# How long before Trump gets shot? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [March 12, 2016, 5:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-long-before-trump-gets-shot/748749 "2016-03-12T17:06:19Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Ludovic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/7ab992/32.png) [@Ludovic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ludovic)\ **Post date:** [March 13, 2016, 11:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-long-before-trump-gets-shot/748749/61 "2016-03-13T11:44:07Z")
> [@ddsun](#): > > he now possesses his own SS detail. Does he make them raise their hand in loyalty too? 🆒 ---
**Author:** ![LinusK](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/258eb7/32.png) [@LinusK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LinusK)\ **Post date:** [March 13, 2016, 2:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-long-before-trump-gets-shot/748749/62 "2016-03-13T14:38:32Z")
Ultimately, I think it’s going to redound to his benefit. MoveOn is making a tactical mistake by trying to shut down Trump’s events. > [@](#): > > “I think it’s a joke that they did that,” Chris Hetzel, a 30-year-old from Akron, said of the protesters. “It’s stupid. It was just stupid. Like, you can’t go support somebody you want to be president anymore? They didn’t do that for Obama. Trump supporters don’t do that for Bernie Sanders or Hillary." > . > . > . > Because of the tumult in Chicago, some Trump supporters said they second-guessed their decision to see him in Ohio, fearing more violence would erupt. Others, however, said they weren’t concerned. Ruggiero brought his 6- and 9-year-old sons with him and said he had no fear of violence. > > One 46-year-old woman, who identified herself only as Wendy, said she thought about skipping the rally because of the Chicago incident, particularly because she planned to bring her 10- and 13-year-old children. But ultimately, she and her children and her father came anyway. > > “It’s America, it’s our right to be here, it’s our right to speak and to listen,” she said. “It’s the First Amendment, we’re here to do that, so I’m not going to let some protesters in Chicago stop me from what I have the right to do." Edit: [Link](http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2016/03/13/trump_supporters_undeterred_by_protests_129958.html). ---
**Author:** ![Count\_Blucher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/c5a1d2/32.png) [@Count\_Blucher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Count_Blucher)\ **Post date:** [March 13, 2016, 2:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-long-before-trump-gets-shot/748749/63 "2016-03-13T14:58:15Z")
Well, the country club set couldn’t have Bush & couldn’t have Christie. I didn’t think it would even take them this long to start looking around for an almost-believable-if-you-don’t-look-close Oswald patsy so they can have “their” candidate instead. It couldn’t be one of their own spawn: Too much blow-back that would hurt their goals. Still, someone left of center, shot dead seconds after the assassination, with an unfired rifle in their hands? That would probably make some people happier than shooting 40 on the back 9. Bonus points if the patsy is a person of color, male, and dies wearing a BLM T-shirt… “Mildred, could you fix us some Chinese food instead? We’re feeling a little Manchurian today…” ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [March 13, 2016, 3:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-long-before-trump-gets-shot/748749/64 "2016-03-13T15:24:10Z")
This should be posted every time free speech comes up in contexts like this: [![](https://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/free_speech.png) ](https://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/free_speech.png) ---
**Author:** ![billfish678](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7bcc69/32.png) [@billfish678](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/billfish678)\ **Post date:** [March 13, 2016, 3:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-long-before-trump-gets-shot/748749/65 "2016-03-13T15:29:54Z")
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > This should be posted every time free speech comes up in contexts like this: > > [https://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/free\_speech.png](https://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/free_speech.png) You really don’t get it do you? ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [March 13, 2016, 3:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-long-before-trump-gets-shot/748749/66 "2016-03-13T15:42:09Z")
> [@billfish678](#): > > You really don’t get it do you? Seems to me you are the one missing it. ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [March 13, 2016, 3:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-long-before-trump-gets-shot/748749/67 "2016-03-13T15:51:02Z")
Yeah. Nobody here is defending criminal assault, or disturbance of the peace, or any other illegal actions perpetrated against a public speaker. But they don’t constitute violations of the speaker’s free speech rights. ---
