Opinion polls on all subjects. Opinions? Heck yes, we have opinions - but we're *always* nice about it, even when ours are diametrically opposed to yours. Register your vote today!
19969 messages in 916 discussions
Latest 5/21/20 by MerlinsDad
2853 messages in 219 discussions
5598 messages in 297 discussions
6589 messages in 431 discussions
2947 messages in 230 discussions
5773 messages in 124 discussions
701 messages in 365 discussions
966 messages in 94 discussions
3578 messages in 216 discussions
2836 messages in 125 discussions
7056 messages in 592 discussions
1819 messages in 95 discussions
8149 messages in 415 discussions
12423 messages in 612 discussions
793 messages in 21 discussions
I don't believe Out of State armed militias should be allowed to protest (or act as bodyguards for protesters) for local state issues. National issues, maybe. But if the protesters are protesting against local elected officials, doesn't the presence of out of staters, particularly armed ones, present a false level of state support or objections to a issue?
I don’t even understand this. Are the gun toting militias liberals or conservatives? Guns for hire? Mercenaries?
They are mostly anti-government who call themselves constitutionalists. Seldom liberals. But what does that matter? My question is should armed people be allowed to protest a state issue if they do not live in that state?
That is what I’m asking. Are the protestors armed or the people stopping them?
The protestors. And law enforcement are armed if required to stop the armed protestors.
Well that is just crazy. They should stay home.
The Constitution places no restrictions on WHERE people can assemble.