Vermithrax]Also, why do you keep dodging the limitation on the 1st amendment issue? Because you were wrong back when you first said that was okay?
It's a red-herring. It is not something reserved for local governments, but the location of where it takes place is relevant. I'm not an authority on 1st amendment jurisprudence though. Ultimately though, it doesn't matter. First Amendment protects speech. Driving an ATV, blocking traffic, and then advancing on police officers is not "speech", and is not entitled to First Amendment protection.
The rest of your comments don't really require comment. The reason why I asked you to state your own position, in your own words, is because I didn't want to misquote you.
I didn't say anyone who feels they've been railroaded has the right to resist a court order.
and...
So I guess my point is, if an American citizen feels they were railroaded in a court decision, I don't think it's out of the question to do what these people have done, court order or not. They feel they are victims of injustice and they are taking a stand against it. I applaud their efforts. I don't think what they are doing is wrong.
and
Yes dude....how can I say it any plainer than I have already said it? What other words do you need me to say to understand that I think their interference with a court order was okay? I'm not arguing whether or not they are breaking the law by doing so. Clearly, they are. What I am saying is that I am okay with it. The believe they are being victimized by an over reaching government so they are actively resisting the orders of that government. How exactly do you think we came to be an independent nation?
What?
