somehow i kind of slightly doubt those rallies were to support veterinary care for kittens. (though i have heard these people, the ones with the swastika flags, openly support the use of convicted criminals, however minor or trumped up the charge, instead of innocent non-human creatures, for medical testing)
Heather Heyer (murdered) seemed like a really fine person, as were many of the other counter protestors. The racist pond scum had a right (legally protected duty) to march but it wasn't right that they did , and decent people have a duty to oppose them (non-violently).
I hate getting this far off topic, but it seems you don't understand what happened at that rally. I hate to rehash this as we've already covered it some time ago, but here are some main points. The statue of Robert E. Lee was slated to be legally removed after a vote was conducted concerning the matter. Jason Kessler, a neo Nazi, alt rightist, and a white supremacist applied for a permit to protest the decision at Emancipation Park. The city council granted him a permit under the stipulation that the protest be moved to the larger McIntire Park over safety and logistic concerns. Kessler's right to protest was upheld. Kessler sued and was supported by the Rutherford Institute and the ACLU. The day before the protest (August 11) he was granted permission to hold the event at Emancipation Park. Counter protesters obtained permits to gather at McGuffey Park and Justice Park, less than a quarter-mile from Emancipation Park. Permits were not needed to counter protest at Emancipation Park. So far so good, everybody is legal. Protesters and counter protesters. But on the night of August 11th white nationalists numbering at least 250 men illegally held a torch lit march through the University of Virginia's campus chanting Nazi and white supremacist slogans. About 30 mostly WVU students had met at the Lee statue and soon found themselves surrounded by at least 250 neo Nazis and white supremacists wielding flaming torches, etc. Fights broke out. Now if you believe 30 men and women students are going to start a fight with at least 250 men carrying torches, that's your right. I don't find it too credible. In my youth, myself and 3 other buddies once found ourselves surrounded by a large group of men. I counted them, the odds were about 10 to 1. We got out of there in a hurry. But I digress. The police broke up the fights. The first illegal actions were conducted by the Nazis and white supremacists. This led to the first violence. Meanwhile a group of clergy, in their vestments, held an pre-planned legal ecumenical Christian and interfaith prayer service at St. Paul's Memorial Church on University Avenue. During the service some of them had the audacity to talk to the some Nazis and white supremacists. They were met with antisemitic, homophobic and misogynistic slurs. One clergy man was thrown to the ground and surrounded by the Nazis and white supremacists. The second illegal action and act of violence was conducted by the Nazis and white supremacists. The next day at the legal protest worshipers at the Beth Shalom synagogue were met by men with semiautomatic weapons positioned across the street. Nazi web sites had called for a burning of the synagogue. The worshipers gathered religious artifacts and fled through the backdoor. And on it went with both sides escalating rhetoric and violence. You can look up the rest. I'll stop here as this is getting long. Now, as the counter protesters did not initiate the first nor even the second illegal actions....I don't have any idea what you are talking about when you say the Nazis and white supremacists were legal and peaceful.
Seems like a lot of confirmation bias going on there I didnt bother checking virginias laws, but I know my countrys law, I would assume America would be more rah rah rah first amendment rah rah rah about freedom of speech You are probably stretching it there even using the word legal in reference to a march, at most you'd be talking some lame low grade misdemeanor for a local council/city code violation near impossible to prove in court anyway that would be based in the first place on whether its on a busy street in peak hour / it can be shown you intended public affray Not saying they are not dickheads, but I dont see how a bunch of them congregating anywhere at night is "illegal" and if they are not walking around with baseball bats I dont see how the police would be able to do anything until a fight breaks out, unless you want to try prove a bunch of BBQ lanterns brought at home depot are weapons 250 vs 30, that also sounds under/overestimated The short version: arguing the "legality" of a march in first amendment US of A seems a waste of time
Maybe you should check out state laws? A few points of Virginia law: And U.S. law: That is a reasonable permit may be required. Further: That is a reasonable permit may be required.
A) Thats not quoting any actual legal code B) There is always a loophole -"However, the First Amendment prohibits such an advance notice requirement from being used to prevent rallies or demonstrations that are rapid responses to unforeseeable and recent events" C) Argument is a pedantic waste of time if violation of some lame city code is just a slap on the wrist anyway
I dont listen to any of these guys but I'm going Chris on this one just because of that feat boy look. To be clear he doesn't look punchable at all. Just out of the 3 he looks the most.
i used to go through a ton of playstation controllers. but i've calmed down a bit in my old age, plus starting with the ps3 those things are just too expensive not to take care of them.