Just a friendly little reminder....

[FarmerRick]

Please, when contacting ANY of our representatives(federal, state or local), be respectful and don't do anything that would put our cause or the NFOA in a poor light.  It can be easy to get carried away with emotion, and it is sometimes mis-understood what a person is trying to convey with the written as opposed to the spoken word.  It is also easier to use as evidence.
Some of these people(such as in the story to follow) can be "thin-skinned" and react quite defensively to any criticism or accusations leveled against them.

Just be careful!


http://www.omaha.com/article/20091201/NEWS01/712019987/1009

How free is ?abusive' speech?

By Aaron C. James
WORLD-HERALD BUREAU

LINCOLN ? The Nebraska Supreme Court will take up a free speech case this week involving a college student's angry e-mails to a professor running for political office.

The student, Darren Drahota, was charged with disturbing the peace and fined $250 in Lancaster County for sending e-mails in 2006 to his former political science professor at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, State Sen. Bill Avery of Lincoln. At the time, Avery was running for his seat in the Legislature.

The Nebraska Court of Appeals upheld the conviction in June, and a UCLA law professor appealed to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court is set to hear arguments in the case Wednesday.

More at the link

[JimP]

So......

"the appeals court ruled that Drahota violated Avery's peace " ...... it is not the Public Peace that the Law is protecting, but a particular individual?  ...... Uhmmm......... I was thinking that the Police did not have a duty to protect an individual, just the Public............  I guess if you are the right indidvidual, the Law will protect your feeeewings..............

I don't condone what Drahota did, but I like what the court did a whole lot less.

[A-FIXER]

NUTS..... now this is why obama and his weakkneed B-nosers want to control the internet and have the ability to shut it down.... well the web is public and if that dude wants not to receive the e-mails then let him get a filter that will allow him only to get spam and feel good ad's...

[Glock 1]

Is the 1st Amendment to the Constitution still in effect or do I NOT have the Right to Freedom of Speech??  If I don't like something and a candidate has sausage between his ears I'm going to say something!

Now I don't mean going out and cursing this person but getting my point across to him/her in a straight forward manner is my right!

If the 'candidates' don't like the heat, they had better stay out of the kitchen and cry on their mama's shoulder!!!

[huskergun]

 What this decision just did was to attempt to silence decent. Now rather than say what is on your mind you will have to make sure that the words you are saying will get a pass from the thought police.
 I will not be quite. And with all due respect to Rick what has talking nice  gotten any of us. Sometimes you have to rock the boat. When politicians refuse to listen to the average every day Joe then the average Joe needs to get louder until they listen.
 I'm not really talking about the firearms issues but rather the rest of the crap that is going on in this country.
 I hope they take this to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Just my thoughts.

[A-FIXER]

What this decision just did was to attempt to silence decent. Now rather than say what is on your mind you will have to make sure that the words you are saying will get a pass from the thought police.
 I will not be quite. And with all due respect to Rick what has talking nice  gotten any of us. Sometimes you have to rock the boat. When politicians refuse to listen to the average every day Joe then the average Joe needs to get louder until they listen.
 I'm not really talking about the firearms issues but rather the rest of the crap that is going on in this country.
 I hope they take this to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Just my thoughts.

Glock 1
Gun Show Volunteer
Benefactor Level Five

 Offline

Gender:
Posts: 59


    Re: Just a friendly little reminder....
? Reply #3 on: Today at 06:30:35 PM ? Quote

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Is the 1st Amendment to the Constitution still in effect or do I NOT have the Right to Freedom of Speech??  If I don't like something and a candidate has sausage between his ears I'm going to say something!

Now I don't mean going out and cursing this person but getting my point across to him/her in a straight forward manner is my right!

If the 'candidates' don't like the heat, they had better stay out of the kitchen and cry on their mama's shoulder!!!

You BOYS GOT IT RIGHT....and its a wonder if they ever thing just how close they are getting to all people on a national level getting ready to defend what amercia once was and its people wanting it to be again.... the pot is steaming and the viddles are cooked and its going to spill over.

[Nick]

While I agree that the student's rights are being violated here and I hope he wins his case, FarmerRick makes a good point. Being rude and abusive to our representatives will only turn them off and, if we identify ourselves as NFOA members, reflects badly on our organization and reduces our impact, IMO.

[A-FIXER]

Hum..........I guess the TEA PARTY WAS THE WRONG THING THEN?

