Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

Liberals need to stop messing with the First Amendment

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    Originally posted by Jedidiah View Post
    How many have the leftists killed?
    Sources disagree. Here's the most complete count I've seen, from a somewhat conservative source. https://www.cato.org/blog/terrorism-...sville-anomaly. Many more publicized sources don't include leftists. Here's their total:

    Islamist 3085
    Right 219
    Left 23

    Note that almost all the Islamic extremist deaths are from 9/11. That should certainly be counted, but we should beware of letting one event dominate the assessment. Without 9/11, the Islamist number would be 102. A lot of data in the press is "since 9/11." This data is the last 25 years, i.e. since 1992.

    If you count injuries rather than death, the numbers are similar:

    Islamist 16365
    Right 998
    Left 46

    However no two analysts count things the same way. This count excludes religious and racial attacks. For data on that see https://ucr.fbi.gov/hate-crime/2015/.../victims_final. The largest victims there have generally been blacks, Jews, and gays, all of them traditional right-wing targets.

    According to this article, https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/01/o...l?mcubz=0&_r=0, the FBI believes hate crimes are underreported. Their annual report typically shows around 5000. They think the real number is more like 260,000. This is baed on a survey from the Bureau of Justice Statistics, asking people whether they've been the target of a hate crime. (https://www.economist.com/news/unite...crime-election)

    These articles discuss the problems faced by trying to get recent data: https://qz.com/843834/are-hate-crime...e-to-the-data/. http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/05/health...fbi/index.html. Both show some signs of recent increases in attacks on Muslims, though attacks on Jews continue far more numerous.
    Last edited by hedrick; 08-19-2017, 05:34 AM.

    Comment


    • #62
      Originally posted by hedrick View Post
      Sources disagree. Here's the most complete count I've seen, from a somewhat conservative source. https://www.cato.org/blog/terrorism-...sville-anomaly. Many more publicized sources don't include leftists. Here's their total:

      Islamist 3085
      Right 219
      Left 23

      Note that almost all the Islamic extremist deaths are from 9/11. That should certainly be counted, but we should beware of letting one event dominate the assessment. Without 9/11, the Islamist number would be 102. A lot of data in the press is "since 9/11." This data is the last 25 years, i.e. since 1992.
      It's worth bearing in mind how tiny these numbers essentially are. There are about 2.6 million deaths in the US per year.

      Here's a chart of the breakdown of major causes of deaths in the US (only some of the largest sub-categories within each category are shown):



      The numbers hedrick gave for terrorist related deaths over the last 25 years, mean that terrorism of all kinds accounts for ~0.0051% of deaths in the US. That number is so tiny it's 500x too small to feature on the above chart. Even if we consider sub-causes of death-by-homicide (itself one of the smallest categories listed), terrorism only accounts for ~0.8% of homicides.

      From a public policy perspective of trying to help Americans live longer in general, it's not even worth talking about terrorism, it's simply so irrelevant and insignificant. Any sort of minor changes to general healthcare, fitness, or diet in the country will be literally thousands of times more impactful with regard to death rates than any kind of anti-terrorism policies. It's bizarre that people waste so much time panicking about terrorism and dreaming up absurd policies to try and stop it.
      "I hate him passionately", he's "a demonic force" - Tucker Carlson, in private, on Donald Trump
      "Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism" - George Orwell
      "[Capitalism] as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of evils. I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy" - Albert Einstein

      Comment


      • #63
        Originally posted by Starlight View Post
        The numbers hedrick gave for terrorist related deaths over the last 25 years, mean that terrorism of all kinds accounts for ~0.0051% of deaths in the US. That number is so tiny it's 500x too small to feature on the above chart.
        I agree. When a group of white nationalists come to town to demonstrate, my primary concern is not the small probability of getting killed. My response was to a thread of discussion started by people trying to characterize Black Lives Matter as a violent group.

        I think BLM has a valid point. Of course people other than blacks get killed by police as well, but blacks seem particularly prone to problems with police. The correct response is not "don't try to stop a black person" but what a number of people are suggesting: independent investigations of deaths by police and of police, much as there are now independent reviews of plane crashes, building collapses and (often) people who die on the operating table. I don't think most police officers intend to harm black people, but I also think careful investigation is likely to lead to ways to reduce the number of deaths, of both civilians and police themselves.

