Before the truth gets its shoes on
The CT police say they may arrest anyone who spread false information about the school shooting. Well, here’s a good place to start. Book ’em.
6 Responses to “Before the truth gets its shoes on”
Remember, I do this to entertain me, not you.
Uncle Pays the Bills
 |
|
Find Local
|
Categories
- ATF (769)
- Death Match (10)
- Eminent Domain (225)
- In the bag (9)
- Notes to Junior (546)
- Poker (74)
- Recipes (142)
- Shotgun Noob (11)
- The Airing of Grievances (19)
- uncategorized (47,725)
December 17th, 2012 at 3:38 pm
The 1st Amendment gives us freedom of speech even if that speech is incorrect. I guess the guy that was saying that the shooter came from the planet Krypton is in trouble now.
December 17th, 2012 at 4:08 pm
Bob, if you read the article they have a point. They are looking for people who were pretending to be the police, the murder, etc. on social media sites spreading false information, not people who just got things wrong.
December 17th, 2012 at 5:06 pm
Looks like those journalism licenses are just around the corner? I almost posted this on the next thread up, but it seems like it belongs almost anywhere right now: I thought I’d seen some blown stories, but this one has so much 180-degrees-out disinformation, it almost has to be somebody’s strategy. For instance:
The piece here about the rifle staying in the car was based on a news report. An hour or two after the posting here, it turned out to be the shotgun that stayed in the car, and all the shooting was with the rifle. Nobody’s that stupid, even in journalism. They’re messing with you.
Meanwhile the main stroke of the opposition (Fire Bad!), doesn’t require any fine points of fact at all to gain whatever traction it has, giving the caring left That Special Feeling that they live for.
The first amendment is subject to valid limitations (actually moreso than the second), and especially in relation to public pronouncements. I suspect we’re drawing some pretty serious “fire in a crowded theater,” so to speak. Nothing concerning the media and its “ancillaries” can surprise me anymore.
December 17th, 2012 at 8:31 pm
Journalism licenses? Why, journalism is too important to be subject to licensing! The First Amendment is too sacred to be soiled by the issuance of dirty licenses, as if reporters were mere dogs to be made to wear license tags on their collars!
On the other hand, every gun owner must be licensed, fingerprinted, photographed, investigated and background checked, and then arrested and sent to jail if they don’t have their FOID card on them, because the Second Amendment is nothing more than a ridiculous and meaningless myth.
That’s the media’s story and they’re sticking to it.
December 18th, 2012 at 4:37 am
People:
Just embrace the assumption that every single member of the mainstream media is a bloody-minded,lying sackfull of rancid fuck sauce, and you won’t be rudely surprised again.
And until American citizens LITERALLY start beating the screaming daylights out of these vermin EVERY SINGLE TIME they tell a lie, the American citizens are going to continue to be fire-hosed with lies, half-truths, distorted information, and utter nonsense.
Here ends the lesson.
December 18th, 2012 at 4:44 am
The first amendment is subject to valid limitations (actually moreso than the second), and especially in relation to public pronouncements. I suspect we’re drawing some pretty serious “fire in a crowded theater,” so to speak
Both Amendments are self-limited, in that they do not extend to protect behaviours that would violate rights (there can be no “right” to violate rights, so the Amendments are properly seen as logically self-limiting). The First Amendment doesn’t protect fraudulent speech (e.g. false advertising) and the Second Amendment doesn’t protect shooting people.
As far as the “shouting fire in a theater” bit, you might want to check out the source and history of that particular quote: Three Generations of a Hackneyed Apologia for Censorship Are Enough