I agree that the police did not handle the problem properly; they waited too long to try to control the situation. Contrast that with the way the Boston police took immediate control last weekend, or the way the Phoenix police acted last night to prevent any real violence from flaring.
"When it comes to the violence that BOTH sides engaged in, I have not, and am not, claiming that one side didn't engage in any violence; you however, seem to be bending over backwards to ignore reality and ignore the images you see yourself in video clips."
I'm doing no such thing. My opinion is that the violence started because of the presence and provocation of the hate groups. They were doing this supposedly to protest the removal of a statue, but if anyone believes this had anything to do with a statue I have a bridge they might be interested in buying. The hate groups were there for one reason - to preach their hatred. The counter-protesters were reacting to that. To say that both sides were responsible excuses the beliefs and tactics of the hate groups. That's why a lot of people across the political spectrum were upset with Trump's flip-flopping responses that suggested there was some moral equivalency here.
"I never asked directly, perhaps I should have. Mike, do you support the aim of such groups as Redneck Revolt, BLM, or several self proclaimed liberals and progressives who claim that certain speech (as in someone's exercise of free speech) should not be allowed or protected if people in such groups decide that they are offended, for themselves or on behalf of some other group?"
No. I condemn the principles and ideals of groups such as the KKK, the white supremacists of the alt-right, and the neo-Nazi movement. Their right to promote their beliefs does not outweigh my right to reject them, nor does it outweigh the rights of anyone who wants to protest against them. They can say whatever hateful stuff they want, but they can't demand that everyone sit quietly by and listen to it.
"They also have a 1st Amendment right to free speech, regardless of who disagrees with their right to do so. That is the issue that has been overlooked in nearly every discussion on this topic."
It's not being overlooked, it just doesn't apply - the 1st Amendment only applies to the government's control of free speech. The 1st Amendment clearly says "Congress shall make no law"; it says nothing about how the citizens must treat each other. As long as the government is not involved on one side or the other, there are no 1st Amendment rights between private citizens.
"Also, according to your own posts regarding their permit, they were the ones who were out of order considering they were not protesting in the areas THEY requested permits for."
NO ONE on either side was in the area they had a permit for when the fighting started - they were in the streets leading to the parks. Nobody had a permit to gather or march there.
"I tried the link you provided, for some reason it took me to the page then blocked it out. I was unable to read anything on the page. "
Could be because some of that site is by subscription only. Sorry. You can probably Google it if you're still interested. |
