Freedom of speech

[DogOnPorch]

1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

Ok - (a bunch of meaningless statistics)

I'm sure you will see that the threat level from domestic racists is orders of magnitude larger, and desist from equating or even dismissing the threat from these hate groups moving forward.

You guys are serious about this Islam is Peace delusion, eh?

https://storymaps.esri.com/stories/terrorist-attacks/?year=2017

You're free to continue gerrymandering and qualifying the results...'domestic terrorism' lol....

If I wanted penguins to look bad, I'd only include results from Antarctica. 

[DogOnPorch]

6 minutes ago, betsy said:

  Every country has their share of whackos of all sorts!  But your own citizen, is your own.  Whatever the motivation to kill isn't the point: the point is the objective!  If someone wants to kill lots of people - for whatever reason - that's a huge problem! 

Knowing what motivates them help a great deal since you know what to watch out for. 

 

Just because a member of a family had committed a crime does not justify that, therefore, your home becomes an open-house to everyone, nor  should you be picky about whom you choose to come in!

Even Karla Homolka can be choosy whom she wants to invite to her house!

 

 

It's a race to see which First World nations can become Third World sh*t holes.

Edited September 7, 2017 by DogOnPorch

[Charles Anthony]

Guys, 

You are all free to stop your thread drift.

[Michael Hardner]

On 6/4/2017 at 11:49 AM, Argus said:

It seems to me that much of the Left has established that its message is of such nobility and virtue, that anyone who disagrees is self-identifying as an opponent of nobility and virtue

Actually, a lot of it is just logical.  I just posted some statistics here about why Islam is not more of a domestic security risk than the 'free speech'/white pride movement and was dismissed as 'Muslim'.  What's good for the goose is good for the gander.    

If you use weasel words like "much of the left" and put it on those people, then you implicitly must admonish right of centre arguments on the topic that are emotionally reactive garbage.  Try to post some facts on the topic and you get called a Muslim by "much of" the right... sheesh...

Edited September 7, 2017 by Michael Hardner

[taxme]

20 hours ago, taxme said:

It has come to light that the moron that drove his car into the crowd which killed a woman in Charlottesville was a member of Antifa and a Hillary supporter. It looks like the truth is coming out that these paid Antifa thugs are the ones who go to American nationalist patriot rallies and try to stir up the chit. Soros and Antifa won't be put out of business until they are all arrested for treasonous and terrorist acts against America. The police were told to stand down by the mayor of Charlottesville so the rally could get out of hand. Apparently, the mayor of Charlottesville is a supporter of Hillary. Shocking. 

Source: Headlines with a voice website. 

 

Edited September 7, 2017 by taxme

[Michael Hardner]

21 minutes ago, taxme said:

It has come to light that the moron that drove his car into the crowd which killed a woman in Charlottesville was a member of Antifa and a Hillary supporter

Fake news, no surprise.   Your non-link proves nothing.  I found a page with the same name Headlines with a Voice - basically one guy saying he is fighting Google over being de-listed. The Youtube Channel shows 'Related Content' as 'Alex Jones'.  Nice.

Anyway, here's the response from people who have an organization of more than one person, who have a reputation and actually earn a living researching and posting facts:
 

Quote

 

One of Fields’ former high school teachers, Derek Weimer, told the Cincinnati Enquirer that the young man’s political views were extreme and flavored with Nazism:

Weimer said that he knew of Fields’ political leanings early on. He said another teacher filed a report during Fields’ freshman year over something Fields had written for an assignment “that just went beyond the pale.”

“It was very much along the party lines of the neo-Nazi movement,” Weimer said.

 

He is also in a picture with Vanguard America "Vanguard America (VA) is a white supremacist group that opposes multiculturalism and believes that America is an exclusively white nation. "

http://www.snopes.com/charlottesville-killer-radical-leftist/

You are free to defend this right-wing murder and compare violent racist groups to religions that people are born into.

 

Edited September 7, 2017 by Michael Hardner

[taxme]

3 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Fake news, no surprise.   Your non-link proves nothing.  I found a page with the same name Headlines with a Voice - basically one guy saying he is fighting Google over being de-listed. The Youtube Channel shows 'Related Content' as 'Alex Jones'.  Nice.

Anyway, here's the response from people who have an organization of more than one person, who have a reputation and actually earn a living researching and posting facts:
 

He is also in a picture with Vanguard America "Vanguard America (VA) is a white supremacist group that opposes multiculturalism and believes that America is an exclusively white nation. "

http://www.snopes.com/charlottesville-killer-radical-leftist/

You are free to defend this right-wing murder and compare violent racist groups to religions that people are born into.