[Hardwood83]

While I agree that the student's rights are being violated here and I hope he wins his case, FarmerRick makes a good point. Being rude and abusive to our representatives will only turn them off and, if we identify ourselves as NFOA members, reflects badly on our organization and reduces our impact, IMO.

Absolutely- they are 2 different issues: Effectiveness and Freedom. Being a jerk may be a right but it isn't persuasive. I contact Ben Nelson's office occasionally & briefly and politely sharing my opinion since screaming rants aren't going to acknowledged. I absolutely have the right to say what I believe- however injurious it may be to tender sensibilities but Freedom of Speech is not a guarantee to be taken seriously.

ETA: That is NOT to say there isn't a time to be loud and explicit- but common sense applies particularly if you are representing a group/organization (NFOA).

[FarmerRick]

While I agree that the student's rights are being violated here and I hope he wins his case, FarmerRick makes a good point. Being rude and abusive to our representatives will only turn them off and, if we identify ourselves as NFOA members, reflects badly on our organization and reduces our impact, IMO.

Absolutely- they are 2 different issues: Effectiveness and Freedom. Being a jerk may be a right but it isn't persuasive. I contact Ben Nelson's office occasionally & briefly and politely sharing my opinion since screaming rants aren't going to acknowledged. I absolutely have the right to say what I believe- however injurious it may be to tender sensibilities but Freedom of Speech is not a guarantee to be taken seriously.

ETA: That is NOT to say there isn't a time to be loud and explicit- but common sense applies particularly if you are representing a group/organization (NFOA).

Agreed, and that was the point I was trying to get across.

[A-FIXER]

I would agree with you Rick, and would think they are more apt to read it if in doing so and was to bringing up the NFOA in any context I would be civil and congenial. But as well, being an informed resident of this place called AMERCIA.....I offer the to all the same to state their opinion. But when one, gets so thin skinned and being in a leadership roles or equal classification will not exempt you from receiving any or all outspoken non challenging or challenging opinions or should I say....Should not exempt them.....or stop a person from challenging ....and I guess I'm doing just as the other fella who has got in trouble by expressing my view.

[huskergun]

First... I will not give the NFOA a bad rep. I will be polite at first...... But if no one wants to listen I may get a bit pushy. That's just me. If I say I'm NFOA I will be polite. If I'm writing just as myself I tend not to hold back and let them know what I'm thinking.

Screaming rants (which I don't do) get you no where. However a change in the tone of your voice may get the point across that you mean business.

 I tend to believe that they work for me and if I don't like what they are doing I will tell them. Plain and simple. Over the years our Reps have taken what WE THE PEOPLE have said and blown us off...Ben Nelson ring a bell? How about Chuck Hagel? I called Nelson allot leading up to the health care debacle. We all know most Nebraskans were against this but still old Ben voted to bring this up for debate while saying that " he had heard from many of his constituants and had a pretty good idea" of what they wanted. Really? He didn't listen to polite speak did he? Ben needs to be shown the door.
 Some times one must rock the boat. Start nice but if they don't listen make them listen. (no violence). Remind them that they work for US not the other way around and we expect them to pay attention. Imagine if everyone told them this. It's time WE THE PEOPLE take this country back to what our founders invisioned.
 
One more thing......TERM LIMITS !
 

[Glock 1]

I don't believe that chewing the rear end of a sausage headed politician who's trying to undermind the Constitution and my rights and purposely placing every LEGAL US citizen in debt up beyond their ears is wrong nor am I a 'jerk' for 'instructing' an elected official on my concerns in a straight-forward manner!

Does this mean that when your father chewed your rear end for doing something wrong was inappropriate?  Did it hurt some little boy's feelings?  I think your father was instructing you on the difference between right and wrong!!

Politicians put their pants on one leg at a time like most of us.  They're not perfect.  I believe a minority of them go with perfect intentions but it doesn't always work out.  It is our responsibility to influence and instruct them to do what is right for the people.  Whether that is done kissing their rear end or in a very straight forward direction!

Freedom of speech is NOT to be taken seriously?  Are you kidding me?  Freedom of speech and the right to bear arms are the 2 most important rights we have!  That's why the framers put them in the #1 and #2 spots!!!!!!!!!

When an individual(s) are fashioning a government to eliminate these rights, they're worth defending!!  Some may not think this way but I guess the 'sheeple' title can be applied in those cases.

I wonder what would have happened if when the Bill of Rights was being written one of the framers would have said "Freedom of Speech is not a gurantee to be taken seriously".  Get real!!

