Quote (thesnipa @ 7 Jan 2021 08:53)
so just a whole paragraph of strawmanning and you've moved away from even trying to make it look like your legal talk is legitimate. good boy.
you're better when u stick to "the gubment be bad, and i dont like reality as it is" rants.
i didnt support 2018 occupation, was vocal at the time about how Kavanaugh was getting railroaded and deserved to be approved without much fuss, and i never support occupation of a political building for any purpose. protest or otherwise. thats what streets are for.
The legal argument is perfectly valid, and is seen out by the fact that prior occupiers were never charged unless they committed further crime. Authorities aren't stupid, and don't like Constitutional challenges that can strike down their authority.
And I will vehemently disagree with you on where protests are appropriate. Public land and buildings are literally the only place they belong. Streets exist for commerce. Private property is private property and should be protected. Public land, be it parks or buildings, is ALWAYS where the protests should land. The First Amendment gives the right to peaceably assemble. It does NOT give the right to trespass on private property OR block commerce. What you appear to be supporting is this strange and completely idiotic and juvenile idea that government property is private property with the full rights and protection of private property, yet actual private property isn't actual private property.
Just go burn down a Target I guess. Long as you raise a fist, I'm sure the media will support you.