**Author:** ![billfish678](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7bcc69/32.png) [@billfish678](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/billfish678)\ **Post date:** [March 13, 2016, 3:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-long-before-trump-gets-shot/748749/68 "2016-03-13T15:57:49Z")
> [@Kimstu](#): > > Yeah. Nobody here is defending criminal assault, or disturbance of the peace, or any other illegal actions perpetrated against a public speaker. > > But they don’t constitute violations of the speaker’s free speech rights. If you won’t let a speaker speak by yelling or booing or whatever such that they can’t be heard…or you intimidate the listeners (or the speaker) by implied threats of violence…or you physically block access so that people that want to hear what the speaker is saying can’t get into the event… Well, “you” don’t believe in free speech. ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [March 13, 2016, 4:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-long-before-trump-gets-shot/748749/69 "2016-03-13T16:14:29Z")
> [@billfish678](#): > > If you won’t let a speaker speak by yelling or booing or whatever such that they can’t be heard…or you intimidate the listeners (or the speaker) by implied threats of violence…or you physically block access so that people that want to hear what the speaker is saying can’t get into the event… > > Well, “you” don’t believe in free speech. Moving the goalposts. This side argument has been about your misinterpretation of **WreckingCrew** ’s perfectly valid rebuttal in post #4 of **doorhinge** ’s claim that the Trump protesters were “denying free speech” to Trump. > [@WreckingCrew](#): > > Unless the person in question was acting on behalf of the government, Donny’s free speech was not denied here. The protester was rude and acted in a violent, and uncalled for manner,but the First Amendment does not prohibit one idiot private citizen from attempting to stop another idiot private citizen from speaking. Other criminal charges, of course, are certainly in play. You claimed that was “bull malarkey”, and ever since you’ve been trying to obscure the distinction between _denying free speech rights_ and _individuals interfering with other individuals’ speech_, whether legally or illegally. Nobody is defending illegal interference with a speaker. Nobody is saying that the laws ought to be changed so that it’s okay to assault a speaker you disagree with. **Nobody is supporting the denial of free speech rights or any other kind of illegal behavior**. We’re just trying to educate you on the difference between illegal obstruction of a speaker and actual denial of First Amendment rights. ---
**Author:** ![billfish678](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7bcc69/32.png) [@billfish678](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/billfish678)\ **Post date:** [March 13, 2016, 4:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-long-before-trump-gets-shot/748749/70 "2016-03-13T16:17:36Z")
> [@Kimstu](#): > > M > > We’re just trying to educate you on the difference between illegal obstruction of a speaker and actual denial of First Amendment rights. I KNOW the difference. Note when I say First Amendment. Note when I say “free speech”. Heck, one of my first post here in this thread, if not THE first one here noted the difference between the two. ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [March 13, 2016, 4:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-long-before-trump-gets-shot/748749/71 "2016-03-13T16:27:35Z")
> [@Kimstu](#): > > Nobody is defending illegal interference with a speaker. Nobody is saying that the laws ought to be changed so that it’s okay to assault a speaker you disagree with. **Nobody is supporting the denial of free speech rights or any other kind of illegal behavior**. Personally I would go even further. It bothers me when people disrupt a speaker where the people there presumably want to hear that speaker. Even if it is crap I disagree with. That said they are not denying free speech. Indeed they are engaging in their own free speech. People protesting other people engaging in free speech is as old as the republic. Nothing new about it whatsoever. Recall things like the KKK marching in Skokie or people counter-protesting Westboro Baptist Church protesters and so on. I would also agree with what was suggested up-thread that this is probably counter-productive. Trump supporters will be energized by these protests and become even more motivated. ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [March 13, 2016, 4:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-long-before-trump-gets-shot/748749/72 "2016-03-13T16:30:51Z")
> [@billfish678](#): > > I KNOW the difference. > > Note when I say First Amendment. Note when I say “free speech”. Heck, one of my first post here in this thread, if not THE first one here noted the difference between the two. “Free speech” doesn’t have a legal meaning **except** in the context of the First Amendment. “Free speech” doesn’t mean that nobody should ever stop anybody else from saying anything. By that reasoning, a disturbed person screaming on a street corner and taken into custody by police would be having their “free speech denied”. Legally obstructing another person’s speech, as in the case of the cops and the street-corner screamer, is not “denying free speech”. _Illegally_ obstructing another person’s speech, as in the case of the protestor who assaulted Trump, is **also** not “denying free speech”. > [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > Personally I would go even further. It bothers me when people disrupt a speaker where the people there presumably want to hear that speaker. Even if it is crap I disagree with. Yup, me too. [QUOTE=Whack-a-Mole] That said they are not denying free speech. Indeed they are engaging in their own free speech. [/quote] Exactly. ---
**Author:** ![Count\_Blucher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/c5a1d2/32.png) [@Count\_Blucher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Count_Blucher)\ **Post date:** [March 13, 2016, 4:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-long-before-trump-gets-shot/748749/73 "2016-03-13T16:39:29Z")
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > Seems to me you are the one missing it. Actually, he gets it. Seconded that You Don’t. ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [March 13, 2016, 4:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-long-before-trump-gets-shot/748749/74 "2016-03-13T16:44:35Z")
