Skip to main content

View Diary: The Irresponsible Gun Owners Act (32 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  along the same lines I'd like to see a revocation (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    noway2

    of people's first amendments rights when they say (or write) stupid shit.

    How big is your personal carbon footprint?

    by ban nock on Fri Mar 08, 2013 at 04:58:44 AM PST

    •  Uh, right (0+ / 0-)

      are implying I have written "stupid shit"? If so, why don't you elaborate with specifics.

      •  no way was I talking about you, I'd never write (0+ / 0-)

        such a disrespectful comment, even if it was about what was said not the person.

        But you can see how this banning of rights goes.

        Next we'll ban the right to vote to certain people who don't vote well.

        Maybe save money by housing soldiers at your place.

        All kinds of rights we could get rid of.

        How big is your personal carbon footprint?

        by ban nock on Fri Mar 08, 2013 at 09:06:42 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  How is it different? (0+ / 0-)

          Free speech has limits (yelling "Fire!" in the crowded theatre, libel, slander, threats, etc). You can't tell people classified information then hide behind the First Amendment.

          Any instance in which speech can be demonstrated to actually harm society has lead to limits on the right. Purists may argue about that, but I really do not think we want to live in a society that places no limits on what you can say, especially if what you say can get someone hurt or killed.

          I have done nothing other than place the same common sense limits on the Second Amendment that already exist on the First. Since I am only targetting "irresponsible" gun owners, the NRA (and its masters the firearms industry) should have no complaint. To object is to say that they now wish "irresponsible" people to possess guns.

          They do of course. They want every person with a dollar to spend to have a gun, but so far they have avoided admitting that publicly.

          •  I too only want to set limits on crazy comments (0+ / 0-)

            ones I don't agree with, I'd only set common sense limits such as exist on the second amendment. Like if someone said stupid stuff they could never speak again.

            I just want equal restrictions on rights for all the amendments.

            Cell phones gotta go too.

            How big is your personal carbon footprint?

            by ban nock on Fri Mar 08, 2013 at 10:07:38 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  I asked how it was different (0+ / 0-)

              How the restrictions I propose differ from those already in place on the First Amendment?

              You are using sarcasm to express disagreement, but give no substantive basis for your objection.

    •  Excellent point. Perhaps it is time to start (0+ / 0-)

      requiring permits to speak in public, including on the Internet.  Ones actions can be subject to review and sanction by the elected authorities.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site