.45ballers
Regular Member
imported post
So much for 1A...
So much for 1A...
-
We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
-
If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
-
Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.
locked threads
- Thread starter .45ballers
- Start date
adamsesq
Regular Member
imported post
This is not the government. This is not a government run forum. There are no 1st Amendment rights here. Everyone of us is a guest of the owners of the forum. When we do not act like polite guests should they have every right to curtail our activitie and/or ask us to leave.
-adamsesq
This is not the government. This is not a government run forum. There are no 1st Amendment rights here. Everyone of us is a guest of the owners of the forum. When we do not act like polite guests should they have every right to curtail our activitie and/or ask us to leave.
-adamsesq
sv_libertarian
State Researcher
imported post
.45ballers wrote:
.45ballers wrote:
deanf
Regular Member
imported post
Since you are less than a year old, I will refrain from letting you have it with both barrells. I mean, you can't even read yet! It's no wonder you don't have even the most basic understanding of one of our most important founding documents. When you get older and can read, please do so.
Since you are less than a year old, I will refrain from letting you have it with both barrells. I mean, you can't even read yet! It's no wonder you don't have even the most basic understanding of one of our most important founding documents. When you get older and can read, please do so.
compmanio365
Regular Member
imported post
I gotta say, it is rather stupid that they are locking topics, sometimes it seems for no reason, but then idiots like AWDStylez, Devil's Advocate, and PaulBlart redux are allowed to hang around and cause the threads to get locked in the first place. Don't bother attempting to contact anyone about this, you'll just get blown off. This forum has one foot in the grave. :banghead:
I gotta say, it is rather stupid that they are locking topics, sometimes it seems for no reason, but then idiots like AWDStylez, Devil's Advocate, and PaulBlart redux are allowed to hang around and cause the threads to get locked in the first place. Don't bother attempting to contact anyone about this, you'll just get blown off. This forum has one foot in the grave. :banghead:
Kevin Jensen
State Researcher
imported post
compmanio365 wrote:
compmanio365 wrote:
Wow... harsh.
jarhead1911A
New member
imported post
How funny and sad that this forum is all about rights epsecially the 2nd and the 1st is band???? Wow and here i thought we were all adult here guess i will be taken to school as to limited freedoms
How funny and sad that this forum is all about rights epsecially the 2nd and the 1st is band???? Wow and here i thought we were all adult here guess i will be taken to school as to limited freedoms
David.Car
Regular Member
imported post
1st amendment has no power over privately run or own establishments.
TV stations, radio stations, websites, newspapers, ect.
They all have the ability to control what is said, seen, printed, because it is their ownership.
Your argument is equivelant to saying you have the right to post a sign on my front lawn because it is freedom of speech...
1st amendment has no power over privately run or own establishments.
TV stations, radio stations, websites, newspapers, ect.
They all have the ability to control what is said, seen, printed, because it is their ownership.
Your argument is equivelant to saying you have the right to post a sign on my front lawn because it is freedom of speech...
Citizen
Founder's Club Member
imported post
.45ballers wrote:
Just to put that in perspective, I've made monetary contributions to the forum.
And, I've not complained to them, even privately, about their rules, even though I myself have experienced thread-lock mid composing a post, and had a thread I started deleted.
Ihave little sympathy forviews that complain about their rights while failing to examine the rights of the party against which they are complaining.
.45ballers wrote:
I've always considered that when I start paying John and Mike for bandwidth and maintenance, then I can complain about their rules.
Just to put that in perspective, I've made monetary contributions to the forum.
And, I've not complained to them, even privately, about their rules, even though I myself have experienced thread-lock mid composing a post, and had a thread I started deleted.
Ihave little sympathy forviews that complain about their rights while failing to examine the rights of the party against which they are complaining.
jarhead1911A
New member
imported post
yes this is a private owned forum but as far as i am concerned if someone donates money to this forum then they just baught there right to speak there mind and no one should be able to tell them they can not speak it how they see it.
Look at co-ops everyone ownes it so from the poor person to the wealthy they all have there right to speak.
Last time i heard private or not as long as the server that runs this forum sits in the USA the owners of this have no right to decide who can say what. 1A isnt just for the govt its for every AMERICAN who chooses to use there rights.
yes this is a private owned forum but as far as i am concerned if someone donates money to this forum then they just baught there right to speak there mind and no one should be able to tell them they can not speak it how they see it.
Look at co-ops everyone ownes it so from the poor person to the wealthy they all have there right to speak.
Last time i heard private or not as long as the server that runs this forum sits in the USA the owners of this have no right to decide who can say what. 1A isnt just for the govt its for every AMERICAN who chooses to use there rights.
Citizen
Founder's Club Member
imported post
jarhead1055 wrote:
Well, then, with any luck, John and Mike will ban you.
You don't buy the right to speak your mind. At best, you buy the right to speak your mind within the limits of their rules. In fact, contributing money is a declaration thatone supports the forum, whichincludes its rules.
Even if you made a money contribution, you could only bypass the rules if John and Mike agreedto that bypass asa condition ofyour contribution.
If you don't agree to their forum rules, yet use facilities they started, maintain, and pay for to some extent, you're basically both a parasite and misleading--seeming to give your assent to their forum rules while truly not.
