In the wake of Charlottesville, permits for rallies should contain an important caveat—no open-carry within the protest zone.
SNIP
Peace—or at the very least, the ability to suppress destructive chaos—is fundamentally related to a state’s ability to control the means of violence. What we saw in Charlottesville was an armed vanguard willing and able to inflict harm upon civilians and a police force hesitant to act against those breaking the law. There were multiple reports of the police hesitating, standing a block away and allowing the situation to escalate or refusing to pursue individuals that had allegedly assaulted those on the other side. Unlike during the KKK demonstrations back in June, there was no police buffer providing a barrier between the two sides. Multiple experts told the Associated Press that the response from Charlotteville’s police department was inadequate and that they appeared hopelessly underprepared for the rally.
SNIP
Perhaps, instead of focusing on better arming the police, we should at least consider disarming the protesters. There are already limits on open carries for airports and some school zones; zoning where someone can and cannot openly carry a deadly weapon is nothing new. Let’s add peaceful protests to the list. There could be restrictions placed upon the armament of protesters and public assemblies.
SNIP
There might not be easy ways to tell who is affiliated with the protest and who is not, which could lead to some complicated question: Does someone forfeit the right to openly carry a weapon the moment he or she decides to join a protest?
I should not have to fear for the lives of my classmates, friends, and family if they are moved to be politically active. I should not have to fear for the safety and sanctity of my town every few months. If these protests are peaceful and the actions of these groups are truly in the interest of free speech, there should be no issue with taking deadly weapons out of the situation.
All about your feelings, isn't it, Mr. Author? Removing dissent, removing weapons, gives you power, and lessens your fear...
When we stray from the idea that rights are absolute, that we can, instead, exempt this and that using the force of law not to protect those within their Rights, but to prosecute those same Rights away, we see the disastrous results.
Last edited by bignflnut on Mon Aug 28, 2017 1:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.
“It’s not that we don’t have enough scoundrels to curse; it’s that we don’t have enough good men to curse them.”–G.K. Chesterton-Illustrated London News, 3-14-1908
Republicans.Hate.You. See2020.
"Avarice, ambition, revenge and licentiousness would break the strongest cords of our Constitution, as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." John Adams to Mass Militia 10-11-1798
And who is to say where the protest area is and when it moves to a new location without notice?
Famous last words: "I just drank What?!-Socrates
bruh bruh is slang for "complete and total moron" -sodbuster95
The following is a list of children's books that didn't quite make it to the printing press...
1. What Is That Dog Doing to That Other Dog?
2. Daddy Drinks Because You Cry
3. You Were An Accident
4. Bi-Curious George
I had this discussion with a proponent of the idea a week ago. Told him that the ENTIRE Bill of Rights is supposed to apply to all*, at all times. There have been a few parameters added by adjudication, we don't need to keep chopping away at it. The BoR is not the "choose any three toppings for $9.99" portion of a pizza restaurant menu.
What's next? The only way to get a fair speedy trial is to allow the government to quarter soldiers in your home, without compensation or even permission?
*That whole aspect of felons losing certain of those rights for life troubles me too. A white collar criminal scams a several thousand from the company till, gets caught and serves his sentence. No 2nd Amendment or voting rights for him/her, forever?
I probably already brought all this up on another post, sorry. But it is topical.
Quit worrying, hide your gun well, shut up, and CARRY that handgun!
********************************************************************************
1911 and Browning Hi Power Enthusianado.
Brian D. wrote:
What's next? The only way to get a fair speedy trial is to allow the government to quarter soldiers in your home, without compensation or even permission?
Excellent example.
I'm certain that you would find some who would say that there should be exemptions to both (speedy trial and compulsory quartering of soldiers), because, you know, you can't yell fire legally when there is no fire.
Not a list of chips one can trade in to gain another. Protecting these Rights is the purpose of erecting a government.
2. The people create their governments primarily to serve one supreme purpose: to "secure" the safety and enjoyment of their God-given, unalienable rights. To make and keep them secure is government's primary function and chief reason for existence, according to the philosophy proclaimed in the Declaration of Independence.
“It’s not that we don’t have enough scoundrels to curse; it’s that we don’t have enough good men to curse them.”–G.K. Chesterton-Illustrated London News, 3-14-1908
Republicans.Hate.You. See2020.
"Avarice, ambition, revenge and licentiousness would break the strongest cords of our Constitution, as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." John Adams to Mass Militia 10-11-1798
Brian D. wrote:
What's next? The only way to get a fair speedy trial is to allow the government to quarter soldiers in your home, without compensation or even permission?
Excellent example.
I'm certain that you would find some who would say that there should be exemptions to both (speedy trial and compulsory quartering of soldiers), because, you know, you can't yell fire legally when there is no fire.
Not a list of chips one can trade in to gain another. Protecting these Rights is the purpose of erecting a government.
2. The people create their governments primarily to serve one supreme purpose: to "secure" the safety and enjoyment of their God-given, unalienable rights. To make and keep them secure is government's primary function and chief reason for existence, according to the philosophy proclaimed in the Declaration of Independence.