Started By
Message

re: Would you be for a new law that removes 1st amendment right to protest

Posted on 5/28/26 at 12:48 pm to
Posted by goatmilker
Castle Anthrax
Member since Feb 2009
76574 posts
Posted on 5/28/26 at 12:48 pm to
Nonononononononono and no again. Pass a law against foreign money.
Posted by Timeoday
Easter Island
Member since Aug 2020
23422 posts
Posted on 5/28/26 at 12:48 pm to
Well, actors and actresses get paid to protest daily. They are very good at subliminally pushing immorality and communism.
This post was edited on 5/28/26 at 1:16 pm
Posted by Snipe
Member since Nov 2015
16783 posts
Posted on 5/28/26 at 12:52 pm to
quote:

I'd rather "protest" be more clearly defined- blocking roadways, building entrances, residential zones, etc.. needs to be barred.


It generally is prohibited, The problem we have is the law is enforced unequally.

Until drastic bold changes are made in the entire justice system nothing will change.
Posted by ChatGPT of LA
Member since Mar 2023
6496 posts
Posted on 5/28/26 at 12:52 pm to
No

But, if the protest goes stops traffic of public roads, then the arrest, crime, and punishment should be instant.
Posted by RT1941
Member since May 2007
32115 posts
Posted on 5/28/26 at 12:54 pm to

quote:

Allow them to show their arse.
Posted by hogcard1964
Alabama
Member since Jan 2017
20219 posts
Posted on 5/28/26 at 12:56 pm to
No, but I do think you should have the right to disrupt them.
Posted by KiwiHead
Auckland, NZ
Member since Jul 2014
37704 posts
Posted on 5/28/26 at 12:57 pm to
How do you know that the big protests are being "paid for"???? The one thing I don't get about conservatives in particular that while they supposedly like freedom of speech, they really hate to see it play out en masse and will say all types of things like "Communist Agitators" back in the the Vietnam days to NGO's today.

Just say you have better things to do with your time.
Posted by LegendInMyMind
Member since Apr 2019
75364 posts
Posted on 5/28/26 at 1:02 pm to
No.
Posted by LegendInMyMind
Member since Apr 2019
75364 posts
Posted on 5/28/26 at 1:14 pm to
quote:

I'd rather "protest" be more clearly defined- blocking roadways, building entrances, residential zones, etc.. needs to be barred.

It is, there are laws that bar it. Yet, there are a couple of problems here.

1. Law enforcement generally refuses to do anything about it as long as the protest remains "peaceful". They don't want to "rock the boat" and risk making the matter worse, putting officers in direct conflict.

2. In reality, most people are supportive of such protester actions if they agree with the cause. It has been seen here when counter protesters have shut down roads or when truckers, farmers, what have you start a protest that they agree with. I got downvoted to hell for saying that the Irish farmers needed to get the hell out of the road and stop inconveniencing people for the sake of their cause.

Regardless of "Who, What, When, Where , and How" I will always say, "Stay out of the road, assholes!".
Posted by RT1941
Member since May 2007
32115 posts
Posted on 5/28/26 at 1:14 pm to
quote:

How do you know that the big protests are being "paid for"????

Take random Wednesday from 10am-4pm in a random city and hundreds of working age individuals are out marching and demonstrating for a myriad of causes. Are they taking vacation time off from their job?

Hell, it's a Saturday in March and they are beating the streets demonstrating. Do they seriously have nothing better to do during the height of college sports during March Madness?

These loons are getting paid.
Posted by TBoy
Kalamazoo
Member since Dec 2007
28632 posts
Posted on 5/28/26 at 1:14 pm to
quote:

My biggest problem is that when a "protest" involves blocking public streets, destroying property, interfering with law enforcement activities, etc. it is no longer a protest.

Those actions are already illegal and are not protected. They fall into the category of "civil disobedience" and often lead to arrest. Historically people who engage in civil disobedience are volunteering to be arrested, so they have no ground to complain if that is what happens.
Posted by DeafVallyBatnR
Member since Sep 2004
18932 posts
Posted on 5/28/26 at 1:18 pm to
I think these paid for protest need to have consequences for the person paying for the violence towards anyone.
Posted by Hennigan
Member since Jan 2020
1413 posts
Posted on 5/28/26 at 1:20 pm to
Lol...giving up constitutional rights is insane.

I would rather our rights be restored / recognized: right of freedom to assembly / 2nd A / etc.
This post was edited on 5/28/26 at 1:22 pm
Posted by CubsFanBudMan
Member since Jul 2008
6158 posts
Posted on 5/28/26 at 1:27 pm to
If your employer organizes a bus to take you and other employees to the capital to either protest or sit in on hearings that directly impact your job, do you consider that being paid to protest?

A company that I previously worked for did that and did not require anyone to use PTO.
Posted by dickkellog
little rock
Member since Dec 2024
3009 posts
Posted on 5/28/26 at 1:29 pm to
what these idiots are doing isn't protected by the first amendment it's being allowed to happen by local governments who need to immediately lose all federal funding
Posted by Reagan80
Earth
Member since Feb 2023
2340 posts
Posted on 5/28/26 at 1:46 pm to
No, that's not a good solution. Go after the funding and dry that up and the protesters will go away. Taking away a right is not the way forward.
Posted by deltaland
Member since Mar 2011
102909 posts
Posted on 5/28/26 at 1:55 pm to
No but it should be law that it has to be publicly announced that a protest is being paid and organized and that the person or people funding it are responsible for damages if it gets non peaceful
Posted by SantaFe
Baton Rouge
Member since Apr 2019
7877 posts
Posted on 5/28/26 at 2:01 pm to
Paid protestors should be required to have some type of business license in

order to operate and be a member of the Actor's Guild.

If caught without a license then 90 days in the hole.
Posted by FooManChoo
Member since Dec 2012
46912 posts
Posted on 5/28/26 at 2:02 pm to
I would like to see additional changes to the 1st amendment to prioritize Christianity and acknowledge Jesus Christ as King of kings and Lord of lords.
Posted by deltadummy
Member since Mar 2025
2608 posts
Posted on 5/28/26 at 2:07 pm to
Here's the King's foot, boy. Get to licking it.

first pageprev pagePage 2 of 3Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on X, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookXInstagram