At 5/2/12 08:45 PM, RightWingGamer wrote:
That's purely hypothetical.
Except for the people who are put on no-fly lists but aren't told why.
Okay, enough with the damn metaphors.
Do you get the point? I like vivid language
Because as we all know, there is absolutely zero percent chance of it happening even when they had permits, and it especially did not happen recently with the Occupy movement, before the shenanigans started.
Ability to track US citizens without consent. Ability to detain and search without ability to resist.
The only case of that ever happening was when the "citizen" in question was also an enemy combatant openly hostile to the united states.
That does not change the ability being on the law book.
Hasn't happened that I know of. Does not change the fact that the power is still there
Refer to the above
Regardless of it seeming silly, don't tell me you actually believe there's malicious intent behind it.
The road to hell is paved with good intentions.
Because no one actually pays attention to congress and is ready to flip shit over something like this.
Except for what is reported on the major networks, pretty much.
Also, there's the little matter of internet censorship being unconstitutional and the supreme court still existing.
Which doesn't mean shit considering the Supreme Court is not some bastion of constitutionality and they definitely don't follow personal interests
"The privilege?" Legal protests happen all the time. It's not that hard. The government doesn't just deny the right to protest because they don't agree with the message.
Happen all the time. That doesn't mean shit considering you can still be turned down for any reason, even not having a reason.
Actually, that would be a royal pain in the ass. Your comparison is moot.
No it wouldn't. One quick 5 second phone call. Easier then obtaining a permit/
Occupiers protest without a permit.
Police move in to disperse the crowd and make arrests.
Riot starts and the cops are left with no other option.
Did you see the Seattle or Oakland feeds? It was fucking hilarious. Riot police surrounded the protesters who were singing. They told them to disperse. They told them to stop approaching officers (Which is hard to do considering they are surrounded). They then threw tear gas.
Solution: Get a damn permit!
You're forgetting that it happened even when they had permits.
It's about potential danger to public well-being. Simple as that.
Potential, not guaranteed danger, which is what happens almost every single time someone untrained gets behind the wheel.
Except that's not what I said at all. What I said was that even if the police keep their distance, they still need to be there.
And you're saying that I said they shouldn't be there at all.
Or if you never went to the DMV and got your license.
Again, need skill to operate compared to not needing skill.
Except it doesn't happen like that. Legal protests happen all the time. Notice how those never turn into riots?
Herp derp. "The protests that were allowed to happen happened. Notice how the ones where police don't instantly go to arrest mode never turn to protest?"
Imagine what would happen at a Tea Party rally if police tried to take somebodies weapons because it was a potential danger.
Reasons like "Likelyhood to incite riot."
Because that is not vague and 100% subjective.