<html>
  <head>
    <meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
      http-equiv="Content-Type">
  </head>
  <body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
    All I asked for was that the rhetoric be toned down. What he
    described was an impact/dragging death. It's a bit extreme. If it
    was said verbally, I might have let it go. But it was said in an
    archived and monitored discussion.<br>
    <br>
    I also notice that he hasn't responded. Maybe he agrees. Everyone is
    allowed to declare their displeasure for any politician. However,
    wishing a gruesome death is, in my opinion, barbaric.<br>
    <br>
    There are limits to speech. Freedom of speech does not mean freedom
    from consequences.<br>
    <br>
    As far as the registration of 3D printers, it's simply overblown
    rhetoric coming from another loud mouthed politician. It's difficult
    to take him seriously due to the impossibility.<br>
    <br>
    Maybe they need to tone it down, too.<br>
    <br>
    No one is afraid of 3D printed zip guns. It's POC at best.<br>
    <br>
    <br>
    <div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 12.05.2013 12:41, LinkReincarnate
      wrote:<br>
    </div>
    <blockquote
cite="mid:CACHQ1TGk2hOCzobFbYUtFZQUN-Nx5zh+2pMKyknX4pz4cBwgxw@mail.gmail.com"
      type="cite">
      <p dir="ltr">That is a straw man.  None of what he said was
        homophobic or racist.  Even if it was I would defend his right
        to say it.  In america the only limit we have on free speech is
        when you use it to directly cause bodily harm to others (yelling
        fire in a crowded theater)  Everything else must be protected
        (including speech you find abhorrent like racism, homophobia, or
        sexism) lest other speech be eroded away.  The proper response
        is not to try to censor people who don't agree with you, it is
        to use your own free speech to counter theirs.  Free speech is
        it's own check and balance.  That only works if everyone has it
        regardless of their opinions or the popularity of their
        opinions. Any  outside interference with that throws the balance
        off and allows one side of an idea to prevail in said
        imbalance.  In the case of women's rights, racism, and
        homophobia outlawing that type of speech may seem like a good
        idea but you'd be throwing the baby out with the bathwater in
        doing so. You would be getting an incremental step in rights at
        the cost of the future of growth of those same rights. The
        meaning of any particular piece of speech (even entirely in
        context) is a highly subjective matter.  I believe that our law
        system tries to be as objective as possible (or at least it was
        originally designed with that intent)  Where do you draw the
        line for what constitutes this type of speech? Who defines it?
        What will be the penalty? What do you do to repeat offenders?
        Who pays for this program? What about weird edge cases?  Finally
        how will it be abused/gamed/corrupted? That's not even getting
        into the problems that plague the justice system right now. Or
        the problems the plague human interaction and understanding in
        general. We live in the real world.  The truth is that violence
        is sometimes necessary.  We hope to avoid it as much as possible
        but pretending that we can all bury our heads in the sand
        RE:violence is just naivety.  Outlawing violent speech is not
        going to stop violence.  It could mean one has less warning
        though.</p>
      <div class="gmail_quote">On May 12, 2013 12:05 PM, "Johny Radio"
        <<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:johnyradio@gmail.com">johnyradio@gmail.com</a>>
        wrote:<br type="attribution">
        <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
          .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
          <div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000066">
            <pre style="line-height:normal;text-indent:0px;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;font-variant:normal;text-transform:none;font-style:normal;white-space:pre-wrap;font-weight:normal;word-spacing:0px">On <i style="line-height:normal;text-indent:0px;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;font-variant:normal;text-transform:none;font-size:medium;white-space:normal;font-family:'Times New Roman';font-weight:normal;word-spacing:0px">Sun May 12 18:41:12 UTC 2013</i>, <b>LinkReincarnate</b><span style="text-indent:0px;letter-spacing:normal;font-variant:normal;text-align:start;font-style:normal;display:inline!important;font-weight:normal;float:none;line-height:normal;text-transform:none;font-size:medium;white-space:normal;font-family:'Times New Roman';word-spacing:0px"><span> </span></span><a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:noisebridge-discuss%40lists.noisebridge.net?Subject=Re%3A%20%5BNoisebridge-discuss%5D%20California%20Lawmaker%20Wants%203-D%20Printers%20To%0A%20Be%2
 0
Regulated&In-Reply-To=%3CCACHQ1TFf1XSATcj%2BZ9Zjqqnu1x_AgNLUyOPx8rB5wTCrVOVPiA%40mail.gmail.com%3E" title="[Noisebridge-discuss] California Lawmaker Wants 3-D Printers
 To Be Regulated" style="font-family:'Times New Roman';font-size:medium;font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px" target="_blank">linkreincarnate at gmail.com</a><a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:noisebridge-discuss%40lists.noisebridge.net?Subject=Re%3A%20%5BNoisebridge-discuss%5D%20California%20Lawmaker%20Wants%203-D%20Printers%20To%0A%20Be%20Regulated&In-Reply-To=%3CCACHQ1TFf1XSATcj%2BZ9Zjqqnu1x_AgNLUyOPx8rB5wTCrVOVPiA%40mail.gmail.com%3E" title="[Noisebridge-discuss] California Lawmaker Wants 3-D Printers To Be Regulated" style="font-family:'Times New Roman';font-size:medium;font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px" target="_blank"><span></span></a> wrote:
</pre>
            <blockquote>If you believe in free speech at all you have to
              protect even speech that offends you. That includes
              violent speech. <br>
            </blockquote>
            Link, i agree with you, in a general sense. However, would
            the NB community tolerate words of violence toward women,
            homosexuals, transgender people, the poor, or people of
            color? If not, then the community agrees that certain kinds
            of speech are not ok. <br>
            <br>
            <div>-- <br>
              <font size="+1"><br>
                Johny Radio<br>
                Stick It In Your Ear!<br>
                <img moz-do-not-send="true" alt=""
src="http://us.123rf.com/400wm/400/400/robodread/robodread1201/robodread120100030/11882514-ear-and-sound-waves.jpg"
                  width="150"><br>
              </font> <br>
            </div>
          </div>
          <br>
          _______________________________________________<br>
          Noisebridge-discuss mailing list<br>
          <a moz-do-not-send="true"
            href="mailto:Noisebridge-discuss@lists.noisebridge.net">Noisebridge-discuss@lists.noisebridge.net</a><br>
          <a moz-do-not-send="true"
            href="https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss"
            target="_blank">https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss</a><br>
          <br>
        </blockquote>
      </div>
      <br>
      <fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
      <br>
      <pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Noisebridge-discuss@lists.noisebridge.net">Noisebridge-discuss@lists.noisebridge.net</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss">https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss</a>
</pre>
    </blockquote>
    <br>
  </body>
</html>