Comments by "Titanium Rain" (@ChucksSEADnDEAD) on "Insane Clown Posse: 'We're First Amendment Warriors' for Juggalo Nation" video.

  1. +Blitzmaschine "free speech could have negative effects on others?" if you're a whistleblower and your information is going to cause damages to a corporation or government, the damages you're about to cause are exactly why free speech exists. Free speech isn't meant to protect speech nobody wants to silence. It's exactly to protect speech that is destructive and thus some evil people might want to silence it for their own gain.
    9
  2. But was it ICP that made them violent, or the group naturally attracts unstable/violence-prone people? The latter is my guess.
    7
  3. And hip-hop is also closely related to criminal gangs. By that logic just round up everyone at a rap show and arrest them. Christ, just arrest anyone who buys a Harley and a leather jacket. Because as you might know, motorclubs are often associated with drug dealing and gun running. If criticizing the government for doing something that is wrong is "propaganda", I don't know what to tell you.
    6
  4. Why does the distinction need to be made? Fans of ICP are called Juggalos the same way that Slipknot fans are called Maggots. It's their identity. Just because criminals share this identity doesn't mean that the distinction has to be made when they're not complaining about the real criminals getting in trouble. They're complaining about being innocent but being profiled as criminals! "Check the comments: most people think that the government is specifically going after innocent fans!" No, the government is going after the innocent fans because it generalized Juggalo culture as criminal activity. Specifically? No. Broadly. If you had everyone who just got back from the mosque pulled over by the police, you wouldn't be going specifically after innocent Muslims, you'd be going after ALL Muslims. While the intention changes, the end result is the same. It would be no different than the government pulling over everyone with a confederate flag in their car for being a white supremacist or detaining anyone in the street for wearing Doc Martens because skinheads wear them.
    5
  5. +Blitzmachine what I am saying doesn't matter because reality, for the most part, already disagrees with you. You have free speech. If you cause unjust damages, you will suffer the consequences. If the damages you cause are the result of the truth being exposed, in theory you are protected (although in the cases of Snowden and Manning we see that it's not quite right). You should be able to damage a corporation for ripping off customers or dumping toxic waste on our water. However, if you write an article trying to defame someone with lies, you may be sued for libel. At no point was your speech restricted. The government doesn't staple lips shut or cut hands off to restrict speech, it only punishes after the fact. It would be like being able to own any gun, even a 20mm M61 Vulcan autocannon. No restrictions. However, nobody said you had the right to kill people with it. That's not a restriction. It just means we'll put you in jail for murder.
    4
  6. How do you "self-police" against violent, criminal gangs using your imagery? Go up to them and ask them to stop? That's like saying Disney doesn't want to be associated with fat nerds so they're going to self-police Star Wars fans. How the fuck are they going to do that? Go door to door and burn the Star Wars merch off the fat nerds' hands? Good luck. "If I spray known gang tags on my car" They're band imagery first and foremost. This isn't the same thing as getting yourself a Hell's Angels cut and riding a Harley wearing it. It would be like if a gang only wore Metallica shirts so if you were wearing a Metallica shirt for liking the band you'd get stopped. Are you at fault for wearing "known gang colours"? No, you're wearing band merch. "into the 21st century and only allow official merchandise to be sold from their own website" >21st century >not allowing for example Amazon to deal with your merch It's almost like you want their business to suffer "ban the old symbols at concerts" THE CRIMINAL GANGS WILL JUST ADOPT THE NEW ONES Also, forcing a band to change logos because of what some fuckers are doing, very libertarian indeed
    3
  7. Darth Maul
    3
  8. That's fucked up. "look at these criminals, you know what we gonna do? prohibit them from owing their own businesses, that will keep them away from crime" Sure, the legitimate business may just be a front for the gang and actually used to launder money, but it's the government that has to prove that. They probably pay someone to "own" the businesses for them, anyway.
    1