        The relatively small impact of terrorism is also a concern for other reasons. The problem is not large enough to justify having the government inspecting all Internet traffic. "Terrorism" has become like "think of the children," a way to avoid concerns about the Constitutional rights.

        As I noted above, we have a tendency to react to single incidents or small numbers of incidents with "X's law," almost always a bad idea.
        Last edited by hedrick; 08-19-2017, 07:18 AM.

        Comment


        • #64
          Originally posted by hedrick View Post
          Sources disagree. Here's the most complete count I've seen, from a somewhat conservative source. https://www.cato.org/blog/terrorism-...sville-anomaly. Many more publicized sources don't include leftists. Here's their total:

          Islamist 3085
          Right 219
          Left 23

          Note that almost all the Islamic extremist deaths are from 9/11. That should certainly be counted, but we should beware of letting one event dominate the assessment. Without 9/11, the Islamist number would be 102. A lot of data in the press is "since 9/11." This data is the last 25 years, i.e. since 1992.

          If you count injuries rather than death, the numbers are similar:

          Islamist 16365
          Right 998
          Left 46

          However no two analysts count things the same way. This count excludes religious and racial attacks. For data on that see https://ucr.fbi.gov/hate-crime/2015/.../victims_final. The largest victims there have generally been blacks, Jews, and gays, all of them traditional right-wing targets.

          According to this article, https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/01/o...l?mcubz=0&_r=0, the FBI believes hate crimes are underreported. Their annual report typically shows around 5000. They think the real number is more like 260,000. This is baed on a survey from the Bureau of Justice Statistics, asking people whether they've been the target of a hate crime. (https://www.economist.com/news/unite...crime-election)

          These articles discuss the problems faced by trying to get recent data: https://qz.com/843834/are-hate-crime...e-to-the-data/. http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/05/health...fbi/index.html. Both show some signs of recent increases in attacks on Muslims, though attacks on Jews continue far more numerous.
          Is this just attacks in one country, or a small number of countries? I'm seeing things like 9,642 people killed this year in terrorist, and other Islam inspired attacks. So something tells me this is a very small sample size, or certain attacks are being left out for one reason or another.

          Comment


          • #65
            Originally posted by Cerebrum123 View Post
            Is this just attacks in one country, or a small number of countries? I'm seeing things like 9,642 people killed this year in terrorist, and other Islam inspired attacks. So something tells me this is a very small sample size, or certain attacks are being left out for one reason or another.
            This is the US, over the last 25 years. This wasn't originally a discussion of Islamic terrorism, but of things happening in the US. The first amendment is a US thing. The OP seemed to be implying that liberals would favor eliminating or restricting the first amendment. I certainly do not. I'd also like to get rid of private speech codes in a number of situations. Google's recent firing of someone over an unpopular view seriously reduces my opinion of Google. I wouldn't want to work in a place that does that.

            One thing I've noticed as that as interactions become more online, they become (1) subject to more easy monitoring, (2) subject to private policies on what you can say. I'm concerned that over time the first amendment is going to become less and less relevant. Note that no one has suggested prosecuting white nationalist demonstrators. Instead they've been trying to get them fired. It seems to be succeeding in some cases. This isn't a first amendment issue, unfortunately.

            It's not just politics. Many Christian web sites don't permit full discussion of liberal theology. Sure you can start your own web site, but what good does that do? Most ISPs claim to the right to take actions against subscribers that use their service to send offensive content. Maybe I could create my own web site, but I probably can't create my own ISP.

            Conservatives are clearly under attack at times. But in other contexts liberals are. This needs to be not finger-pointing, but developing a concensus that free speech is important, and even private actors are expected to allow it.
            Last edited by hedrick; 08-19-2017, 08:31 AM.

            Comment


            • #66
              an example of UNPROTECTED speech:

              ‘I hope Trump is assassinated’: A Missouri lawmaker faces mounting calls to resign after Facebook comment

              A Missouri lawmaker is under mounting pressure to resign after she said on social media she hopes President Trump is assassinated, following his response to violence at a white supremacist rally in Charlottesville.

