>>513961415 (OP) >libtards attacking freeedom of speech >>:((( >retards i like attacking freedom of speech >:)))
i genuinely think less of humanity as a whole at this point. were beyond the point of cutting off your nose to spite your face, this is basically lighting yourself on fire to prove that its not cold outside
>>513962119
What's hilarious is that the overwhelming majority of instances the right has been accusing the left of attacking free speech has been from run of the mill cancel culture shit like getting banned from a forum. The "defenders of free speech" right literally sign infringements into law or straight up blackbag people for criticizing Israel. There's no real "both sides" here.
>>513962811
Great then you're fucked you stupid of shit cunt leftist faggot. I hope trump writes an executive order that you fucktards are shot by firing squad as a punishment for burning down a privately owned store like you did during the summer of nigger riots
>>513962811
Unlikely. All the liberal judges and ACB will guaranteed vote against Trump if SCOTUS even accepts the case, so the best possible case scenario for Trump is that he loses 5-4.
>>513963355
Yes and no. Burning a flag is a form of expression. Set shit on fire is arson. If you want to burn an american flag that you bought on your property under controlled conditions, go for it. Set on fire during a riot? Enjoy tyrone's cock in your ass for a year in jail.
>>513963547
Yea sure, in a contained environment where only your property is being damaged or destroyed then it is free speech. Burning things in a place that doesn't specifically allow burnings (on the streets vs camping grounds) is illegal regardless.
>>513961800 >had a supreme court case about this
checked, Wrong.
today's Executive Order specifically exempts the free speech aspect, it only targets those inciting violent riot (who _also_ happen to burn a flag).