The Forum > Article Comments > Charlottesville and the first amendment: a tale of two parks > Comments
Charlottesville and the first amendment: a tale of two parks : Comments
By Laurence Maher, published 5/9/2017The role of Judge Glen E Conrad of the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, Charlottesville Division has been overlooked in public consideration of the appalling breakdown of public order in Charlottesville on 12 August 2017.
- Pages:
-
- 1
- 2
-
- All
Posted by Divergence, Tuesday, 5 September 2017 4:24:12 PM
| |
Hear, hear and well said Divergence.
Judge Conrad just couldn't apply a black letter reading of the first amendment! Just to be legally pure? But, I believe, needed to clarify, so as to forbid and outlaw racially motivated hate speech/riotous armed assembly! Nor should it grant a right to publicly voice an opinion that makes ethnic cleansing/honor killing acceptable! My solution would have included riot police armed with pump action shotguns and non lethal bean bag ammunition! We wouldn't allow anyone to go armed in public unless legally sanctioned. i.e., members of the police or armed forces. And these out of town white supremacists, were an uninvited riot going somewhere to happen. A few bean bag volleys aimed at the midriffs/testicular appendages of these misfits, would have had them running/hobbling for, them thar hills and mummy! A few well positioned snipers authorised to take out anyone seen to aim a loaded weapon at the peaceful gathering or law enforcement! Video, captured by worn cameras, could have supported legal, if independant, law enforcement action? Patrolling drones, would have likely assisted that positive I.D. And one crashed through the windscreen of that car, might well have prevented a tragedy!? As for the statues? The civil administration was well within its purview and authority to have these last vestiges of slavery made acceptable, removed to a less frequented more remote public space, in the interest of local racial harmony! Alan B. Posted by Alan B., Tuesday, 5 September 2017 5:52:01 PM
| |
I think what should be highlghted is the 'gay flag on Sydney Harbour bridge' effect, and if you're not sure what I mean by that I mean elected governments involving themselves in the activism for one side of a political issue. I haven't looked in depth at Charlottesville, but I suspect the local government were actively trying to favor the leftist side, to shut down speech of the right or incite confrontation themselves for political gain.
Posted by Armchair Critic, Tuesday, 5 September 2017 6:30:31 PM
| |
Alan,
There have been a number of Supreme Court cases in the US about the First Amendment. Here are the restrictions on freedom of speech that have been recognized http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_free_speech_exceptions Note that they don't include hate speech, and incitement to violence needs to be imminent. You are perfectly free to say that the US would be better off without any ethnic, racial, political, or religious group that you like. That is why the authorities relied on the Antifa thugs, who started the violence, by the way. I don't approve of bringing weapons to a demonstration, but these white supremacists have had abundant evidence from other demonstrations that the police are unlikely to protect them, regardless of any theoretical rights that they might have, and they did have a permit in this case. The police at Auburn University in the South, however, had previously defused the situation at such a demonstration, by barring entry to anyone on either side who was masked or carrying anything that could be used as a weapon. I don't think that people need censorship from the nanny state. As I said above, these white supremacist groups are on the lunatic fringe, and the vast majority of people are perfectly capable of seeing that for themselves. The answer to free speech is more free speech. Let them have their demonstration. Ignore it. And take away the masks and weapons before it starts. Posted by Divergence, Tuesday, 5 September 2017 6:35:11 PM
| |
A very interesting article Laurence. America seems to be the last bastion of free speech in the world, but how so many authority figures reacted to the riot does give a lot of cause for concern. I was very impressed that Trump stood up (somewhat) to the commentariat at the height of its frenzy. Was also impressed that the ACLU is still standing up for all, not just those with the acceptable point of view. Makes you want to send them a donation.
Posted by Edward Carson, Wednesday, 6 September 2017 7:01:35 PM
| |
Weren't America the first bastion of free speech!
Posted by mememememememe, Wednesday, 6 September 2017 8:18:42 PM
| |
Not that surprising to note that the people on the political left are never that big into property rights.
The recently named Emancipation Park was originally donated to the city by a Paul McIntire, who died in 1952, on the understanding it would commemorate Civil War hero Robert E Lee by being named after him as well as housing his statues. OK, so times change, history is revised, and the majority wish to forget General Lee, if not castigate him, but are you justified in simply taking a donation that was used for one goal and then applying it elsewhere? Philanthropist Paul McIntire was an alma mater of the University of Virginia and apparently cared about its future judging by the endowments the gave it. One wonders if the city has given the value of park back to the estate of McIntire, or at least donated it to the U. of Virginia Posted by Edward Carson, Thursday, 7 September 2017 8:57:03 AM
|
So far as the US Left are concerned, tolerating Antifa is actually counterproductive. Real white supremacists, the sorts of people who talk about ethnic cleansing, as opposed to people who vote Republican or don't want open borders, number in the thousands or low tens of thousands at most, much like UFO cultists, out of a nation of more than 300 million. They can't get more than a few hundred supporters to show up at their demonstrations. In the past, they could have their demonstration, chanted "Jews will not replace us" or whatever, and people would ignore them. Passers-by were likely to consider them plain bonkers.
Now people see them on national television, being attacked by violent thugs, with the connivance of the police and ultimately, the politicians, who clearly have no problem with jettisoning freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, and the rule of law to shut these people up. Not a good look and giving the white supremacists credibility that they don't deserve.
The police should be out in force at these demonstrations and arrest anyone on either side who incites or indulges in political violence. A good stiff fine and/or some jail time will cure their enthusiasm.