[SpecialOlympian]

Lol your own article says they didn't start it. Unless you're lowering the bar for assault to "stands in someone's way."

I know you're posting on a text based forum but I don't think you can read.

[Pants-of-dog]

WRONG!

WRONG!

WRONG!

WRONG!

see you at the polls...

Great arguments. The best.

[Stormsmith]

This is a city which allows people to go to demonstrate at political rallies with bloody great rifles, and you think a court of law is going to find against a small group of people linking arms. Were there "KEEP OFF THE GRASS" signs preventing the white supremacists from walking around them?

[Buzz62]

Hey boys, the law is the law.
Blocking a person's path in a threatening manner is assault. Sorry you don't like it but...there's really nothing you can do about it.
And it does happen to be the initial confrontation between the 2 parties. Hence...they started the confrontation.
An idiot of a lawyer could successfully make such an argument.
As for "bloody great rifles"...so what's ur point? Maybe that the state, and even the whole country, should try adopting "real world" gun laws?
That I would be ALL for.

[Stormsmith]

I'm saying a rifle is damned sight more intimidating than people stood arm in arm. Why didn't the Nazis simply walk around them, instead try to bash through them by striking them with Shields? Why weren't the counterprotesters charged? Maybe the cops knew the charge, under these conditions, wouldn't hold up.

[SpecialOlympian]

How exactly do you assault someone when your arms are locked to the people next to you?

[Pants-of-dog]

Hey boys, the law is the law.
Blocking a person's path in a threatening manner is assault. Sorry you don't like it but...there's really nothing you can do about it.
And it does happen to be the initial confrontation between the 2 parties. Hence...they started the confrontation.
An idiot of a lawyer could successfully make such an argument.
As for "bloody great rifles"...so what's ur point? Maybe that the state, and even the whole country, should try adopting "real world" gun laws?
That I would be ALL for.

Here is the definition you cited:
http://www.plea.org/legal_resources/?a= ... at=8&pcat=

Let us note one thing about it before we look at it: it deals with the law in Saskatchewan. For our non-Canadian posters, that is one of our midwestern provinces that is easy to drawn and hard to spell. The law in Saskatchewan is not applicable in Charlottesville, Virginia.

Now, here is the law in Saskatchewan that you cited:

Assault
What is an Assault?
Many people believe that assault refers only to a violent physical attack. In fact, the word assault is used in law to describe a number of different actions with a wide range of seriousness.

Under the Criminal Code, an act can be considered an assault even if there is no actual physical contact. However, words alone cannot be an assault. There must also be a gesture or some other action that leads to harm or the threat of harm.

An assault can include any of the following acts...

intentionally applying force to a person, such as hitting, poking or shoving them

attempting to apply force to a person, whether or not actual contact is made

threatening with an act or gesture to apply force to another person, causing them to believe they are in danger

carrying a weapon, or what appears to be a weapon and blocking another person's way, accosting them or begging

The bolded phrase is your argument for why the counter protesters are guilty of assault.

Please note that blocking another person's way is only assault if the person is carrying a weapon or what appears to be a weapon. In Canada.

[Bulaba Khan Jones]

It's an interesting back-and-forth emotional rollercoaster ride for our pants-shitting Nazi apologists frantically trying to keep defending or denying whatever. One day it's all about conspiracy theories involving American society being controlled by the Jews and the media who are persecuting an innocent Nazi driver guy (or ones in which it was a false flag/staged event), and then other days it's about how it did happen and either he was justified in driving towards a group of people and slamming into them or he hit no one while hitting a lot of people and the person who was killed died as a result of unrelated other factors.

I'm really not surprised this retarded display of autism is still going on with these people.

[blackjack21]

I'm really not surprised this retarded display of autism is still going on with these people.

And so picking on the mentally handicapped is socially acceptable on the political left now?

It's an interesting back-and-forth emotional rollercoaster ride for our pants-shitting Nazi apologists frantically trying to keep defending or denying whatever.

The reality is that a lot of people don't care about a dead protester, because they don't like protesters. The whole story line is dumb. If people want to die protesting the protesters protesting the removal of a statue of Robert E. Lee, I suppose that's their choice. It just seems like another episode of dumb and dumber. I guess her parents didn't teach her to look both ways before crossing the street.

[Hindsite]

I'm saying a rifle is damned sight more intimidating than people stood arm in arm. Why didn't the Nazis simply walk around them, instead try to bash through them by striking them with Shields? Why weren't the counterprotesters charged? Maybe the cops knew the charge, under these conditions, wouldn't hold up.

Because they were attacked by the Antifa and BLM. in my opinion, the rifles were just an expression of support for the NRA and the second amendment. The Antifa with masks and clubs, mace, flame throwers, and shouting threats seemed more intimidating to me.

Maybe that the state, and even the whole country, should try adopting "real world" gun laws? That I would be ALL for.

I am a member of the NRA and in no way will I support taking any more of my second amendment rights away.

This is a city which allows people to go to demonstrate at political rallies with bloody great rifles, and you think a court of law is going to find against a small group of people linking arms. Were there "KEEP OFF THE GRASS" signs preventing the white supremacists from walking around them?

It would be nice if you would get your head out of your ass.

POD's a "special case" to me.
He's obsessed with racism, and the cause of the native people.
But during the Bush years, I sided with him and a number of these people here, to condemn Bush and to warn against wars and right-wing economics. He claims not to remember, but I don't believe him.

The problem now for me is, the Liberal agenda has gone off the proverbial deep end.
Where violence was deplorable, it now appears it may be the only way to save the culture of Europe.
Where ideas of racism and fascism have always been deplorable, the Liberal mind has decided to use violence to ostensibly oppose them. However, in their zeal, they cross the line of decency and have become the very dictatorial jack-asses, they used to oppose. They now sound childish and chaotic. Many have completely lost the capability to see past this fog of liberal-based moral superiority, and have come to reflect the very things they opposed not too long ago.

In short, "Misa Faulty, he go clazey!"
Manuel in Faulty Towers...

Go on, tell us what you really think. Praise the Lord. HalleluYah

[Buzz62]

Here is the definition you cited:
http://www.plea.org/legal_resources/?a= ... at=8&pcat=

Let us note one thing about it before we look at it: it deals with the law in Saskatchewan. For our non-Canadian posters, that is one of our midwestern provinces that is easy to drawn and hard to spell. The law in Saskatchewan is not applicable in Charlottesville, Virginia.

Now, here is the law in Saskatchewan that you cited:

Assault
What is an Assault?
Many people believe that assault refers only to a violent physical attack. In fact, the word assault is used in law to describe a number of different actions with a wide range of seriousness.

Under the Criminal Code, an act can be considered an assault even if there is no actual physical contact. However, words alone cannot be an assault. There must also be a gesture or some other action that leads to harm or the threat of harm.

An assault can include any of the following acts...

intentionally applying force to a person, such as hitting, poking or shoving them

attempting to apply force to a person, whether or not actual contact is made

threatening with an act or gesture to apply force to another person, causing them to believe they are in danger

carrying a weapon, or what appears to be a weapon and blocking another person's way, accosting them or begging

The bolded phrase is your argument for why the counter protesters are guilty of assault.

Please note that blocking another person's way is only assault if the person is carrying a weapon or what appears to be a weapon. In Canada.

And for those of you who simply don't care where Saskachewan is, here what constitutes assault in NC.

Assault and Battery in North Carolina

This article is a brief overview of the crimes of assault and battery.


ASSAULT

Assault is the unlawful touching of a person or an attempt to do so. To be charged with assault in North Carolina, it doesn’t even require physical contact. Putting someone in fear of physical harm is enough for assault charge or conviction. For example, when a defendant points a gun at someone and defendant thinks it is a joke but the victim has a fear of imminent harm, the defendant can be charged with assault. Even the raising of a hand as if about to hit someone can constitute an assault.

http://www.waypointlegal.com/index.php/ ... nd-battery

And to add insult to your injury...

You have a constitutionally protected right to engage in peaceful protest in “traditional public forums” such as streets, sidewalks or parks. But in some cases the government can impose restrictions on this kind of activity by requiring permits.

The government cannot impose permit restrictions or deny a permit simply because it does not like the message of a certain speaker or group.

Limitations on Action
Demonstrators who engage in civil disobedience – defined as non-violent unlawful action as a form of protest – are not protected under the First Amendment. People who engage in civil disobedience should be prepared to be arrested or fined as part of their protest activity.

If you endanger others while protesting, you can be arrested. A protest that blocks vehicular or pedestrian traffic is illegal without a permit.

You do not have the right to block a building entrance or physically harass people.

https://aclu-or.org/en/know-your-rights ... ht-protest

So ya...there's that too...

Oh by the by...have any of you fine twinkies heard the recounts by media people who were assaulted...by counter protestors?

Enjoy the mid-terms kids...

[Hindsite]

And for those of you who simply don't care where Saskachewan is, here what constitutes assault in NC.

http://www.waypointlegal.com/index.php/ ... nd-battery

And to add insult to your injury...


https://aclu-or.org/en/know-your-rights ... ht-protest

So ya...there's that too...

Oh by the by...have any of you fine twinkies heard the recounts by media people who were assaulted...by counter protestors?

Enjoy the mid-terms kids...

I know the police are not blind, but I don't know of any BLM or Antifa getting arrested for assault in accordance with that NC law. Also none of the anti- protesters were arrested for blocking the roadway for an extended period of time leading up to that intersection were the car crash occurred in accordance with that NC law. Something smells fishy. Where am I going wrong?

[Buzz62]

yer right. They seem to have gotten off scott-free.
That does not mean they didn't commit the illegal acts.
They most certainly did.
Hence...they "started" the confrontation which precipitated the death of Heather Heyer.

[Stormsmith]

Because they were attacked by the Antifa and BLM. in my opinion, the rifles were just an expression of support for the NRA and the second amendment. The Antifa with masks and clubs, mace, flame throwers, and shouting threats seemed more intimidating to me.

Antifa came in to the defence of the counterprotesters who were being mauled by the Nazis.

it wound be nice if you would get your head out of your ass.

It would be even nicer if, when you fail to counter an argument, you managed to maintain the maturity to still write as an adult.

I know the police are not blind, but I don't know of any BLM or Antifa getting arrested for assault in accordance with that NC law. Also none of the anti- protesters were arrested for blocking the roadway for an extended period of time leading up to that intersection were the car crash occurred in accordance with that NC law. Something smells fishy.

Apparently, the cops weren't thinking the Antifa were the real villains.

Where am I going wrong?

Youre supporting Nazis. Honestly, don't you understand how much Nazi supporters are despised?

[Pants-of-dog]

And for those of you who simply don't care where Saskachewan is, here what constitutes assault in NC.

http://www.waypointlegal.com/index.php/ ... nd-battery

And to add insult to your injury...

https://aclu-or.org/en/know-your-rights ... ht-protest

So ya...there's that too...

Oh by the by...have any of you fine twinkies heard the recounts by media people who were assaulted...by counter protestors?

Enjoy the mid-terms kids...

So, none of this shows that the counter protesters were responsible for the violence, or that simply sitting in front of a park constitutes assault.

[Buzz62]

So, none of this shows that the counter protesters were responsible for the violence, or that simply sitting in front of a park constitutes assault.

"sitting in front of a park"

Ya ok...that's enough of the blatant lies POD.

For being COMPLETELY disingenuous....

[maz]

Antifa came in to the defence of the counterprotesters who were being mauled by the Nazis.

I don't even understand how you can still continue to try and use this as an argument.

'Stay away’ from Charlottesville rally urges Va. governor

Every responsible authority figure from law enforcement to the university system were warning and advising people to stay away from the UTR demonstration.

"Many of the individuals coming to Charlottesville are doing so in order to express viewpoints many people, including me, find abhorrent.

"As long as that expression is peaceful, that is their right. But it is also the right of every American to deny those ideas more attention than they deserve.

"Men and women from state and local agencies will be in Charlottesville tomorrow to keep the public safe, and their job will be made easier if Virginians, no matter how well-meaning, elect to stay away from the areas where this rally will take place."

The governor said Virginia State Police would handle police planning and

The counter-protesters showed up looking for a fight, already knowing that the UTR were also planning to be confronted and most likely attacked by leftist protesters.

Every single account from the right wing side said that the were immediately set upon by "counter-protesters" everywhere they showed up. Are they all lying?

If the counterprotesters had heeded the warning of the governor and stayed away from the rally, there simply would have been no violence.

[blackjack21]

Antifa came in to the defence of the counterprotesters who were being mauled by the Nazis.

Oh, come off it. Antifa came to conduct violence. They are Hillary and Soros funded mobs. The Nazis weren't mauling people in some unprovoked manner.


See? Here's a picture of Hitler with Jesse Owens. Do you know what Jesse Owens later said?

Hitler didn't snub me – it was FDR who snubbed me.

We're hip to the Democratic party's drill. So nobody believes this crap anymore. Whine all you want about the Nazis. It's just the natural byproduct of poisonous political correctness gone unchecked.

Apparently, the cops weren't thinking the Antifa were the real villains.

The cops clearly sided with Antifa on the orders of the mayor. When government becomes a law breaker, it breeds contempt for the law. That's what we saw. Democratic party dirty tricks backfired and got someone killed.

Youre supporting Nazis. Honestly, don't you understand how much Nazi supporters are despised?

Communists are also despised. Naziphobia doesn't make as much sense these days compared to Islamophobia. Your chances of getting killed by a Nazi in the United States are quite negligible.

So, none of this shows that the counter protesters were responsible for the violence, or that simply sitting in front of a park constitutes assault.

Preventing a lawful assembly without a lawful permit is against the law. You simply aren't going to get any sympathy. Antifa has been stirring up shit for awhile now, and the Trump supporters had to deal with their assaults in places like San Jose, CA where the Democratic mayor told police officers not to keep the peace for Trump supporters there too. We're more than familiar with it. Hillary and Soros deliberately sent in paid thugs to attack Trump supporters. They are not going to get any sympathy from Trump or his supporters. When you stir up violence, you really can't expect sympathy when you get the violence you were after in the first place.

[Pants-of-dog]

"sitting in front of a park"

Ya ok...that's enough of the blatant lies POD.

For being COMPLETELY disingenuous....

Provide evidence that I am lying or being disingenuous.

[Buzz62]

No. Bye...