Dem Protestors
The 1st Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America grants freedom of worship, speech & press, the right to petition the government & to assemble peaceably. Specifically with regard to "peaceably assemble" it states: Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech, ... or the right of the people to peaceable assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. Incredibly important part of the Bill of Rights and our freedom. But, a key word in this amendment is one that we have let get away from us in the past 50 years is "peaceably". George Washington had to put down the "Whiskey Rebellion" in the first 2 years of his first term which served to secure the issue of a "peaceable" redress of grievances. For us today, relaxing of this principle "peaceful assembly" started with union strikes and activism in the 1930s and came to be part of our culture during the extensive protests of the 1960s. We need to re-establish this principle in our culture. Anytime you are part of a protest you should expect that if it turns from peaceful to disrupting commerce, disturbing the peace or violence, you and your associates may be arrested and that it may not be a pleasant experience. To let the protests we see today continue like OWS and the union gangs in Wisconsin is to invite insurrection. And, then to have them be celebrated by everyone from media and entertainment personalities, to politicians, to the President, we might as well send an engraved invitation to the revolution. Recognizing the groups of "professional protestors" that exist today around the world it is even more important to make sure that our citizens have the right to be heard without the noise and violence of the professional "agitator" who is out to further their own agenda, not the best interest of America. The same can be said about the political partisanship described under 2012/2014 Elections which serves to enable such behavior.
Archive Related Items

What Would You Have Him Do?

7/21/20
from The Gray Area:
7/21/20:

President Trump is getting media and Democrat criticism about trying to put down violent protests, riots and city takeovers around the country. He said yesterday he would be doing what he thinks is necessary to curb the violence in are major cities.

The media and the left complain this is what dictators do, assaulting peaceful protestors. The right says these are anything but peaceful protestors. They launch fireworks at law enforcement, use laser pointers at their eyes, thrown fecal matter, assault officers (one with a hammer), are armed with rifles, tasers, slingshots and sledgehammers, have committed multiple acts of arson, and daily graffiti and property damage. And while this continues, we don't see as much of the carnage on TV as we did a month ago. Ever wonder why? If it was peaceful, wouldn't the media continue to show and applaud them? If they are violent, do Americans want to see violent mobs controlling city streets? No. We talk about Portland, but only show the officers aggressive actions. What would you have him do? Ignore it? No. Leave it up to the local and state authorities? Yes. What if the local authorities don't do anything and it continues and grows worse? What then? There are those who say left the city and state leadership live and die with their decisions, don't bail them out. Because the violence hurts the citizens not the politicians, some say you cant do that. What would you have him do? Is it unconstitutional for a President to restore order in a lawless city? No. It is constitutional and expected by the citizenry. Early on, Americans supported 'George Floyd protests' in huge numbers. Polls ( which are always suspect), but these seem reasonable, now show most Americans do not like protests turned to violent riots or defunding the police. Is he a dictator for going in with force? Not necessarily. Does he want to take over & control the city? No. He just wants to help restore peace. Oh, and its a Presidential election year, so all of this is political. Democrat cities on fire, Republican incumbent President under fire. Do you still believe that Portland and other city protests are peaceful, justified and should be left alone? Probably not a realistic perspective. Do you believe the 'George Floyd protests' have turned to riots with violent elements taking over for a new cause? (See Seattle, Portland, Chicago, New York, etc). What would you have him do?

More From TPPF:



365 Days Page
Archive Related Items
Comment ( 0 )