Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Log In

A valid email is required.
Password is required.
Site Notices
3/20/2017 5:03:23 PM
Posted: 4/20/2001 11:11:42 AM EDT
The First Amendment guarantee of freedom of speech was written over 200 years ago by men who knew nothing of modern forms of communication. Let's face it, speech to them was a newspaper, a broadside, or some guy shouting on the Village Green. What we have to day, compared with what they had then, constitutes "assault media," and there is simply no valid reason not to license and regulate it to some extent. After all, the children are at stake here. Mcuzi should be silenced With the Internet, anyone can print anything and children have a great deal of access. We must protect our children with reasonable, sensible speech control legislation now. Where is the harm in citizens getting a license to engage in speech? Following a comprehensive course in proper use of speech, and a review by a licensing board, citizens could be issued their speech license. Anyone engaging in freedom of speech without a license would have to be punished severely, of course, the future of our children is at stake here. Mcuzi should be silenced We already license radio and television stations, as well as ham radio operators. What is the difference, really, between that and licensing individual citizens? None that I can see. Would it really hurt citizens to be trained properly before we set them lose to engage in speech? Speech can be very harmful, as proven by libel and slander suits. Television and radio, in comparison to the forms of speech the Founders knew, constitute an "assault media," capable of doing irreparable harm, and the Internet is like a speech atomic bomb. We must bring them under control and protect our children. Mcuzi should be silenced Nor can we ignore everyday speech. People expressing political opinions must be licensed to ensure that the express only reasonable, acceptable opinions. Far out opinions must be carefully regulated. It may be necessary to have citizens pass their political opinions before a review board before they can express them. Do we, as a nation, want our children to hear someone putting down the government? Of course not, so you can see why speech control is necessary. Mcuzi should be silenced The First Amendment is an anachronism in a time when speech moves around the world at nearly the speed of light. The Founders simply could not have envisioned the devastating speed with which speech moves now, or the impact of computers and the Internet. Our children's minds are far too precious to allow them to be exposed to certain kinds of speech. We could injure their minds forever if we're not careful, and they are our future. Support speech control, our children deserve no less. Mcuzi should be silenced You know, the arguments used against the Second Amendment, and for gun control, work pretty good against the First Amendment too. Think about it. You should be frightened of Mcuzi A serious note with a little humor.
Link Posted: 4/20/2001 11:19:00 AM EDT
I have a dream that one day all McUzi's will be free to speak their mind. I've been to the McMountain top!
Link Posted: 4/20/2001 11:22:25 AM EDT
Fortunately, the first amendment only guaruntees freedom of speech, and doesnt require others to listen! Just ignore him.
Link Posted: 4/20/2001 12:31:44 PM EDT
had someone who truly believed this crap posted it, here's my response. keep in mind this isn't meant personally to RipMeyer. just going along with the "scenario".
Originally posted by RipMeyer: The First Amendment guarantee of freedom of speech was written over 200 years ago by men who knew nothing of modern forms of communication. Let's face it, speech to them was a newspaper, a broadside, or some guy shouting on the Village Green. What we have to day, compared with what they had then, constitutes "assault media," and there is simply no valid reason not to license and regulate it to some extent. After all, the children are at stake here.
View Quote
that smacks silly of "the founding fathers never meant for us to have assault weapons or fully automatic weapons. you can't pick and choose who or what the Constitution protects.
With the Internet, anyone can print anything and children have a great deal of access. We must protect our children with reasonable, sensible speech control legislation now.
View Quote
try regulating what your kids use. if we used that kind of control instead of what you're proposing, there wouldn't even be a problem. (well, sort of. someone will always be a lousy parent.)
People expressing political opinions must be licensed to ensure that the express only reasonable, acceptable opinions.
View Quote
you've got to be freakin' outta your mind. how about we start with your opinions right here and shut you up because i don't think your opinions are "reasonable" or acceptable". does that sound fair to you?
Link Posted: 4/20/2001 12:37:58 PM EDT
CENSORSHIP SUCKS
Link Posted: 4/20/2001 12:56:41 PM EDT
Getting rid of McUzi, even though he is the fellow who designed a famous submachinegun, IS NOT CENSORSHIP. The first amendment does not prohibit him from speaking out his a**, but it does not prohibit the owners of THIS board from locking him out of here. The first amendment gaurentees a political voice, but does not gaurantee an audience for any attention wanting moron. You think the first amendment is absolute? Try telling that to the editor of your local paper. Try getting one of Mcuzi's diatribes printed in the letters to the editor. I for one am getting tired of reading foulmouthed tirades on a board I like to read. I don't really care if someone hates wops, niggers, kikes, or good honest Irishmen, but I can't stand that little 'roid's diarrea posts any more. He stated himself he enjoys the notariety of all the commotion. If the owner of this board would ban him til the end of time, we could go back to discussing material more relevant than an exhibitionist's attention getting antics. -Your Most Obediant Servant, Pogo.
Top Top