 

Blah-blah-blah.  

[betsy]

9 minutes ago, taxme said:

Blah-blah-blah.  

Duet:

Blah-blah-blah. 

 

Gimme five!

Edited September 7, 2017 by betsy

[taxme]

5 minutes ago, betsy said:

Duet:

Blah-blah-blah. 

 

Gimme five!

I like you so much Betsy that I am going to give you ten. 

[Argus]

del

 

Edited September 7, 2017 by Argus

[Argus]

del

 

Edited September 7, 2017 by Argus

[Argus]

2 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

Actually, a lot of it is just logical.  I just posted some statistics here about why Islam is not more of a domestic security risk than the 'free speech'/white pride movement and was dismissed as 'Muslim'.  What's good for the goose is good for the gander.    

Your statistics, as I have explained previously, are nonsense. They improperly conflate anti-government behavior by some screwballs with terrorism. These anti-government people could, I suppose, be described as right wing insofar as they have any understandable political philosophy. But for the most part their violence consists of interactions with the police because the police are upholding laws these people seem to believe should not apply to them.

Saying that doesn't suggest there are no white supremacy groups or that they aren't dangerous. But their numbers are tiny and their influence on society is even less.

And btw, using the expression 'free speech/white pride movement' is more than slightly despicable as it equates those who believe in free speech with those who are white supremacists.

 

 

 

 

Edited September 7, 2017 by Argus

[Michael Hardner]

Just now, Argus said:

1. They improperly conflate anti-government behavior by some screwballs with terrorism.  

2. Saying that doesn't suggest there are no white supremacy groups or that they aren't dangerous. But their numbers are tiny and their influence on society is even less.

3. As far as Muslims go. I'm still waiting to hear...

 

1. Ok, and I mentioned that some dispute individual crimes.  But with a 66X per capita ratio, it's pretty clear the scope we're looking at.

2. True.  But as a reminder - the thesis I'm DISproving is that domestic security needs to pay MORE attention to homegrown Muslims than white supremacist groups.  

3. All the stuff you mention is a side issue and off-topic from the 'freedom of speech' security issue we were discussing.  I will post on another thread if you post it there.

[Argus]

Just now, Michael Hardner said:

1. Ok, and I mentioned that some dispute individual crimes.  But with a 66X per capita ratio, it's pretty clear the scope we're looking at.

2. True.  But as a reminder - the thesis I'm DISproving is that domestic security needs to pay MORE attention to homegrown Muslims than white supremacist groups.  

3. All the stuff you mention is a side issue and off-topic from the 'freedom of speech' security issue we were discussing.  I will post on another thread if you post it there.

1. There are lies, damned lies, and statistics.

2. This topic is about freedom of speech, not far right vs Muslim violence

3. I realized that almost as soon as I posted it, and have redone the post to which you responded. Unfortunately, you responded with breakneck speed.

[Michael Hardner]

1 minute ago, Argus said:

1. There are lies, damned lies, and statistics.

2. This topic is about freedom of speech, not far right vs Muslim violence

3. I realized that almost as soon as I posted it, and have redone the post to which you responded. Unfortunately, you responded with breakneck speed.

1. Yep.  66X though is hard to fudge if it's really <1X

2. Right.  But if you follow where this came from - it was about security concerns about the Charlottesville marches.  Nobody on this subtopic is debating their influence on society.  I actually concur with you.

3. Thanks for the compliment on my obsessive posting style   If the edited post is about my use of: " 'free speech/white pride movement' "  The reason I have to use the ambiguous phrasing is that dishonest posters (not you my friend) misrepresent those groups.  We even had one person today saying the Nazi killer in the Dodge was a Hillary Clinton supporter.

Thank God for sane conservatives.... sorry... sane conservative.

[Argus]

42 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. Yep.  66X though is hard to fudge if it's really <1X

2. Right.  But if you follow where this came from - it was about security concerns about the Charlottesville marches.  Nobody on this subtopic is debating their influence on society.  I actually concur with you.

3. Thanks for the compliment on my obsessive posting style   If the edited post is about my use of: " 'free speech/white pride movement' "  The reason I have to use the ambiguous phrasing is that dishonest posters (not you my friend) misrepresent those groups.  We even had one person today saying the Nazi killer in the Dodge was a Hillary Clinton supporter.

Thank God for sane conservatives.... sorry... sane conservative.

1. The attempt is to compare all murders done by the far right with terrorist murders committed by Muslims. To be anything like logical you would have to compare all murders committed by the far right with all murders committed by Muslims.

