‘Unmasking Antifa Act' includes 15-year prison term proposal

[Tgo01]

Wait, is that quoted part implying that only rich, straight, white Christians are hurt by Antifa riots?

You have to remember in time4fun's mind Republican = straight white Christians and Democrats = everything else.

Therefore, according to her own logic and words, hate crimes are political in nature because they tend to affect minorities, which are Democrats.

So she's against this new Antifa Act because Antifa typically targets conservatives and since Republicans are straight white Christians she doesn't give a shit.

[cwolff]

It reminds me of the "urban camping" laws that Denver passed after the occupy Wall Street protests and the free speech cages/zones or calling BLM a terrorist organization. I wish the left were able to must some of the ruthlessness of which the right is constantly capable.

[Tgo01]

It reminds me of the "urban camping" laws that Denver passed after the occupy Wall Street protests and the free speech cages/zones or calling BLM a terrorist organization. I wish the left were able to must some of the ruthlessness of which the right is constantly capable.

Wait, are you saying the Denver city council is comprised of Republicans? Denver itself is so far left it makes San Fransisco seem rural Alabama.

[Wrathbringer]

It reminds me of the "urban camping" laws that Denver passed after the occupy Wall Street protests and the free speech cages/zones or calling BLM a terrorist organization. I wish the left were able to must some of the ruthlessness of which the right is constantly capable.

crying.jpg

[cwolff]

Wait, are you saying the Denver city council is comprised of Republicans? Denver itself is so far left it makes San Fransisco seem rural Alabama.

I don't know the composition of Denver's city government but you could start researching it here. https://www.denverpost.com/2012/05/1...eless-camping/

[Astray]

I'm kind of amazed. The racism of 'no you're white, you can't be protected and you shouldn't expect to be' is insane. This bill is literally helping everyone by saying if you commit acts of violence in a mask, you are getting arrested, regardless of who or what you stand for. Why is it such a terrible thing to want to ensure that peaceful assembly doesn't devolve into hatred and anger?

I can already see the "Well hate speech shouldn't be protected and should be persecuted" argument and let me stop you there. All speech is protected. Whether it comes from a place of anger and misunderstanding or peace and acceptance. It makes pointing out the shitty people so much easier.

[Tgo01]

I don't know the composition of Denver's city government but you could start researching it here. https://www.denverpost.com/2012/05/1...eless-camping/

I don't have a subscription to the Denver Post, what does it say about the political party of the members?

I also like how your first post said you wish the Democrats could be as ruthless as Republicans, implying the previous list you offered up were done by Republicans, then you come back and say you don't even know what the composition of the city council of Denver even is.

Can you not even keep your arguments straight within the span of literally one post?

[Gelston]

I don't know the composition of Denver's city government but you could start researching it here. https://www.denverpost.com/2012/05/1...eless-camping/

Primarily democrat with a Democrat mayor that signed off on it. But yeah, only Republicans can do things like that, right?

[cwolff]

They're straight. Don't worry about that and my point stands. I do wish the left could capture some of that ruthlessness.

[Tgo01]

I'm kind of amazed. The racism of 'no you're white, you can't be protected and you shouldn't expect to be' is insane. This bill is literally helping everyone by saying if you commit acts of violence in a mask, you are getting arrested, regardless of who or what you stand for. Why is it such a terrible thing to want to ensure that peaceful assembly doesn't devolve into hatred and anger?

So far the only two arguments I have seen in this thread from the nay crowd is 1) the possible prison sentence is too long, which is a legit argument that can be discussed.

The other argument is the law is "too vague" and someone could run afoul of the law if they wear a mask while threatening the life of someone because they don't want that person to sit on a park bench. This is actually an argument that has been made. So I guess it's bad because people should be able to threaten the lives of others for mundane things? I guess?

Here's an idea for the "too vague" crowd; don't threaten, harass, assault, or intimidate another person for any reason, while wearing a mask or not, and you won't have to worry about it.