Brett Kavanaugh: Banning a ‘Class of Arms’ Like Banning a ‘Category of Speech’

[montana]

Gene,

I cannot keep the thread on track by myself. I attempted to get it back on topic in post #20. Everyone else continued to post about other subjects.

But, I will try again: Since there are categories of speech which are banned, what is the significance of his comparison to banning classes of arms?

I tried to make the point that speech in of itself was not banned, "but the misuse of certain speech for the purpose to cause harm" is illegal. The words and speech in of itself is not banned unless used for harmful and illegal purpose. Banning classes of firearms, "when not used to cause harm or for illegal purpose" should not be banned in of itself. Rules for safe storage, shooting, carry, etc are rules for safe, firearm use and ownership, but are not laws banning classes of firearms. Banning classes of speech such as, "personal opinions on, religion, politics, immigration, homo sexuality,etc is like banning classes of firearms. Whether they cause harm or not they are banned. These classes of speech are banned in many so called friendly European nations, but not in the US. This is what his meaning of banning classes of arms is like banning classes of speech. It is the use of harmful speech that is banned, not the subject or class of speech that is banned.