> [@Count\_Blucher](#): > > Actually, he gets it. Seconded that You Don’t. Your _right_ to free speech is a legal concept. It is spelled out in the US Constitution. It protects us from the government. As such a protester at a rally cannot deny Mr. Trump his free speech rights (unless they did so in an official capacity as a government employee). Period. Is the protester being disruptive? Definitely. Is the protester being a dick? Maybe. Has the protester broken any laws? Quite possibly but they did not violate first amendment free speech protections. ---
**Author:** ![Uosdwis\_R.Dewoh](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/9e8a1a/32.png) [@Uosdwis\_R.Dewoh](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Uosdwis_R.Dewoh)\ **Post date:** [March 13, 2016, 4:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-long-before-trump-gets-shot/748749/75 "2016-03-13T16:46:08Z")
> [@ddsun](#): > > What’s the debate here? Whether someone will shoot Trump? I’ll take “no” for $500, because why would anyone bother and he now possesses his own SS detail. He had his own secret service detail? At what point do candidates get one? Does the rest of the candidates have one too? Does the guy with the rubber boot on his head get one? ---
**Author:** ![billfish678](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7bcc69/32.png) [@billfish678](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/billfish678)\ **Post date:** [March 13, 2016, 4:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-long-before-trump-gets-shot/748749/76 "2016-03-13T16:50:11Z")
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > Your _right_ to free speech is a legal concept. It is spelled out in the US Constitution. It protects us from the government. Your “right” to free speech might be a legal concept. The idea that free speech should be allowed does not require any legal construct. ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [March 13, 2016, 4:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-long-before-trump-gets-shot/748749/77 "2016-03-13T16:50:56Z")
> [@Uosdwis\_R.Dewoh](#): > > He had his own secret service detail? At what point do candidates get one? Does the rest of the candidates have one too? Does the guy with the rubber boot on his head get one? It is a courtesy the Secret Service extends to political candidates. They have their own rules for when they do this (e.g. they do not extend it the instant any schmo throws their hat in the ring). It is really up to them. IIRC they gave Obama SS protection sooner than they normally would have in 2007 because of specific threats Obama was getting during his campaign. Clinton has SS protection because she gets it for life as the former First Lady. I believe lifetime protection has since been rescinded and ex-presidents and their spouse now only get protection for ten years after they leave office. I think that started with Bush (the younger). ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [March 13, 2016, 5:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-long-before-trump-gets-shot/748749/78 "2016-03-13T17:00:48Z")
> [@billfish678](#): > > Your “right” to free speech might be a legal concept. Manfully conceded, thanks. [QUOTE=billfish678] The idea that free speech should be allowed does not require any legal construct. [/QUOTE] Well, it kind of does, if there’s going to be any workable definition of what counts as “free speech” and what is “allowable”. I presume you’re not arguing that **all** forms of speech should be allowed in **all** circumstances. I mean, in that case we’re right back in “yelling Fire in a crowded theater” territory. ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [March 13, 2016, 5:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-long-before-trump-gets-shot/748749/79 "2016-03-13T17:18:48Z")
> [@Kimstu](#): > > I presume you’re not arguing that **all** forms of speech should be allowed in **all** circumstances. I mean, in that case we’re right back in “yelling Fire in a crowded theater” territory. Clearly not since **billfish678** seems to want to restrict what a person can or cannot say at a political rally. ---
**Author:** ![running\_coach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/running_coach/32/15836_2.png) [@running\_coach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/running_coach)\ **Post date:** [March 13, 2016, 5:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-long-before-trump-gets-shot/748749/80 "2016-03-13T17:31:48Z")
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > Clinton has SS protection because she gets it for life as the former First Lady. I believe lifetime protection has since been rescinded and ex-presidents and their spouse now only get protection for ten years after they leave office. I think that started with Bush (the younger). [Lifetime protection was restored in 2013.](http://www.cbsnews.com/news/obama-restores-lifetime-secret-service-for-former-presidents/) > [@](#): > > Under a new law signed today by President Obama, all former U.S. presidents and first ladies will receive lifetime Secret Service protection. > > The measure also authorizes protection for the children of former presidents until they are 16 years old. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-long-before-trump-gets-shot/748749.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-long-before-trump-gets-shot/748749.md?page=5)