1
LauriThorne 1 point ago +1 / -0

That's what makes him unhinged, dude's so mad about something that he's being tricked into advocating for the stance the people he's mad at have.

Or did he forget when they tried to tell everyone that they get to look at leaked documents but it's illegal when we do it? They lied, and apparently he believed them.

1
LauriThorne 1 point ago +1 / -0

Dudes unhinged, so much so he's advocating for what the journos want. They want to be a separate class of people who get more rights and he unknowingly wants to give it to them

0
LauriThorne 0 points ago +1 / -1

No I'm not, but you won't listen because you're an authoritarian buffoon.

Freedom of the press refers to the act of publishing, not some class of people. It always has in American law. Journalists are protected by each other and the same right we are. Removing that right means we would only have state run and approved news orgs and they would just arrest Alex Jones instead of suing him to death, which is an abuse of the courts and should not have happened.

But saying we should remove a right over that is cutting your nose to spite your face.

You reaaaaally avoid addressing why this logic, once applied the way your stupid, commie ass wants it to be, wouldn't immediately be applied to gun rights.

I can see it now, GuN OwnErShIp IsNt a RiGhT ItS ProTeCtiNg A claSS of PeOPlE

0
LauriThorne 0 points ago +1 / -1

Oh look the authoritarian's inability to understand a point comes to the fore.

If you can't distinguish between defending against your asinine desire to remove a fundamental right and defending people who abuse said right to do bad things, then you're the perfect tool for the communist take over.

Does your head hurt from the cognitive dissonance when you don't apply this exact same logic to gun rights?

0
LauriThorne 0 points ago +1 / -1

Where, what's the law that sets them apart?

Also, the solution to a right being denied to some people in some places is not to deny it to everyone everywhere you dunce.

1
LauriThorne 1 point ago +2 / -1

What Supreme Court precedent treated "the press" as a class? Name the case. Not how the current administration treats them, or how social media companies treat them, actual precedent that says I'm wrong.

Here's a hint, you can't. In fact, the Trump administration kicked certain pressies out of the conferences. No special treatment there right?

1
LauriThorne 1 point ago +2 / -1

Except it is the interpretation used you buffoon. SCOTUS constantly interprets "the press" as an act and not a group of people.

Stop thinking that authoritarianism can be solved with more authoritarianism that benefits you in the short term you weirdo.

1
LauriThorne 1 point ago +2 / -1

They're not you fucking dunce. "The press" weren't a class at the time, it was referring to the act of publishing news. That right has been broadly interpreted, and applies to literally everyone here. You do not want to remove that right and make it so all of those people are enshrined as the only people who can publish news, because thats what would happen.

1
LauriThorne 1 point ago +2 / -1

Who said a thing about not questioning them? Stay on topic.

This is a conversation about how you want to remove a right because bad actors are using that right to do bad things. That's commie thinking. Commies use this exact logic to push gun control.

The freedom of the press is what gives you the right to publish shit counter to their bullshit.

1
LauriThorne 1 point ago +2 / -1

It is not, the fact that you want to curtail freedom because of bad actors is commie thinking. You're saying the exact same shit they're saying, thinking it would be used against them and not us you absolute fucking buffoon.

1
LauriThorne 1 point ago +2 / -1

Literally no you wouldn't. Have any of the people on the internet that doxxed and blackmailed by internet randos have those internet randos arrested?

People do shit they do all the time, the only "protections" they get are from each other not from the law.

10
LauriThorne 10 points ago +11 / -1

They don't. Freedom of the press refers to the creation of news, not some class of people. They don't have any extra protection legally America has incredibly lax libel and slander laws.

The "extra protection" comes from other journos not relentlessly attacking people like this.

Don't talk like a commie.

5
LauriThorne 5 points ago +5 / -0

That's the through plot of the original Rainbow Six book and that shit launched a huge franchise.

Too bad these people can only read at a fifth grade level.

1
LauriThorne 1 point ago +1 / -0

Most companies have started running that way. I used to work for a biotech company and the way they ran it is every step of the process was performed by a separate lab and each lab "sold" product to the next one in line. Supposedly that was to track costs more efficiently, but it just gave the higher ups excuses on why they got to treat the initial departments worse than the finish product departments, you cost us money, but don't bring any in.

Internal billing is stupid, and was made up so accounting could get lazy.

8
LauriThorne 8 points ago +8 / -0

Some jobs take about 3 hours, too bad that there's only one guy allowed to do it and he's booked with 3 hour jobs for the next 3 weeks.

18
LauriThorne 18 points ago +18 / -0

Jesus preached love and that means just letting people sin

money changers in the temple

Remember, when someone asks WWJD, making a whip, flipping some tables and chasing away sinners isn't necessarily off the table.

1
LauriThorne 1 point ago +1 / -0

I guess he either thinks he's going to forum slide us, or that we'd all get banned for mocking him or something.

3
LauriThorne 3 points ago +3 / -0

Stop replying to yourself, literally no one is fooled you fuckin regressive streetshitter.

Who is paying for this shit? Because they're not getting their money's worth.

9
LauriThorne 9 points ago +9 / -0

Gun control is stupid, but your point isn't a good argument against it. Saying "this thing is worse, therefore guns should be legal" doesn't work on anyone who doesn't agree with you. The response is "you're right, let's regulate all of those things too"

Gun rights center around defending yourself against the government and anyone else who would attack you. A bomb isn't a good way to stop that rapist or mugger and bombs can't patrol your neighborhood to secure the homestead.

14
LauriThorne 14 points ago +14 / -0

It's never been illegal to manufacture your own weapons. Serialization and licensing is only required if you intend to make a profit on them.

If you just want to 3D print a glock frame for your own use or as a gift for someone go ahead. Just don't sell it for a profit.

view more: ‹ Prev Next ›