[FarmerRick]

Freedom of speech is NOT to be taken seriously?  Are you kidding me?  Freedom of speech and the right to bear arms are the 2 most important rights we have!  That's why the framers put them in the #1 and #2 spots!!!!!!!!!

When an individual(s) are fashioning a government to eliminate these rights, they're worth defending!!  Some may not think this way but I guess the 'sheeple' title can be applied in those cases.

I wonder what would have happened if when the Bill of Rights was being written one of the framers would have said "Freedom of Speech is not a gurantee to be taken seriously".  Get real!!

I won't speak for Hardwood83, but I'm pretty sure he meant that to be "...not a guarantee to be taken lightly."

[Hardwood83]

Freedom of speech is NOT to be taken seriously?  Are you kidding me?  Freedom of speech and the right to bear arms are the 2 most important rights we have!  That's why the framers put them in the #1 and #2 spots!!!!!!!!!

When an individual(s) are fashioning a government to eliminate these rights, they're worth defending!!  Some may not think this way but I guess the 'sheeple' title can be applied in those cases.

I wonder what would have happened if when the Bill of Rights was being written one of the framers would have said "Freedom of Speech is not a gurantee to be taken seriously".  Get real!!

I won't speak for Hardwood83, but I'm pretty sure he meant that to be "...not a guarantee to be taken lightly."

I'll speak for Hardwood83- What I intended to communicate was more like "Freedom of Speech is not a guarantee that you will be taken seriously" (ie heard)by those you're talking to. In other words just because you can say it doesn't mean anyone has to listen. I can call Ben Nelson (for example) and scream that he is a worthless member of a socialistic party...and while that may be satisfying to me and be true I doubt he'll find it persuasive. Again sorry for my lack of proof-reading. 

[FarmerRick]

Freedom of speech is NOT to be taken seriously?  Are you kidding me?  Freedom of speech and the right to bear arms are the 2 most important rights we have!  That's why the framers put them in the #1 and #2 spots!!!!!!!!!

When an individual(s) are fashioning a government to eliminate these rights, they're worth defending!!  Some may not think this way but I guess the 'sheeple' title can be applied in those cases.

I wonder what would have happened if when the Bill of Rights was being written one of the framers would have said "Freedom of Speech is not a gurantee to be taken seriously".  Get real!!

I won't speak for Hardwood83, but I'm pretty sure he meant that to be "...not a guarantee to be taken lightly."

I'll speak for Hardwood83- What I intended to communicate was more like "Freedom of Speech is not a guarantee that you will be taken seriously" (ie heard)by those you're talking to. In other words just because you can say it doesn't mean anyone has to listen. I can call Ben Nelson (for example) and scream that he is a worthless member of a socialistic party...and while that may be satisfying to me and be true I doubt he'll find it persuasive. Again sorry for my lack of proof-reading. 

Understood, well put.

[LawyerJan]

I've posted the decision at http://www.beranlaw.com/laws/Drahota.pdf for anyone who wants to take the time to decide for themselves.

Note that Drahota represented himself.

Note also that this is the Nebraska Court of Appeals, not the Nebraska Supreme Court (though they didn't reach down and take the case, so they apparently trusted Judge Inbody.)

Lawyers jokingly used to say that you cannot disturb the peace of cops, lawyers, judges and politicians.  I guess that's not true anymore, so all you people who call threatening to puke on me, watch out.

[A-FIXER]

^ LOL, I think? Or have I just been warned what will happen to me now.

[huskergun]

? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?

[huskergun]

 I just read the decision and while I'm not a person who speaks the language of the law (or lawyers) I see no problem with what he said except for the the threat of kicking his ass. At the same time Avery does appear to insult Drahota. Right? Drahota then apologized for his emails after the threat of the cops from Lincoln being called. (hopefully I'm reading this right).
 If all these emails were reason enough to take Drahota to court then why may ask was it not enough during the Bush adminisration to prosecute Harry Reid, and all the other lunatic leftists, Socialists out there that called Bush a traitor and other slanderous words? Why were they not prosecuted? I know.....Because they are elitist politicains. Was that over the top? hope not. It's just my thoughts. Hope the thought police don't show up at my door. What a joke. This now State Senator whos name begins with the letter "A" needs to get thick skin.
 I think this was a waste of our judicial system.  But then again this is just a rant from a right wing, God fearing, Gun owning, radical extremist who believes in the Constitution as it was written by our founders.
What the hell do I know? ?