              Democratic state Sen. Maria Chappelle-Nadal went on her personal Facebook page Thursday morning to vent two days after the president blamed “both sides” for the brutality.

              “I put up a statement saying, ‘I really hate Trump. He’s causing trauma and nightmares.’ That was my original post,” she told the Kansas City Star. The Facebook post received many responses, Chappelle-Nadal said, and to one she replied, “I hope Trump is assassinated!
              https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.5ae6b5b782ac

              Comment


              • #67
                Originally posted by hedrick View Post
                Sources disagree. Here's the most complete count I've seen, from a somewhat conservative source. https://www.cato.org/blog/terrorism-...sville-anomaly. Many more publicized sources don't include leftists. Here's their total:

                Islamist 3085
                Right 219
                Left 23

                Note that almost all the Islamic extremist deaths are from 9/11. That should certainly be counted, but we should beware of letting one event dominate the assessment. Without 9/11, the Islamist number would be 102. A lot of data in the press is "since 9/11." This data is the last 25 years, i.e. since 1992.
                Wikipedia lists 4687 killed in Islamic terrorist attacks in 2001 alone. And even if you argue that we shouldn't for some reason include attacks in the Middle East or North Africa the 2002 attack in Bali killed 202 which is nearly double the number your source here provided of deaths since 9/11.

                And in Madrid back in 2004 another 192 were killed. In London in 2005 add another 53. In Mumbai, India in 2007 another 209 were killed. In Jaipur, India in 2007 80 more were killed. In 2008, again in Mumbai, India at least 166 more were killed. In Moscow in 2010 another 40 were killed. In 2011, again in Moscow we can add another 37. And on and on.

                And these were only some of the larger attacks outside the Middle East and North Africa but they alone total 979.

                I'm always still in trouble again

                "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
                "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                Comment


                • #68
                  Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                  an example of UNPROTECTED speech:

                  ‘I hope Trump is assassinated’: A Missouri lawmaker faces mounting calls to resign after Facebook comment

                  A Missouri lawmaker is under mounting pressure to resign after she said on social media she hopes President Trump is assassinated, following his response to violence at a white supremacist rally in Charlottesville.

                  Democratic state Sen. Maria Chappelle-Nadal went on her personal Facebook page Thursday morning to vent two days after the president blamed “both sides” for the brutality.

                  “I put up a statement saying, ‘I really hate Trump. He’s causing trauma and nightmares.’ That was my original post,” she told the Kansas City Star. The Facebook post received many responses, Chappelle-Nadal said, and to one she replied, “I hope Trump is assassinated!
                  https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.5ae6b5b782ac
                  I think this is a difference between the contempt that I hold for liberal politicians and the contempt that liberals hold for Trump...
                  When Jimmy, for example, accuses me of 'hating' Nancy Pelosi, there is nothing in my being that would want her injured or dead. I want her FIRED, but I don't want her harmed.
                  It appears liberals can't grasp that - Simply because you don't want somebody in office doesn't not mean you hate them. This woman, however, appears to operate on hate.
                  The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                    I think this is a difference between the contempt that I hold for liberal politicians and the contempt that liberals hold for Trump...
                    When Jimmy, for example, accuses me of 'hating' Nancy Pelosi, there is nothing in my being that would want her injured or dead. I want her FIRED, but I don't want her harmed.
                    It appears liberals can't grasp that - Simply because you don't want somebody in office doesn't not mean you hate them. This woman, however, appears to operate on hate.
                    yep. I didn't like Obama, but I would never wish him any harm. Or any one else. Heck I even prayed for Obama.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Originally posted by hedrick View Post
                      This is the US, over the last 25 years. This wasn't originally a discussion of Islamic terrorism, but of things happening in the US. The first amendment is a US thing. The OP seemed to be implying that liberals would favor eliminating or restricting the first amendment. I certainly do not. I'd also like to get rid of private speech codes in a number of situations. Google's recent firing of someone over an unpopular view seriously reduces my opinion of Google. I wouldn't want to work in a place that does that.

                      One thing I've noticed as that as interactions become more online, they become (1) subject to more easy monitoring, (2) subject to private policies on what you can say. I'm concerned that over time the first amendment is going to become less and less relevant. Note that no one has suggested prosecuting white nationalist demonstrators. Instead they've been trying to get them fired. It seems to be succeeding in some cases. This isn't a first amendment issue, unfortunately.

