I don't know why people think repealing this will help things. From the right-wing perspective, where they feverishly imagine they are being censored, it would obviously make twitter/facebook/etc... completely clamp down on anything even vaguely libelous/slanderous/dangerous. It would increase, not decrease, censorship.
From the left wing, they may be happy with less disinformation and "harassment", but they will be sad when their own disinformation and harassment is also blocked.
The second amendment allows for carrying guns under the aegis of a well-regulated militia. In the current context, that's the National Guard. So you get to strut around with your silly guns under drills with your guard unit, that's it. No sneaky intimidating others thereby advertising that you are so frightened of your own shadow you need a gun to feel secure. You aren't fooling anyone, you are just a scared bunny.
If I put up a sign in my store that says "Due to shoplifting by teens, no backpacks will be allowed on the premises" does that mean you can bring a backpack in if you don't plan to shoplift? Does it mean you can wear one if you're over 19? No, of course not.
It's a parenthetical phrase. It's fucking risible that anyone would think they would make the second amendment about the ability of the national guard to carry weapons. Were they scared we'd be the only nation on earth with a formal government run paramilitary force who had to use pitchforks? Absurd. I'm surprised they didn't include the "right to breathe air" or "right to be free from being shot in the head by the village idiot" in the list if that's the case.
Nobody takes your sophist nonsense seriously. If you want to remove the second amendment there is a way to do it, it's even built into the US Constitution. Good luck with that, fruitcake.
CDA 230.. (Score:2)
I don't know why people think repealing this will help things. From the right-wing perspective, where they feverishly imagine they are being censored, it would obviously make twitter/facebook/etc... completely clamp down on anything even vaguely libelous/slanderous/dangerous. It would increase, not decrease, censorship.
From the left wing, they may be happy with less disinformation and "harassment", but they will be sad when their own disinformation and harassment is also blocked.
It also raises a constitutio
Re: (Score:1)
The second amendment allows for carrying guns under the aegis of a well-regulated militia. In the current context, that's the National Guard. So you get to strut around with your silly guns under drills with your guard unit, that's it. No sneaky intimidating others thereby advertising that you are so frightened of your own shadow you need a gun to feel secure. You aren't fooling anyone, you are just a scared bunny.
Re:CDA 230.. (Score:3)
No, it doesn't. Learn to read English.
If I put up a sign in my store that says "Due to shoplifting by teens, no backpacks will be allowed on the premises" does that mean you can bring a backpack in if you don't plan to shoplift? Does it mean you can wear one if you're over 19? No, of course not.
It's a parenthetical phrase. It's fucking risible that anyone would think they would make the second amendment about the ability of the national guard to carry weapons. Were they scared we'd be the only nation on earth with a formal government run paramilitary force who had to use pitchforks? Absurd. I'm surprised they didn't include the "right to breathe air" or "right to be free from being shot in the head by the village idiot" in the list if that's the case.
Nobody takes your sophist nonsense seriously. If you want to remove the second amendment there is a way to do it, it's even built into the US Constitution. Good luck with that, fruitcake.