For those who believe the right to bear arms should be subject to a background check, do you have similar feelings about the right to free speech? Does free speech insult? Incite? Provoke verbal retaliation? Provoke physical retaliation? Create social discord? Provoke revolutions? Should those whose speech lead to those negative situations be restricted in their right to free speech?
1
Be part of the movement!
Welcome to the community for those who value free speech, evidence and civil discourse.Create your free account
5 comments
Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.Here is a thought experiment. Let's say we classify gender dysphoria (spellcheck is no help!) as a mental illness preventing one from gun ownership due to the high rate of suicide in the trans community. Is that not discrimination on basis of gender? Would it be discrimination on basis of sexual preference? Or is it solely a matter of mental stability?
Experiment 2...say a guy checks his elderly mother's mail and somehow forgets where he put that one super important bill and gets slapped with mail tampering which is a felony...or maybe a girlfriend defends her rights against illegal search and seisure unknowingly giving her boyfriend an opportunity to dump drugs or hide plans to rob a neighbor. She gets stuck with a charge of conspiracy to commit a felony by association. Should she be denied a right to gun ownership?
These are the considerations we must take into account when deciding to regulate liberty.
Wordscythe73
Level 4
Mar 5, 2019
0
Only the freedom of thought, conscience and opinion are subject to no real restriction. There's no need to fear government interference so long as opinions remain private. What I am saying is, there are limitations to all of the "guarantees" enacted within the constitution.
PatriciaBurger
Level 6
Mar 4, 2019
0
"Only the freedom of thought, conscience and opinion are subject to no real restriction. There's no need to fear government interference so long as opinions remain private."
LOL! You actually believe that's what the framers and signers of the Constitution believed when they penned the First Amendment? That's sort of like saying you can bear arms as long as they are in your mind only.
@DanTige I believe that you may have misunderstood the intent of my statement. We, as individuals, limit our own speech. Yes we have the freedom to say whatever it is that we choose to say; however, many of us out of courtesy limit our speech. Therefore, all "freedoms" have a certain level of limitation that we as individual humans set for ourselves relative to the situation in which we find ourselves. Limitations to free speech are further defined in the case of “clear or present danger,” according to the Supreme Court ruling in Schenck v. the United States. This landmark case from World War I, determined that freedom of speech could be limited if the homeland is in imminent danger. Although I don't feel the country is in imminent danger; political correctness has restricted many of the 1st Amendment freedoms because supposedly trigger words incite violence aka danger.
I also discovered that trigger words can be investigated by law enforcement even when they are not verbalized ... even when they are written in a computer comment.
I don't believe ANY liberties should be conditional. As a society...a community...a neighborhood, we should encourage proper behavior and discourage poor social policies. There should not be a need for any government interference in liberty. Isn't that clearly stated in our constitution(U.S.)?
Wordscythe73
Level 4
Mar 4, 2019
3
That is exactly where the far left will go next. Everything we do will be subject to the regulations of the government
Conservative-Mex
Level 6
Mar 4, 2019
3
I pray not.
Be part of the movement!
Welcome to the community for those who value free speech, evidence and civil discourse.Create your free account
Share this post
Categories
Slug does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.