                      It's not just politics. Many Christian web sites don't permit full discussion of liberal theology. Sure you can start your own web site, but what good does that do? Most ISPs claim to the right to take actions against subscribers that use their service to send offensive content. Maybe I could create my own web site, but I probably can't create my own ISP.

                      Conservatives are clearly under attack at times. But in other contexts liberals are. This needs to be not finger-pointing, but developing a concensus that free speech is important, and even private actors are expected to allow it.
                      I think it's a bad idea to count only terrorist attacks in a single, well defended country that spends a LOT of money and effort to neutralize such attacks when discussing how dangerous said terrorism actually is. You didn't draw too much of a conclusion from what you cited, but Starlight seems to think that Islamic terrorism isn't a real threat based on those numbers. The amount of attacks have been on the rise from my understanding, and are easily traced to the teachings of Islam's founder Mohammed. Even if you dismiss the Sahih Hadith you can still find a LOT of Muslim supremacist statements, as well as commands to conquer all non-Muslims. When such teachings are not only spreading, but being defended/ignored* by many of the countries being attacked, you can only expect the situation to get worse.

                      Did you know that TWeb was started because of a different website that didn't allow much freedom when it came to discussion? I'm not sure where, but I have seen people here often talk about "the other location", and how restrictive they were. If things got too bad with ISP's limiting speech, then I think people would either need to find a way to hide their servers, or like you said start a new ISP. With the near monopoly my current ISP has in my area, I don't expect the latter to happen. Although, given how more and more people seem to want to remain anonymous on the internet, someone might come along and do just that.

                      *Defended in that Islam is often defended as "the religion of peace", while the blatant commands for violence and bloodshed are swept under the rug.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                        It appears liberals can't grasp that - Simply because you don't want somebody in office doesn't not mean you hate them. This woman, however, appears to operate on hate.
                        You're being unfair. I'm a liberal, and I don't want anyone to die. There are deadly conservatives as well, as the data above shows. Fortunately, both liberal and conservatives are only *very* rarely serious about killing their opponents.

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          CP, I don't think that's particularly fair. Ted Nugent publicly called for the death of Obama but I'm not extrapolating from that that all conservatives support violence (even though the current President chose to host Nugent at the WH!)
                          "I am not angered that the Moral Majority boys campaign against abortion. I am angry when the same men who say, "Save OUR children" bellow "Build more and bigger bombers." That's right! Blast the children in other nations into eternity, or limbless misery as they lay crippled from "OUR" bombers! This does not jell." - Leonard Ravenhill

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Originally posted by KingsGambit View Post
                            CP, I don't think that's particularly fair. Ted Nugent publicly called for the death of Obama but I'm not extrapolating from that that all conservatives support violence (even though the current President chose to host Nugent at the WH!)
                            Originally posted by hedrick View Post
                            You're being unfair. I'm a liberal, and I don't want anyone to die. There are deadly conservatives as well, as the data above shows. Fortunately, both liberal and conservatives are only *very* rarely serious about killing their opponents.
                            Fair enough. I should have said "some liberals" - and I gave the specific example by citing "this woman".
                            The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Meanwhile, just out of curiosity, I googled "liberals calling for the death of conservatives", and I can't link to the site because there are so many F bombs in the citations. TBF, I haven't yet googled the inverse.

                              Gotta go to a coffee shop and pretend to be interested in the music of a young man I am encouraging.
                              The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Just for fun I googled "conservatives calling for the death of liberals." The very first result was, liberals calling for the death of conservatives.
                                Micah 6:8 He has told you, O man, what is good; and what does the LORD require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by little_monkey, 03-27-2024, 04:19 PM
                                16 responses
                                159 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post One Bad Pig  
                                Started by whag, 03-26-2024, 04:38 PM
                                53 responses
                                400 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Mountain Man  
                                Started by rogue06, 03-26-2024, 11:45 AM
                                25 responses
                                114 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post rogue06
                                by rogue06
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 09:21 AM
                                33 responses
                                198 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Roy
                                by Roy
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 08:34 AM
                                84 responses
                                373 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post JimL
                                by JimL
                                 
                                Working...
                                X