White Man Exercising Free Speech Rights is Assaulted by Black Man

Nordberg said:
Not quite. When someone is verbally abusive and blatantly insulting and racist and will not quit. He will find someone who will get offended enough to stop him. That appears to be what he was after. Again. a black person helped him up and he verbally abused that person too. We know whose fault this is.
Click to expand...

Yes quite.

Physical assault over verbal provocation only is always a crime.
Everybody wants to hit an asshole that he thinks he can handle.
Do it, however, and you get arrested, sued, or both.

We may know whose fault it is, I agree, but that's irrelevant.
 
hvilleherb said:
The punch knocked the white man back and left him dangling over the edge of the platform above the train tracks.

It appears he gets hit again twice by the same man. With the punches, the white man was knocked into the pit, next to the tracks as the crowd erupts into screams.

https://chicago.suntimes.com/news/commuter-punches-man-used-n-word-blue-line-spat/
Click to expand...

His free speech wasn't violated. He wasn't arrested, he got his ass beat. Because he was yelling racial slurs at a big black guy. Common sense dictates you probably shouldn't do that. Freedom of speech protects you from the government, not from the social consequences of that speech.
 
NiftyNiblick said:
Banjofuck reminds me of my seventh grade teacher.

The annoying broad had cramps for four weeks each month.
Click to expand...

Black boy in the video reminds of the typical black coward. Wait until someone turns their back then sucker punches from behind because he's afraid to look someone in the eye.
 
TrippyHippy said:
His free speech wasn't violated. He wasn't arrested, he got his ass beat. Because he was yelling racial slurs at a big black guy. Common sense dictates you probably shouldn't do that. Freedom of speech protects you from the government, not from the social consequences of that speech.
Click to expand...

He got suckered punched from a fat ass black coward too gutless to look him in the eye.
 
CFM said:
He got suckered punched from a fat ass black coward too gutless to look him in the eye.
Click to expand...

Be that as it may, doesn't change the fact that hurling insults at somebody and getting hit for it does not count as a violation of free speech. If you provoke and get a reaction, you have no right to complain about the reaction.
 
TrippyHippy said:
Be that as it may, doesn't change the fact that hurling insults at somebody and getting hit for it does not count as a violation of free speech. If you provoke and get a reaction, you have no right to complain about the reaction.
Click to expand...

So you're OK with sucker punching rather than being a man and looking the person in the eye? Interesting.
 
CFM said:
So you're OK with sucker punching rather than being a man and looking the person in the eye? Interesting.
Click to expand...

I don't recall saying that. I said, be that as it may. Acknowledging what you said. However, the fighting technique used is rather inconsequential to the bigger picture here.
 
CFM said:
It’s about when you do something you shouldn’t have done because you think you can do whatever you want whenever you want and they teach you a life lesson.
Click to expand...

right, because YOU don't believe in rights, only permissions that government grants you................and if one ignores government over the constiutiton, they should be executed. as i said, you prefer government execution squads over liberty.
 
TrippyHippy said:
His free speech wasn't violated. He wasn't arrested, he got his ass beat. Because he was yelling racial slurs at a big black guy. Common sense dictates you probably shouldn't do that. Freedom of speech protects you from the government, not from the social consequences of that speech.
Click to expand...

don't laws prohibiting assault and battery protect us from other people, regardless of speech?
 
TrippyHippy said:
I don't recall saying that. I said, be that as it may. Acknowledging what you said. However, the fighting technique used is rather inconsequential to the bigger picture here.
Click to expand...

The techniques is the big picture. There's quit a difference between whipping someone's ass when they have a chance to fight back and claiming sucker punching when the person's back is turned is the same thing.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
right, because YOU don't believe in rights, only permissions that government grants you................and if one ignores government over the constiutiton, they should be executed. as i said, you prefer government execution squads over liberty.
Click to expand...

You don't have the right to do whatever you want whenever you want to do it. That's anarchy and the Constitution didn't create such a system.
 
CFM said:
The techniques is the big picture. There's quit a difference between whipping someone's ass when they have a chance to fight back and claiming sucker punching when the person's back is turned is the same thing.
Click to expand...

The big picture is a fundamental misunderstanding of constitutional rights. The fighting technique used in one incident is semantics.
 
TrippyHippy said:
The big picture is a fundamental misunderstanding of constitutional rights. The fighting technique used in one incident is semantics.
Click to expand...

I'm not the one claiming his right to free speech was violated. It wasn't. He spoke and a cowardly POS waited until he turned his back before sucker punching him instead of being a man and looking him in the eye.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
don't laws prohibiting assault and battery protect us from other people, regardless of speech?
Click to expand...

I never said he didn't violate the law by assaulting him, now did I? I was making a simple point about the common misconception that getting hit for being an asshole is a violation of free speech. That's not a defense of the other guy.
 
CFM said:
I'm not the one claiming his right to free speech was violated. It wasn't.
Click to expand...

And my original reply wasn't to you............for the record.

He spoke and a cowardly POS waited until he turned his back before sucker punching him instead of being a man and looking him in the eye.
Click to expand...

Ok? You've said that about five times already. Not one of those times did I disagree with you. Sometimes I think you argue just for the sake of arguing.
 
TrippyHippy said:
And my original reply wasn't to you............for the record.



Ok? You've said that about five times already. Not one of those times did I disagree with you. Sometimes I think you argue just for the sake of arguing.
Click to expand...

Sure you did. You deflected from the topic of what you admit I was discussing and began talking about rights.
 
CFM said:
You don't have the right to do whatever you want whenever you want to do it. That's anarchy and the Constitution didn't create such a system.
Click to expand...

that is tyranny, not anarchy. the constitution created a system where everyone had the right to do what they wanted as long as it didn't infringe or encroach on the rights of others. your system is one of tyranny and oppression.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
that is tyranny, not anarchy. the constitution created a system where everyone had the right to do what they wanted as long as it didn't infringe or encroach on the rights of others. your system is one of tyranny and oppression.
Click to expand...

What you support is anarchy. It isn't tyrannical to tell you no. It is the sign of a spoiled brat to expect the answer to everything you want to be yes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top