Posts: 4,287
Threads: 156
Joined: Jan 2017
https://www.breitbart.com/california/201...ms-speech/
Quote from the article:
[INDENT]...He referenced these things in the dissent to Heller v. District of Columbia (2011), a suit challenging firearm regulations adopted in D.C. in the aftermath of District of Columbia v. Heller (2008).
The Los Angeles Times quoted Kavanaugh writing, A ban on a class of arms is not an incidental regulation. It is equivalent to a ban on a category of speech.
Kavanaughs statement indicates his understanding that the rights protected by the Bill of Rights are of a cloth and possessed by the people on an individual basis. And his use of a First Amendment example to demonstrate the danger of an attack on the Second is a clear indication that he knows that each natural right is to be protected with vigor.
The Times went apoplectic over this...[/INDENT]
"Down the floor, out the door, Go Brandon Go!!!!!"
Posts: 4,033
Threads: 106
Joined: Apr 2011
a. Some categories of speech are prohibited by law. Would Kavanaugh argue against libel, slander, incitements to riot, etc, being illegal?
b. Like the divine right of kings, "natural rights" do not actually exist outside of the human mind. In reality, you have only such "rights" as you can convince (or force) other people to respect.
Posts: 3,214
Threads: 215
Joined: Jun 2011
stanc Wrote:a. Some categories of speech are prohibited by law. Would Kavanaugh argue against libel, slander, incitements to riot, etc, being illegal? Not quite true Stan. When free speech is used in an illegal act, then it becomes a crime. https://www.jstor.org/stable/1122070?seq...b_contents
stanc Wrote:a. b. Like the divine right of kings, "natural rights" do not actually exist outside of the human mind. In reality, you have only such "rights" as you can convince (or force) other people to respect.
Very true Stan, this is why we have the 2nd A, to back up our other rights.
Posts: 2,062
Threads: 88
Joined: May 2016
RPGs are a class of arms. And I want one!
Let's go Brandon!
Posts: 4,287
Threads: 156
Joined: Jan 2017
Stan perhaps there is a US Senator who will ask those questions for you when the confirmation hearings begin.
Montana's point b is well-taken... however remember those "natural" rights were given to us by God, Who is above any government -- the Bill of Rights only recognizes them as such, it did not create them. Certainly a govt can "take away" or try to take away rights, albeit in the providence of God, but He also can call them into account in terrible ways...
Having a right never stops a tyrant (which is also why I particularly like the 2A to help us in those circumstances), but that does not make it any less a right -- a tyrant's actions do not invalidate it. Judgment inevitably falls on those who trample.
"Down the floor, out the door, Go Brandon Go!!!!!"
Posts: 4,033
Threads: 106
Joined: Apr 2011
montana Wrote:Not quite true Stan. When free speech is used in an illegal act, then it becomes a crime. You're kinda missing the point. Some categories of speech are illegal.
Posts: 4,033
Threads: 106
Joined: Apr 2011
StoneHendge Wrote:RPGs are a class of arms. And I want one! 
Posts: 4,033
Threads: 106
Joined: Apr 2011
grayfox Wrote:Montana's point b is well-taken... however remember those "natural" rights were given to us by God, Who is above any government... Heh, heh. You mean, like how kings used to claim that they had the God-given right to do as they wished? https://www.britannica.com/topic/divine-right-of-kings
There is no proof that God is anything more than a figment of Man's imagination. If God actually exists, where is the document he wrote that defines our rights?
Posts: 3,214
Threads: 215
Joined: Jun 2011
stanc Wrote:You're kinda missing the point. Some categories of speech are illegal.
No, it is the act or misuse of speech that is punishable, not the speech itself. I can yell fire, fire, fire all I want in the privacy of my home, in a song, if there is a fire in a movie theater, but if I yell it when no fire is present in a crowded movie theater, then it is a crime. It is the act, not the speech itself that can be illegal.
Posts: 4,033
Threads: 106
Joined: Apr 2011
montana Wrote:No, it is the act or misuse of speech that is punishable, not the speech itself. I can yell fire, fire, fire all I want in the privacy of my home, in a song, if there is a fire in a movie theater, but if I yell it when no fire is present in a crowded movie theater, then it is a crime. It is the act, not the speech itself that can be illegal. Since you're saying that libel, slander, etc, are not "categories" of speech, then what are?