2. This topic was started before Charlotteseville. Security concerns were not mentioned in the OP and should not be a part of the topic unless they relate to the legal definition of hate speech insofar as hate speech incites people into committing violence against an identifiable group.

3. The ideology of the lunatic who ran into people in Charlottesville shouldn't be a part of any sane discussion on the topic of freedom of speech, either.

Edited September 7, 2017 by Argus

[Omni]

26 minutes ago, Argus said:

3. The ideology of the lunatic who ran into people in Charlottesville shouldn't be a part of any sane discussion on the topic of freedom of speech, either.

That lunatic emerged from the extreme version of a political stance you tend to represent. Apparently he hated non white immigrants too.

[bush_cheney2004]

33 minutes ago, Argus said:

3. The ideology of the lunatic who ran into people in Charlottesville shouldn't be a part of any sane discussion on the topic of freedom of speech, either.

 

Sorry, but Charlottesville is in another country...the United States...where such "lunatic" speech is not only legal, but constitutionally protected.

 

[Omni]

6 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

Sorry, but Charlottesville is in another country...the United States...where such "lunatic" speech is not only legal, but constitutionally protected.

 

Running over people with a car is constitutionally protected? I've heard some loony tunes before but that takes the cake.

[bush_cheney2004]

1 hour ago, Omni said:

Running over people with a car is constitutionally protected?

 

No, but if you want to decapitate someone on a bus, you will walk away free in Canada.

[Guest]

10 hours ago, dialamah said:

The son of Sam said he did it because a dog told him to.  Does that mean he did it because of the dog?

Why did the white supremacist run down that woman in Charlottesville?  Most white people are nice, so it can't have anything to do with colour or race, right?

EDIT>  I was notified of your post, replied, and then read back a few posts.  I saw than that  this was brought up already.  I think.  I have some reading to do to see whether the point was the same.  But can't now.

Edited September 8, 2017 by bcsapper

[Omni]

2 hours ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

No, but if you want to decapitate someone on a bus, you will walk away free in Canada.

No you won't. We have what are called courts here, I'm sure you've heard of them, and they examine the case and if you are determined to be mentally ill and therefore not criminally responsible you will be sent to a rehab facility, not a jail. Check around, you have similar situations in the US, and maybe stop trolling all things Canada for once. 

[blackbird]

4 hours ago, Omni said:

No you won't. We have what are called courts here, I'm sure you've heard of them, and they examine the case and if you are determined to be mentally ill and therefore not criminally responsible you will be sent to a rehab facility, not a jail. Check around, you have similar situations in the US, and maybe stop trolling all things Canada for once. 

I guess you haven't been  following the latest.  Didn't the fella who decapitated someone on a bus walk free recently?  Being found "not criminally responsible" doesn't meant one can never walk free again apparently in Canada.  It all depends on the decision of a judge at some point in time.

 

The fella who killed his three kids a few years back and was declared NCR has recently had a judge rule he will not get dangerous offender status, even though he has had many incidents of violence in custody and authorities believe he is a danger.  He is still in custody, for now.

[Omni]

3 minutes ago, blackbird said:

I guess you haven't been  following the latest.  Didn't the fella who decapitated someone on a bus walk free recently?  Being found "not criminally responsible" doesn't meant one can never walk free again apparently in Canada.  It all depends on the decision of a judge at some point in time.

 

The fella who killed his three kids a few years back and was declared NCR has recently had a judge rule he will not get dangerous offender status, even though he has had many incidents of violence in custody and authorities believe he is a danger.  He is still in custody, for now.

Um you sound  bit confused, but yes Li did his time at an institution  rather than  jail cell because a jury of experts in their fields found him not criminally responsible. He has been released.

[blackbird]

19 hours ago, Omni said:

Um you sound  bit confused, but yes Li did his time at an institution  rather than  jail cell because a jury of experts in their fields found him not criminally responsible. He has been released.

I believe most Canadians would disagree with a so-called "jury of experts" and a system which would let someone in those circumstances be released.

Wikipedia says " In the United Kingdom, Ireland, and the United States, use of the (insanity) defense is rare;^[4] however, since the Criminal Procedure (Insanity and Unfitness to Plead) Act 1991,^[5] insanity pleas have steadily increased in the UK. " 

It seems Canada is a leader in a number of questionable "progressive" things, which many seem to pride themselves on.    The not criminally responsible defense seems to be one of a number of things Canada is taking a lead in.   Other subjects are same-sex marriage, doctor-assisted suicide, open borders, and of course abortion on demand. 

Edited September 9, 2017 by blackbird