Oh, I disagree. He and his cohorts disagreed about the would-be protestors' constitutional right to congregate and express protected free speech.
Had he/they personally known the targets in advance, your argument might have worked; one could then invoke an existing personal relationship between target and nutjob to avoid the general "terrorist" umbrella.
(I do agree that protesting at a funeral is poor in taste, but it is protected.)
It depends. Is your goal to send a message to the remaining members of the KKK that they aren't safe to practice their free speech, deplorable as it is? if so, then you are.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2007-05-23 05:36 pm (UTC)Oh, I disagree. He and his cohorts disagreed about the would-be protestors' constitutional right to congregate and express protected free speech.
Had he/they personally known the targets in advance, your argument might have worked; one could then invoke an existing personal relationship between target and nutjob to avoid the general "terrorist" umbrella.
(I do agree that protesting at a funeral is poor in taste, but it is protected.)
(no subject)
Date: 2007-05-23 11:35 pm (UTC)Now, if I was to shoot, assualt, or throw an explosive at someone doing these things would you call me a terrorist?
Solving a disagreement with violence is not automatically terror.
(no subject)
Date: 2007-05-24 04:32 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-05-24 04:35 am (UTC)A man spits in your face so you punch him. