Shop Forum More Submit  Join Login

STOP 👏 WITH 👏 THE 👏 VIOLENT 👏 PROTESTS 

100%
43 deviants said QUIT 👏 BEING 👏 A 👏 PISS 👏 BABY 👏 AND 👏 GO 👏 HOME

Devious Comments

:iconi-am-ayla-cat:
I-am-Ayla-Cat Featured By Owner Feb 5, 2017  Student Digital Artist
Whas this about?
Reply
:iconnebulanovia:
NebulaNovia Featured By Owner Feb 5, 2017  Student Digital Artist
Reply
:iconq-beam:
Q-beam Featured By Owner Feb 4, 2017  Student
Nonviolent protests obviously weren't enough 
Reply
:iconnebulanovia:
NebulaNovia Featured By Owner Feb 4, 2017  Student Digital Artist
Are you suggesting that violent protests should be done...
Reply
:iconq-beam:
Q-beam Featured By Owner Feb 4, 2017  Student
there's a point where only certain actions can be taken to achieve change
Reply
:iconnebulanovia:
NebulaNovia Featured By Owner Feb 4, 2017  Student Digital Artist
So you're resorting to terrorism to get your way?
Reply
:iconq-beam:
Q-beam Featured By Owner Feb 4, 2017  Student
ah, violent acts =/= terrorism ; terrorism implies it's against unparticipating civilians, which is not a good thing 
Reply
:iconnebulanovia:
NebulaNovia Featured By Owner Edited Feb 4, 2017  Student Digital Artist
Terroism-
"the unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims."

See you act like these violent protests don't effect civilians or other people, especially those who disagree.
But terrorism is not just defined on harming those 'not involved'.
And there is deffinately acts of terrorism in a lot of these violent protests.

m.youtube.com/watch?v=wcYakRbg…
m.youtube.com/watch?v=E6gl-iHb…
m.youtube.com/watch?v=y3z_jqbL…
m.youtube.com/watch?v=4UXkrx1I…
Reply
:iconq-beam:
Q-beam Featured By Owner Feb 4, 2017  Student
Well, if you define it that way, then absolutely ! i condone it, then 
Reply
:iconnebulanovia:
NebulaNovia Featured By Owner Feb 4, 2017  Student Digital Artist
ಠ_ಠ
People like you are the reason why Trump won.
Reply
(1 Reply)
:iconnebulanovia:
NebulaNovia Featured By Owner Feb 4, 2017  Student Digital Artist
Hm?
Reply
:iconlunebug:
Lunebug Featured By Owner Feb 4, 2017  Hobbyist Digital Artist
-salutes-
Reply
:icondigimonlover101:
digimonlover101 Featured By Owner Feb 4, 2017  Student Digital Artist
ironic how these lunatics call trump and republicans a nazi yet they are the ones oppressing free speech.
Reply
:iconcelebi-yoshi:
Celebi-Yoshi Featured By Owner Feb 4, 2017  Professional General Artist
The first amendment says the government cannot suppress your ability to have freedom of speech--however, no one else is required to listen to others unless they wish to. It is not opposing free speech to not agree with another's opinions.
Reply
:icondigimonlover101:
digimonlover101 Featured By Owner Feb 5, 2017  Student Digital Artist
what these rioters did WAS oppressing free speech. listening to the conservative speaker was completely optional and they were not forced to go. if they disagreed with him they could have just not attended the event or attended it and voiced their opinion on why they disagreed with him. instead they chose to be violent and destroyed private property and their own school, not to mention they viciously attacked people who tried to stop the violence. sorry, but anyone who thinks violence towards others because you disagree with their opinion is ok is completely bigoted.
Reply
:iconcelebi-yoshi:
Celebi-Yoshi Featured By Owner Feb 5, 2017  Professional General Artist
>"what these rioters did WAS oppressing free speech" 

I was not arguing whether or not it's okay to riot or break property, I was just telling you that "freedom of speech" applies to the fact that our government cannot shut anyone down for their viewpoints. The first amendment is for checks and balances on the government.
The people rioting (people who are not affiliated with the government) are within their rights to suppress free speech.

I did not say that it is okay to break property or be violent. I did not say that it is okay to be violent towards others because you disagree with them.
Reply
:icondigimonlover101:
digimonlover101 Featured By Owner Feb 5, 2017  Student Digital Artist
"I did not say that it is okay to break property or be violent. I did not say that it is okay to be violent towards others because you disagree with them."


"The people rioting (people who are not affiliated with the government) are within their rights to suppress free speech. "

- when you say statements like this ^ you ARE defending violent behavior, that's how they suppress free speech, by being violent

everyone is entitled to an opinion in a free country like the US. what makes these violent thugs's opinions more superior to others so that they can violate a person's first amendment rights? again, everyone has the right to have an opinion and everyone has the right to equally disagree with that opinion but NO ONE has the right to suppress free speech regardless if they are in government or a private citizen. saying otherwise means one of two things:

1. you won't condemn the rioters' behavior because you share the same ideology as them 

2. you are closed minded because you refuse to hear out what others have to say 

Reply
:iconcelebi-yoshi:
Celebi-Yoshi Featured By Owner Feb 5, 2017  Professional General Artist
Alright, you're putting tons of words in my mouth. I was literally just trying to explain the concept of the first amendment. > constitution.findlaw.com/amend…

Stop calling me violent. :\ 
Reply
:icondigimonlover101:
digimonlover101 Featured By Owner Feb 5, 2017  Student Digital Artist
never said you were violent, I said you're agreeing with the violence.
Reply
:iconnebulanovia:
NebulaNovia Featured By Owner Feb 4, 2017  Student Digital Artist
I think some people don't understand the term nazi and throw it around way too lightly
Reply
:icondigimonlover101:
digimonlover101 Featured By Owner Feb 4, 2017  Student Digital Artist
yeah if they think trunp is oppressive they should live in north Korea for a while.
Reply
Add a Comment:
 

Poll History