Forum Post: NY Senators Want To Make Free Speech A Privilege
Posted 12 years ago on Oct. 4, 2011, 7:32 p.m. EST by revg33k
(429)
from Woodstock, IL
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
"In the past, lawmakers pushing these laws have tended to simply ignore the First Amendment issue, and focus on screaming "protect the children!" as loudly as possible (never mind the fact that kids seem much less concerned about "bullying" than all these adults seem to think). However, it appears that some state Senators in NY are trying a new line of attack: going directly after the First Amendment and suggesting that current interpretations are way too broad, and it's not really meant to protect any sort of free speech right. In fact, it sounds as though they're trying to redefine the right to free speech into a privilege that can be taken away. Seriously:
Proponents of a more refined First Amendment argue that this freedom should be treated not as a right but as a privilege — a special entitlement granted by the state on a conditional basis that can be revoked if it is ever abused or maltreated. "
Use the children to push this crap on the people, shame! They do it like this because no elected official wants to be painted as not protecting the children, but you know what this will be used for.
It's going to get worse before it gets better.
Say what you will about the Tea Party - the price of freedom is eternal vigilance, and standing up for the Constitution.
There is a reason why the powers that be have diligently worked towards shredding the Constitution.
Dear Anonymous,
We must stop all attacks on free speech! This must not be allowed to continue!
We are Legion We do not Forgive We do not Forget Expect Us
Thank you,
anonymous
Yea, ridiculous, but looks like it is NY State Senate not Federal. Also interesting on techdirt - a defense lawyer is pleading a case for his client claiming that a DDoS is protected speech. Like to see where that goes.
Well DDoS is the same as millions of people visiting a website at the same time
That's exactly what he's saying. He's calling it a "virtual sit in".
Yup, I would win that case, and I'm not even done with law school yet.
lol - let's see if he wins, though.
If he does, it will be appealed to the US Supreme court and they will shoot it down. They are afraid of anonymous, because they are part of the Political parties, who are afraid of change.
Believe me, I've read some terrible decisions.
wow, i agree, this is sinister. we need to get to this detail...
in essence tho our free speech rights have already been mostly removed from us.
to get serious requires a few things they don't have. like chat admins who aren't ego serving propaganda tools, a wiki, 1001 sub forums, an actual game plan, a straight up political platform... you know.. basic organizational things sane people do BEFORE protesting.. like figure out a diplomacy and logic centered metaprocess to give their chatadmins so that they don't really just drive out even more people than the trolls. Adminatrolla. trollaAdmin. Whats the difference to somebody whos got the truth facing a propaganda tool abusing admin powers to push their agenda? how can you prevent such a thing? Metaprocess. did i mention metaprocess? and science diplomacy science psychology science sociology and all those textbooks to read B4 protesting?
you can't have capitalism without a free(SLAVE) market. but you can have a free market without capitalism. And thats strangely the only way it CAN work.
Marketing 101 was fascinating. I admit thats a lot less than a bachelors but its sure more than enough to see whats really going on given the other things I know. Capitalism is not the problem since it does not exist. corporate oligarchy is the problem. capitalism has never been tried. I am a democracy guy. in order for real democracy to function a free market system is required. Thats not capitalism. thats a free market system. there is a subtle difference there which most people would miss. I will again repeat. Neither capitalism nor marxism nor communism nor socialism has ever existed. All of those governments were oligarchy pretending to be something as a con scam. Telling that simple truth gets one banned out of the Chat by either a capitalist or a socialist whos pissed you just said their pet ideology isn't real. It isn't. anybody who thinks that it is is accidentally playing for team corporate oligarchy as a tool. the ONLY system worth talking about is DEMOCRACY. how democracy HANDLES a FREE MARKET system is dynamic and interesting and NOT capitalism.
o. yes. no. yes. what? making change is not reliant on changing the money system one tenth as much as it is on changing the informational ecology. Going to a gold standard as an idea is a proof of ignorance, not a solution. Really the end game is we evolve out of money. To do that we evolve first new currencies and new economic strategies. this leads to economic singularity in about 50 years. If everyone is a millionaire how much you get depends on exactly the material valuation of that money. Which is to say that by the time money becomes obsolete everyone will live like the current millionaire. Tangible items to other tangible items? the real economy is about ideas, change the ideas and everything changes. the problem with the tangible economy is it does not change; its a static reality. you can't make a meaningful gold standard with only enough gold to represent on millionth of the economy. You can make a purely imaginal money system work; but it has to be subject to moral and ethical laws. This is about pinning down those moral and ethical laws and implementing them in new currencies; not trying to imagine a control freak impossible non solution because of the simplicity with which you go about thinking over the problem.
its already dead, the government didn't even need to intervene people killed it themselves with political correctness