Baitball Blogger (26,333 posts)
Should we revoke the voting rights from those who are active in HATE groups
that are responsible for domestic terrorism?
Orrex (55,636 posts)
1. Revoke their citizenship and deport them.
Baitball Blogger (26,333 posts)
41. Our one saving grace is that it seems like politicians and public officials are
opposed to Trump's weak stance. That's probably because they're the ones that have to enforce law and order. And it just appears to me that we have the moral high ground on this one.
Baitball Blogger (26,333 posts)
15. We'll see if this escalates under Trump's leadership.
If it does, I am all for expediting due process. Justice delayed is justice denied.
Sentence first, verdict later.
WinkyDink (49,266 posts)
8. Sure! Why not?! Maybe Dubya was right about the Constitution!
Maybe it IS just "a *******ed piece of paper"!
A lie fabricated by a LW blogger.
BainsBane (42,595 posts)
19. Rather than coming up with ways to violate the First Amendment
How about people reflect on what they can do to stop making excuses for these people, to stop pretending they are just misunderstood, that they aren't really racist but care about TPP and corporatism? Seems to me if people did more of that, we might not have a White Supremacist in the White House to begin with.
These are the people we were told we needed to reach out to. Think on that a bit. How about we all think about what we may have said and done to minimize racism in an effort to promote a political agenda or faction?
^ when you're too old and saggy to work topless
yardwork (44,807 posts)
52. We need people to vote for Democrats.
Too many people allowed Trump to be elected because they "didn't feel inspired by" the Democratic nominee.
Now those same folks are horrified that Nazis feel empowered by the president who openly espoused their ideology during his campaign. The solution to this problem is not to abandon our Constitution.
Get out the vote.
Remember when the LW condemned Bush for his "if you're not with us, you're with the terrorists" rhetoric while the WTC was still smoldering?
Lefty doesn't.
NurseJackie (13,969 posts)
20. Define "active". Are you referring only to those who perpetrate the "domestic terrorism"? Or...
... does it also include "dues paying" members who are "active in the hate group" but who are content to sit-at-home and read the newsletter, fly the flag, wear the t-shirt, and emblazon the bumper sticker?
What level of "activity" would qualify someone to forfeit their rights?
Who decides?
Baitball Blogger (26,333 posts)
24. Active: Holding tiki torches to shout hate speech, kicking people who are on the ground,
arriving with the intention to create physical damage.
"holding tiki torches, shouting hate speech"
Just get your gun Lefty and let's do this.
NurseJackie (13,969 posts)
30. You're being very vague. Please explain: at what point do they lose their rights? Is it...
... when they arrive wearing a particular style of clothing? Or...
... because they held tiki torches and chanted? Or...
... because a designated mind-reader has determined that they have evil intentions? Or...
... is it when they're arrested for actually perpetrating violent and destructive acts?
And even then, what about due process?
How does this fit-in with our nation's constitutional protections, and how do we guarantee that these tactics won't be used against groups (and individuals) with which (and with whom) we agree?
I get the anger and rage that you're feeling and expressing. I'm sure it's a satisfying fantasy, but your proposed solution doesn't really fit well with our established laws and constitutional protections. It's an impulsive reaction that I'd expect from Cersei Lannister.
When the idiot scrunt NJ is your voice of reason you've gone wa-a-a-at too far.
Baitball Blogger (26,333 posts)
37. I think we are now at the level of this discussion where the only option is to
get them to the point of conviction, where, as a convicted felon, they lose their voting rights.
To add to that, I believe the benchmark for what qualifies as "active" will be in direct proportion to the potential future escalation of frequency and violence.
In other words, if Trump's veiled support of these groups embolden them and their mission becomes more violent, I forsee that they will be actively sought out based on the street photographs that prove they were there when the violence began.
NotASurfer (118 posts)
22. After adding the words "convicted felon" to their police record
Yes.
Odds that the Feds will treat these groups like the interstate crime syndicates they are ain't great without regime change.
So regime change is the first order of business.
Then we run people for office at every level who pledge to make "convicted felon" happen
You and what Army?
Baitball Blogger (26,333 posts)
26. Agree.
The one thing I would like to see is a much swifter process to get them to "convicted felon" status.
roamer65 (12,342 posts)
35. I do think they need to be identified and tracked.
They are no different than foreign agents.
They are enemies of the American republic.
Proud Liberal Dem (15,920 posts)
45. Makes a lot more sense
than refusing to allow people whom are felons from voting (or having to jump through a zillion hoops to "get their rights back" ).
So, to recap:
1. overthrow the duly elected government
2. institute domestic spying
3. arrest dissenters
4. circumvent civil liberties to ensure conviction and sentencing
Thank Kek for the 2nd Amendment.
https://www.democraticunderground.com/10029458113
