[internetworkers] OT: In Florida, shoot first, ask questions later
michael at czeiszperger.org
Tue Apr 26 14:36:05 EDT 2005
On Apr 26, 2005, at 2:12 PM, Shea Tisdale wrote:
> Actually it's a perfect analogy. Speech, in the right (or wrong)
> hands, is
> a far more powerful weapon than any firearm. All things have
> and a single speech can result in consequences far worse than many
> can imagine. Nations have been moved to war on the breath of a speech
> sometimes those wars aren't even just.
The whole argument trying to link free speech and firearms is a red
herring meant to scare people, which is evidenced by the fact you
didn't address my arguments about the current perfectly reasonable
limits on speech. There's a huge difference between the lawful
expression of one's opinion, and slander, threats, harrassement, and
If you are going to argue that there should be no limits on speech,
then you're going to have to address why slander, threats of bodily
harm, harassment and intimidation should be legal.
If you're going to argue there should be no limits on the ownership of
weapons, then you're going to have to address why people should be
allowed to own rocket propelled grenade launchers, tanks, and nuclear
michael at czeiszperger dot org | "Kindness knows no shame"
Chapel Hill, NC USA | -- S. Wonder
More information about the InterNetWorkers