Posts: 4,033
Threads: 106
Joined: Apr 2011
montana Wrote:stanc Wrote:Like the divine right of kings, "natural rights" do not actually exist outside of the human mind. In reality, you have only such "rights" as you can convince (or force) other people to respect. Very true Stan, this is why we have the 2nd A, to back up our other rights. Yeah. A good example of case in point. The 2A depends entirely upon voluntary compliance. That's why the 2A has repeatedly been violated.
There are no penalties imposed upon legislators who create laws that violate the 2A, or upon law enforcement personnel who enforce them.
An armed populace that does not take up arms in response to government infringements on the RKBA only encourages further infringements.
Posts: 3,214
Threads: 215
Joined: Jun 2011
stanc Wrote:Since you're saying that libel, slander, etc, are not "categories" of speech, then what are?
I never said they were not speech, I stated the act of, "illegal speech" is the crime, not speech in of itself. The act of libel and speaking slander in my house to my dog, in my car with my cat, on a mountain to myself, etc is not a crime. If done in public, it then becomes an illegal act of speech.
Posts: 4,033
Threads: 106
Joined: Apr 2011
montana Wrote:I never said they were not speech, I stated the act of, "illegal speech" is the crime, not speech in of itself. The act of libel and speaking slander in my house to my dog, in my car with my cat, on a mountain to myself, etc is not a crime. If done in public, it then becomes an illegal act of speech. I understand what you've been saying. But, you're not answering my question regarding the issue raised in the OP: What are "categories" of speech?
Are not libel and slander categories of speech? If they are not, what are?
Posts: 3,214
Threads: 215
Joined: Jun 2011
stanc Wrote:I understand what you've been saying. But, you're not answering my question regarding the issue raised in the OP: What are "categories" of speech?
Are not libel and slander categories of speech? If they are not, what are?
They are categories of illegal, "acts" of speech. Driving is not a crime in of itself, but the illegal, "act" of driving recklessly is a crime.
Posts: 4,033
Threads: 106
Joined: Apr 2011
montana Wrote:They are categories of illegal, "acts" of speech. Since you agree that they are categories of speech, I'm not sure why you objected to my comment that some categories of speech are illegal. 
Posts: 3,214
Threads: 215
Joined: Jun 2011
stanc Wrote:Since you agree that they are categories of speech, I'm not sure why you objected to my comment that some categories of speech are illegal.
The OP:"It is equivalent to a ban on a category of speech". It is about topic,not action. Illegal speech today is about certain, "actions" of speech deemed to be illegal. To ban a category refers to topic. For example: we are now going to ban all speech pertaining to politics. It is not just the category of illegal "actions" of political discussion being banned, but the, "topic" or category of political discussion in of itself being banned.
Posts: 4,033
Threads: 106
Joined: Apr 2011
07-18-2018, 06:14 AM
(This post was last modified: 07-18-2018, 02:47 PM by stanc.)
montana Wrote:The OP:"It is equivalent to a ban on a category of speech". It is about topic,not action. Illegal speech today is about certain, "actions" of speech deemed to be illegal. I agree, it is about topic, not action. And there is no such thing as "actions" of speech. There is only speech, and the various categories thereof.
Illegal speech today is (as it always has been) about types of speech deemed to be unjustly harmful either to individuals or to the public at large.
Posts: 3,340
Threads: 46
Joined: Mar 2011
Guys:
Once again this has degenerated into arguments over word choice, word meaning, who said what, and word definitions.
I will keep it open because it has remained civil, but you guys either get it back on topic or it will be locked.
LR55
Posts: 3,214
Threads: 215
Joined: Jun 2011
stanc Wrote:Illegal speech today is (as it always has been) about types of speech deemed to be unjustly harmful either to individuals or to the public at large.
I agree 100%. I will end the debate on the topic of action or non action of such deeds or action will be taken against us on this topic. 
Posts: 4,033
Threads: 106
Joined: Apr 2011
Okay, Gene. I'll try to get back on topic.
I completely agree with Kavanaugh's statement in the OP that "“A ban on a class of arms...is equivalent to a ban on a category of speech.”
But, since some classes of arms and some categories of speech are illegal, I'm not sure what point either he or the OP is trying to make.
|
