Please Help Add Reasonable Restritions

Discussion in 'Off-topic Political' started by Mrs_Esterhouse, Feb 23, 2018.

  1. Mrs_Esterhouse

    Mrs_Esterhouse Swollen Member

    11,832
    507
    113
    Look, the last thing this country needs right now is another Ferguson, Baltimore, Berkeley or Dallas riot. Reasonable restrictions should be placed on our freedom of assembly. Nobody needs a crowd larger than 50 people. If you can't get your point or idea across with a crowd of 50, then it's probably a pretty weak idea to begin with. Today, I am taking action and writing my representatives to ask that they support new legislation banning protests larger than 50 people. Our streets are dangerous enough as they are. We don't need the added danger of 100s or even 1000s of people rioting and looting because of the next jury verdict. Please join me and help put an end to the danger and violence of large crowds.

    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited: Feb 23, 2018
    TimBob and EJR914 like this.
  2. Wegahe

    Wegahe NRA Instructor

    3,268
    527
    113
    So much for the right to assemble...

    Any other Constitutional Rights you want to get rid of?
     

  3. UtiPossidetis

    UtiPossidetis American

    3,187
    247
    63
    I think the Government finds the 4th and 5th particularly annoying. We all know that "shall not be infringed" is too tough a phrase for lawyers in bathrobes to comprehend and the 2nd has been weakened. Likewise, the 6th, due to the FISA Courts, is weakened. And of course the 10th has been obliterated by the democrats. So, I think its probably time to go after the 1st.
     
  4. GM404

    GM404 Well-Known Member

    3,028
    153
    63
    I *think* there is some sarcasm intended on the part of the OP.
     
  5. UtiPossidetis

    UtiPossidetis American

    3,187
    247
    63
    On THIS forum? Seriously? I'm confused.....
     
    Nullifier likes this.
  6. GM404

    GM404 Well-Known Member

    3,028
    153
    63
    Join the crowd! :)
     
  7. UtiPossidetis

    UtiPossidetis American

    3,187
    247
    63
    It's good to be in a group for a change......oh wait, it's this group!?! ;)
     
  8. NTA

    NTA Well-Known Member

    7,273
    130
    63
    The 4th amendment annoying. Not so much. It no longer carries any weight.
     
  9. Wegahe

    Wegahe NRA Instructor

    3,268
    527
    113
    Sorry I missed the /sarcasm at the end of the post.
     
  10. AtlPhilip

    AtlPhilip Proud GCO member.

    7,950
    104
    63
  11. Mrs_Esterhouse

    Mrs_Esterhouse Swollen Member

    11,832
    507
    113
    Last edited: Feb 23, 2018
    AtlPhilip likes this.
  12. Nemo

    Nemo Man of Myth and Legend

    12,832
    827
    113
    Might throw in a sign or 2 stating:

    Bet a dollar that idea gets shot down quick, but which is more dangerous to society, guns or votes?

    Nemo
     
  13. Wegahe

    Wegahe NRA Instructor

    3,268
    527
    113
    I'm old enough to remember voting being restricted to 21. The 18 year old's at the time were complaining they could go to war but not vote. Under then President Nixon the voting age was lowered to 18 in 1971. At the same time they were complaining they could go to war but not drink adult beverages. At some point around the mid 80's drinking age dropped to 18. Later to be raised back to 21 for alcohol consumption.

    The votes are more dangerous. Even more dangerous is the teachers pushing their political views in the classroom. I am not saying they should not teach politics but they should be restricted from pushing a personal political agenda inside a classroom.
     
  14. UtiPossidetis

    UtiPossidetis American

    3,187
    247
    63

    Sorry, drinking age was dropped to 18 in the mid-70s and raised incrementally starting in 1980 by 1 year each year on September 1 for several years. So if you were born in August you could drink for <1 month and then not drink for 11 months for 3 years. Interesting way to celebrate your birthday in 1980-1982.
     
  15. GM404

    GM404 Well-Known Member

    3,028
    153
    63
    There is a lot of evidence to show that judgement isn't really that great until at least 26 years old (and in some cases, NEVER). And now some research is showing that brains are developing slower in younger generations. I am not a millenial, but I can say that my judgement was quite a bit different when I was 18, 26 and today (at 43).
     
  16. UtiPossidetis

    UtiPossidetis American

    3,187
    247
    63
    Fine. Make the age 21. But stop several things along with that:
    No rights at 18, ok, then no Military Service.
    No rights at 18, ok, no criminal culpability until 21.
    No rights at 18, ok, no ability to go into debt until 21.

    Sort of takes the fun out of changing things to 21 doesn't it.
     
    AtlPhilip likes this.
  17. phantoms

    phantoms Senior Mumbler

    6,211
    188
    63
    I wonder why....
     
    Schweisshund likes this.
  18. Wegahe

    Wegahe NRA Instructor

    3,268
    527
    113
    Well with all the violence in movies, TV and video games it's a small wonder that we have people turning to violent behavior.

    OH!!! Wait...
    What could the likes of Doc Holiday, John Wesley Hardin, Hyman Niel, Billy the Kid, Ike Clanton, Cole Younger and Jessie James blame it on? They didn't have video games, TV or movies containing violent content.

    Could it be just some people are just born to be bad actors?
     
  19. gunsmoker

    gunsmoker Lawyer and Gun Activist

    27,543
    687
    113
    I’m pretty sure reasonable restrictions CAN be placed on large gatherings, rallies, or demonstrations.
    As long as the government does it the same way regardless of the message, no matter if the protesters are Right wingers or Lefties.
    A content-neutral restriction on the Time, Place, and Manner of the speech is OK.
     
  20. Mrs_Esterhouse

    Mrs_Esterhouse Swollen Member

    11,832
    507
    113
    No, there must be a number cap so the damage is less. I said 50 but maybe 10 would be safer.