it is all, and the cancel culture is hopping on the bandwagon. It's is kind of a #metoo thing, but the metoo isn't actually leading to people getting fired based purely on accusations, it's just giving teams yet another reason to justify firing shitty coaches.

It's a five minute penalty and there is an instigator rule. Encouraged my ass, they have practically nerfed fighting out of hockey and you still complain. This is why you can't give the Millenials anything, they keep wanting to water down the game more and more, no matter how many previous concessions have been made. There is more sportsmanship in hockey than any other major stick and ball sport, so I don't know what you're blathering about there either. Antithesis of sportsmanship, what a clown show.

The NRA supported a Republican nominee for POTUS? Shocking! Must have been Russia, there is no other explanation. Trump Derangement Over 9000

The fact that you think it should be illegal is proof enough that you are as anti-free speech as I claim. You simply want to make it illegal to say things that offend you or others you agree with, it's all about de-platforming your political enemies to make yourself feel better, you don't care at all about protecting speech you don't agree with.

You were talking about that, that is your go to strawman of everyone who disagrees with you, because your opinion can't stand up to any other argument. Putting words in other people's mouths and calling them White Supremacists is all you got.

We are not discussing a point of law. We are discussing how counter-productive your free speech hating is, and how it makes you no better than the free speech haters you decry with labels that end in ist and phobe. You have no moral high ground, that is the discussion. Two wrongs don't make a right, and stooping to their level doesn't make you a paragon of virtue.

Shouting down people you disagree with and refusing to allow them to speak in public spaces is degenerate. You have a right to go around shouting the n-word in public spaces, that doesn't mean it's a good idea nor does it put you on pedestal. Having the right to do something, does not make it a good idea to do anything you have a right to do.

People have no right to free speech in public spaces. If it offends jacee it's not allowed, only those who don't offend jacee are allowed to speak in public. Yeah, you're so pro-free speech. Whether most people don't want to hear racist, sexist, homophobes is irrelevant, they still have the right to free speech. Public spaces are not required to be a safe space, nor should they be. The popularity of those speaking in those spaces is irrelevant. No one put you in charge of public spaces, you don't get to thought police them, you just think you do.

I can. Notice there is not no one in the crowd, people came to listen to the guy, it's not just protesters in the crowd. You may not like him, but you don't speak for everybody. Lack of popularity is not a good excuse for shouting someone down at a public event, regardless, you bringing it up like it even matters, just proves the straws you will grasp at to justify your lame behavior.

They do show up to hear them, you are just too busy shouting them down to notice. You thinking someone isn't worth listening to does not excuse your behavior, just because you don't think they are worth listening to does not mean everyone or even most people agree with you.

Some of them are better than you, because at least they don't show up to your events and try to shout them down, the way you show up to theirs and shout them down. In many cases, they have the moral high ground on you, the one's who engage in the same behavior that you do, you are no better than.

Go ahead, be as bad as the very people you decry for engaging in the same behavior that you do. Be a giant hypocrite and act like the other side are the only one's engaging in bad behavior. Suit yourself. I don't disagree with your right to be an idiot in this instance, but that doesn't make it wise to be an idiot. Nor does it give you any moral high ground on the bigots homophobes trying to shout down Pride Parades that you like to trash on, you are no better than they are. You are just a left wing version of the same idiocy.

You are trying to shut down their speech on the grounds that you don't find them to be popular. They aren't guaranteed an audience, but that doesn't mean they don't have one, and that doesn't mean you should act like a jerk. Stop attending events to prevent people you don't like from speaking. You think everyone is white supremacist, including several popular individuals, and you still try to shut them down when the speak publicly. Maxime Bernier and Dave Rubin for instance. Someone being a white supremacist that you don't think is very popular is not a good excuse to try and shout them down, and most of the time, you aren't even right about them being a white supremacist or their popularity level, and you still engage in this degenerate behavior. You are searching for a reason to be outraged, and when there is no good reason, you make one up because you are addicted to outrage. You think this justifies your actions, when it does nothing of the sort.

The people you shout down have an audience who wants to listen, just because you show up and try to shout them down doesn't mean that they don't. They have an audience, and you are disrupting their good time and preventing them from listening makes you as big of a jerk as the White supremacist homophobe/Christian bigots who show up at events they don't like just to disrupt them as well. You have no moral high ground, you are the other side of coin of the very behavior you decry only when the right engages in it, while excusing it while the left engages in it. How about you and the homophobes you so decry both just stay home and stop attending public speaking events of people you hate so much you can't shut up and let them talk? If you don't like it, don't listen, gathering a mob together to shout them down, when it's obvious other people want to listen to them, that is just being a control freak. Whether the right does it, or the left does it, is irrelevant, when either engage in it, it's called being an asshole. You aren't morally in the right just because you think you are the good guys and they are bad guys, and the excuses being a jerk.