This thread is a lost cause due to the pile-on of people who read “First Amendment,” “Second Amendment,” and “danger” and didn’t bother to read any of the other words.
Can’t blame the OP for that.
6 months ago before you graced us all by skimming the thread we got to read this:
If you don’t recognize that, it’s the first two lines of the OP. Those are his words.
Then he comes back later and says
He literally said that the 1st amendment is destroying our country, then says that the 1st amendment isn’t the huge problem and blames his readers for not “understanding” his OP.
He compares it to the 2A, helpfully telling us that thousands of dead Americans is no big deal, and then says it has nothing to do with the fight against the 2A, and we are at fault for thinking that, too.
On the other hand, the rest of this thread:
OP: The First Amendment is dangerous to America and we really should fix this while keeping in mind that it’s also sacred and shouldn’t be changed, but the Founding Fathers couldn’t have expected Fox News so that really doesn’t apply anymore, but really, whatever it is, it’s extremely urgent and important. Did I mention I’m all for it?
Everyone else: The First Amendment is totally sacred and necessary to the country, but no one could have predicted what would happen all the way back then (Why not, I wonder? Did they not have malcontents and liars back then?), so we need to totally do something folks, but you can’t mess around with the First Amendment, and anyone who attempts to do so would be leading this country to ruin and ushering in the Dark Ages, but then again, I see their point.
I just can’t understand why we can’t get the message out. I can’t understand why SDMB participation has dropped. I blame Trump.
The problem is, you fucking knucklehead, is that you stopped reading when you got blind with rage.
I’m pretty sure the OP is in favor of gun control, so again, you aren’t following what he’s actually saying. It’s more like saying “OMG meth is dangerous and everyone recognizes that, but nobody is talking about how fucking dangerous alcohol is in comparison.” It isn’t saying meth is good, or that we have to ban alcohol. That’s you and a handful of other posters getting your panties in a twist because you can’t open your minds for a damn second without making a big show of our outraged you are that the First Amendment is beyond reproach or debate.
But then why bring it up? If everyone can agree that meth is bad and that prohibition is a bad idea, then why bring alcohol into the conversation to begin with?
And anyway, it really isn’t the same thing. The OP explicitly called the First Amendment a threat, or a “threat,” as those were his direct words right in the title, and never mind the original post. He didn’t call it an inconvenience. He didn’t call it a problematic situation. He called it a threat. Doesn’t the existence of a threat imply that we need to eliminate it or at least modify it somehow? I mean, beyond the extent it’s already been modified so as not to include death threats, slander, or libel.
It’s sort of like when a right-winger calls criminals “mad dogs,” and then takes umbrage when you accuse him or her of wanting to put them down. I mean, everyone knows what to do with mad dogs, right?
The well was poisoned in the OP itself, basically.
There was eventually revealed a reasonable question/debate but a lot of bullshit was required to get there.
You missed the part where he comes in 20 posts later to complain that we’re all too focused on the failures of Prohibition and that alcohol is not, per se, the problem. You also missed where he said “who cares about meth?”
His OP was a hot mess, which deserved to be left where it was 5 months ago rather than be resurrected to explain again how he doesn’t want to repeal the first amendment, but free speech in our country sucks.
See, there you go; you claim to want a mature discussion (and it’s totally our fault that it isn’t turning out that way) but you can’t resist throwing in further insults. I’m not willing to pretend that you have ever held the moral/intellectual/philosophical high ground in this thread since you were lashing out at respondents as early as post #6. Your greatness, such as it is, is not being appreciated here. Give up, or try a different way of expressing it.
Why do you bother responding to his posts? Why are you on a message board to begin with? To fucking talk about things.
Well, I would call the efforts by Mitch McConnell and others to overturn all campaign finance laws on First Amendment grounds to be a threat to our democracy. I suppose you’re going to go off whining that I should have said that having corporations buy our elections is merely a “concerning development” or “something to keep an eye on” but I think the word “threat” fits just fine. So now are you going to accuse me of hating America and Freedom or whatnot?
You missed the last paragraph of the OP, so I wouldn’t be throwing around accusations of not paying attention.
You engage in a pile-on because you can’t understand what the OP wrote, and you try to make yourself the aggrieved party when asked to respond to what he actually wrote?
Damn, it must be hard to be you. Climb down off your cross and let someone else hang there for a while.
Figured this article might be thread-suitable:
The Atlantic: Internet Speech Will Never Go Back to Normal (Tagline: “In the debate over freedom versus control of the global network, China was largely correct, and the U.S. was wrong.”)
Well, look who’s calling the kettle aggrieved. You’re the one going off for three pages in this trainwreck like someone watching the fall of Jerusalem.
Errr . . . how is McConnell trying to overturn campaign finance laws using the First Amendment a reflection on the First Amendment itself? Surely the real threat is McConnell and company trying to find loopholes in it. I mean, is the First Amendment a threat because slander exists?
