Charlie Kirk assassinated

[Sunstroke]

^^^ Then I am guessing that you will (or have, or do) find it nearly impossible to relate to most gun owners.. That explains your position quite a bit.

[Spider-Dan]

I think that's part of the problem.

I was talking with a friend yesterday about the political alignment of Kirk's shooter, and I mentioned that whether he turns out to be a leftist or a groyper, his conservative family is the source of his immersion in gun culture, giving him access to and training with the kinds of weapons he used to murder Kirk.  And my buddy said, "Oh, are we also going to blame whoever taught him to breathe?", to which I replied, "Are we seriously comparing learning how to use a gun to learning how to breathe?"

America has a deadly problem with the culture of guns and gun ownership; one that is unique to us along all industrialized countries.  It is the reason why Charlie Kirk spent his last breaths on this earth defending the right of people like his killer to have unfettered access to as many guns as they please.  It is the reason why the leading cause of death for children in this country is gunfire.

If Charlie Kirk were a conservative in Canada, or Australia, or England, he would still be alive today.

[Sibster]

The State Department has revoked visas for foreign nationals who made vile comments about Kirk's murder



https://www.foxnews.com/politics/state-department-revokes-six-visas-over-offensive-charlie-kirk-assassination-comments

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

The State Department has revoked visas for foreign nationals who made vile comments about Kirk's murder



https://www.foxnews.com/politics/state-department-revokes-six-visas-over-offensive-charlie-kirk-assassination-comments

None of the comments made about Charlie Kirk was any worse than what Charlie Kirk said about George Floyd's murder. 

[Sibster]

None of the comments made about Charlie Kirk was any worse than what Charlie Kirk said about George Floyd's murder.  

The difference is, Charlie Kirk is an American citizen.  

The State Department is sending a clear message to foreign nationals.  "You are guests in our country.   Behave respectfully and do not wish harm on American citizens or we will send you home."

[Spider-Dan]

You say that like you opposed American citizens being fired for criticizing Charlie Kirk after his death.

The only sort of free speech you support is "We're allowed to say what we want, and you're allowed to say what we want."

[Sibster]

You say that like you opposed American citizens being fired for criticizing Charlie Kirk after his death.

The only sort of free speech you support is "We're allowed to say what we want, and you're allowed to say what we want."

Apparently you are disillusioned about what free speech really is.  Let me break it down for you.


- Free speech.  Your rights under the First Amendment simply protect you from criminal prosecution if you say something bad about the government.  It doesn't give you the right to say anything you want in any situation.  

- Offensive speech.  Inappropriate or off color remarks will obviously draw the ire of others and may be dangerous for your health depending on the situation.  If what you say will put your employer in a bad light when their clientele, it can cost you your job. Employers can fire you if you say something inappropriate that could offend their customers and smear their reputation.  

- Threatening speech.  Under the First Amendment, threats are not protected speech and can result in civil and criminal liabilities.

[Spider-Dan]

First off, "free speech" and "First Amendment" are not the same thing, and I didn't say "First Amendment."

Second, the First Amendment is not limited to "criminal prosecution."  For example, government officials seizing your business because you have criticized them is a First Amendment violation.  And the Trump Administration (i.e. the federal government) has already directly threatened broadcasters with the prospect of revoking their licenses for being too anti-Trump, which would be a clear and direct violation of the First Amendment.

Third, even if we set the First Amendment and all related government action aside, I very much doubt that you are/were OK with conservatives being shadowbanned (or: actually banned) from google or social media because their expressed viewpoints are considered distasteful by the management of those corporations (i.e. not the government).  So I don't think you're being sincere there, either.  It is as I said: "free speech" for you, silence for your opponents.

And we are seeing this again as we speak!  After weeks of conservatives lobbying to get people fired for criticizing Charlie Kirk (frequently by using his own words!) after his death, now there is reporting of Republican Party figureheads engaging in blatantly racist talk in Telegram chats, as well as a Republican congressional staffer participating in video conference calls with a Nazified US flag behind him:



And what does our Vice President think about such action?  Well apparently, while edgy, offensive jokes about Charlie Kirk's death are deeply disturbing and cause for swift government action against the radical left, edgy, offensive jokes about Hitler and Nazism are "kids doing stupid things," and the Important Thing is that we not have a country where a kid telling a stupid joke is cause to ruin their lives.  (note: every single person in the linked articles is a grown-ass adult)

[Sibster]

First off, "free speech" and "First Amendment" are not the same thing, and I didn't say "First Amendment."

Second, the First Amendment is not limited to "criminal prosecution."  For example, government officials seizing your business because you have criticized them is a First Amendment violation.  And the Trump Administration (i.e. the federal government) has already directly threatened broadcasters with the prospect of revoking their licenses for being too anti-Trump, which would be a clear and direct violation of the First Amendment.

Third, even if we set the First Amendment and all related government action aside, I very much doubt that you are/were OK with conservatives being shadowbanned (or: actually banned) from google or social media because their expressed viewpoints are considered distasteful by the management of those corporations (i.e. not the government).  So I don't think you're being sincere there, either.  It is as I said: "free speech" for you, silence for your opponents.

And we are seeing this again as we speak!  After weeks of conservatives lobbying to get people fired for criticizing Charlie Kirk (frequently by using his own words!) after his death, now there is reporting of Republican Party figureheads engaging in blatantly racist talk in Telegram chats, as well as a Republican congressional staffer participating in video conference calls with a Nazified US flag behind him:



And what does our Vice President think about such action?  Well apparently, while edgy, offensive jokes about Charlie Kirk's death are deeply disturbing and cause for swift government action against the radical left, edgy, offensive jokes about Hitler and Nazism are "kids doing stupid things," and the Important Thing is that we not have a country where a kid telling a stupid joke is cause to ruin their lives.  (note: every single person in the linked articles is a grown-ass adult)

And there you go again running off on your tangent.   You missed my entire point.   The point being, constitutional rights are for American citizens.   If you're a foreign national or an illegal, you should not be afforded such rights.

[Fau Teixeira]

And there you go again running off on your tangent.   You missed my entire point.   The point being, constitutional rights are for American citizens.   If you're a foreign national or an illegal, you should not be afforded such rights.

That is very much not true. Constitutional rights are for everyone in America. You don't have to prove your citizenship status for be protected by any part of the bill of rights. Unless the constitution specifically mentions citizenship.

[Dave Gray]

The point being, constitutional rights are for American citizens.   If you're a foreign national or an illegal, you should not be afforded such rights.

This is false.

[Spider-Dan]

The point being, constitutional rights are for American citizens.

This is false. (Although it's not surprising that many conservatives hold this belief; if you think non-citizens have no rights in this country, then treating them as subhuman is acceptable.)

The Constitution guarantees rights to everyone on American soil.  If that were not true, then (for example) the 13th Amendment prohibiting slavery would only apply to citizens.