If you want the full legal limit ofa right to speak your mind, start your own forum.
jarhead1055 wrote:
Well, then, with any luck, John and Mike will ban you.
You don't buy the right to speak your mind. At best, you buy the right to speak your mind within the limits of their rules. In fact, contributing money is a declaration thatone supports the forum, whichincludes its rules.
Even if you made a money contribution, you could only bypass the rules if John and Mike agreedto that bypass asa condition ofyour contribution.
If you don't agree to their forum rules, yet use facilities they started, maintain, and pay for to some extent, you're basically both a parasite and misleading--seeming to give your assent to their forum rules while truly not.
If you want the full legal limit ofa right to speak your mind, start your own forum.
Citizen
Founder's Club Member
imported post
jarhead1055 wrote:
I guess you forgot a fundamental element of 1A.
The 1st Amendment doesn't exist to give everyonea right to speak their mind. That would be self-defeating.
Freedom of speech and press exist only to prevent suppression of beneficial information, views, opinions, analysis. Harmful views, stupid views, dangerous views are only coincidentally protected.
We don't protect a right for the Communist Party to try to convince everyone of dangerous and harmful policies because those policies are equally valid and beneficient. They have no such right to harm others. We extend coverage of the right to them against government infringement because we cannot afford to let government be the ones to make the decision about which is beneficial speech and which isn't.
Its a little like voting. People weren't given the vote because the Framers had some idea that idiots deserved as muchchance to wreck everything as good people had to build something worthwhile. The vote was given to the people for one exact reason only--to dilute power and avoid tyrrany.
John and Mike have no more obligation to let you speak on their forum than the Washington Post has an obligation to let you take over their presses.
jarhead1055 wrote:
I guess you forgot a fundamental element of 1A.
The 1st Amendment doesn't exist to give everyonea right to speak their mind. That would be self-defeating.
Freedom of speech and press exist only to prevent suppression of beneficial information, views, opinions, analysis. Harmful views, stupid views, dangerous views are only coincidentally protected.
We don't protect a right for the Communist Party to try to convince everyone of dangerous and harmful policies because those policies are equally valid and beneficient. They have no such right to harm others. We extend coverage of the right to them against government infringement because we cannot afford to let government be the ones to make the decision about which is beneficial speech and which isn't.
Its a little like voting. People weren't given the vote because the Framers had some idea that idiots deserved as muchchance to wreck everything as good people had to build something worthwhile. The vote was given to the people for one exact reason only--to dilute power and avoid tyrrany.
John and Mike have no more obligation to let you speak on their forum than the Washington Post has an obligation to let you take over their presses.
deepdiver
Campaign Veteran
imported post
jarhead1055 wrote:
jarhead1055 wrote:
The first amendment is not only not "just for" the gov't it is not "for" the gov't at all. It is a constitutional restriction ON the gov't. As an incorporated amendment, no level of gov't can pop onto OCDO and delete a thread it doesn't like. However, as it is a restriction on gov't, it does not restrict private property rights (except in CA malls I guess) so if you came into my house or my forum and said something I did not like I can tell you to leave and bar you from reentry or delete your post. The first amendment doesn't guarantee someone the right to say whatever they want, wherever they want, whenever they want without consequence. See for example the concept of contempt of court if someone were to choose to start exercising their 1A rights in the middle of trial, or the potential consequences of "fighting words" for reference.
Kildars
Regular Member
imported post
I agree w/ their right to lock threads. I'm just curious why the one about the AWB got locked.:question:
I agree w/ their right to lock threads. I'm just curious why the one about the AWB got locked.:question:
mkl
Regular Member
imported post
jarhead1055 wrote:
PM me your home address, I have some friends who want to come into your house and preach to you for a few hours. You're going to let them right? This is American and they have the freedom of speech. If you stop them, you're anti-american.
jarhead1055 wrote:
PM me your home address, I have some friends who want to come into your house and preach to you for a few hours. You're going to let them right? This is American and they have the freedom of speech. If you stop them, you're anti-american.
marshaul
Campaign Veteran
imported post
That's right, freedom of speech includes the right to aggress against another person, so long as the means of aggression is speech.
:quirky
That's right, freedom of speech includes the right to aggress against another person, so long as the means of aggression is speech.
:quirky
deanf
Regular Member
imported post
The shallowness of Constitutional understanding displayed in this thread is appalling.
The shallowness of Constitutional understanding displayed in this thread is appalling.
.45ballers+2
New member
imported post
deanf wrote:
deanf wrote:
Good thing your here to explain to us all about the constitution. After all, we are to stupid to read or comprehend according to you.
Tomahawk
Regular Member
imported post
deanf wrote:
deanf wrote:
Well, explain, please.
PT111
Regular Member
imported post
WOW!!!!!!You learn something new every day. If I buy a share in Fox News they have to let me go on there and say whatever I want to any time I want to. How about if I just send them a $5 donation. :celebrate
WOW!!!!!!You learn something new every day. If I buy a share in Fox News they have to let me go on there and say whatever I want to any time I want to. How about if I just send them a $5 donation. :celebrate