Umm . . . no, unless your being an unpleasant asshole involves hating America. I’m willing to admit that the two aren’t mutually exclusive, but oh well.
But man, it burns me that you hate whatnot. Back the fuck off of whatnot.
Seriously, are you this much of a whiney, pedantic dickhead at parties? Or doesn’t anyone invite you to parties?
You assume I care what other people are doing instead of just expressing my own opinion of the OP’s behaviour.
Bullshit. His writings are childish and simplistic and about as layered as a Full House episode. Have fun stuffing the anchor of his stupidity down your pants and jumping into the deep end.
Ok, I went too far. Whatnot is a friend to all of us.
This year’s winner of the Trying Too Hard to Make an Internet Insult Award is… here comes the envelope… you!
Oh . . . oh my god, this is so unexpected, I didn’t even have a speech prepared. I don’t know what to say.
I guess I’ll just have to use this moment to thank Starcraft, frozen Tater Tots, and hentai Internet porn, without which Ravenman might have left the basement and never given me my big break!
I love you all!!
I mean, except for you, Ravenman. You still suck. And also my fifth grade history teacher. Seriously, fuck you, Mr. Dunklegruber.
Ravenman’s just bitter because he didn’t win despite getting the Big One from Parker Stevenson for eight years.
Please, please, please include the proper quote tags so no one has to search the thread for whichever post you are quoting. At least for the first one, assuming the rest are from the same post.
Huh, huh-huh-huh, huh-huh.
Are you comparing me to a Scientologist? This means war!
[smacks you with a white glove)
I want to review the six (6) sentences in OP. But first some preliminary remarks:
-
This OP was posted in BBQ Pit. Those who accuse me of not fostering a good debate in this thread might wish to review the modes and reasons for the several SDMB forums. Since my semi-autistic style just incites inchoate rage in others, I thought a more temperate Doper would be a better choice to OP such a thread in GD. Instead rageful Dopers just want to attack me. Fine! I hope it won’t hurt your feelings, but I know my own intellectual strengths and weaknesses better than you do: your insults flow off me like water off a duck’s back.
-
Substitution of “Free speech” for 1st A and “Guns” for 2nd A in the title would have made the thread less confusing. Yes. Better still, guns shouldn’t have been mentioned at all — the thread has nothing to do with Guns. We can characterize the unfortunate title in various ways; “septimus is stupid” may be as good as any; but “septimus suffers from (mild?) autism” might be more accurate and more charitable. Sending TWO messages with one sentence asked too much from readers. Still, the excessive attention on guns from both the pro- and anti- camps is very misplaced when American society is being destroyed not by guns but by lies and propaganda.
-
Let me extend a big Thank You to Ravenman and Velocity who were willing to understand and respond to the message, rather than play Let’s Gang Up on the Messenger!
-
Velocity’s recent post links to a must-read article …
… that leads me into my final prefatory remark. I do not have a solution. Authoritarian states like China (or even Singapore!) may be better poised to deal with neo-modern problems, but I am NOT happy to embrace authoritarianism. I wish I had solutions to offer but I don’t. All I ever wanted with this thread was to shine a spotlight on problems. But even in that, I failed. :o
One helpful idea might be to strengthen perjury laws. In the John Oliver video I linked to above, we see a doctor paid to lie to legislatures who is apparently immune because he wasn’t under oath. Is that appropriate?
Now let’s dissect OP. Setting aside quotes and parentheses it comprised just six (6) sentences. It appears this was too much. Next thread I start I’ll try to pack only 3 or 4 sentences into the OP.
Here they are:
[ol][li]The 1st Amendment is a MUCH MUCH bigger threat to America than the 2nd Amendment. [/li][li] It is the 1st Amendment that is destroying our country.[/li][li] Just for starters it provokes disinformation and unifies haters.[/li][li] I expect to be attacked by BOTH the Left and the Right for this post.[/li][li] But note that I am not calling for a direct repeal of the First Amendment.[/li][li] I just want us all to FIRST grok what the real problems are; THEN we can seek solutions. … If it’s not too late.[/li][/ol]
Comments:
(1) “Free speech” — when that includes lying with impunity on the scale we see today — is a FAR greater threat to America than guns are. If y’all can’t see that, I’m afraid I’m going to have to start calling you “stupid” again. 
(2) Some of us are bitter about the 1st Amendment specifically since Scotus ruled, in a 5-4 vote, that the 1st Amendment gives corporations the right to buy elections with lies. But again, replace “1st A” with “unrestricted free speech” to improve clarity.
(4) I sure got this one right! 
(5),(6) Sorry that I didn’t put these sentences in a size-6 font. Would that have helped?
Please don’t use autism as an excuse for wankery.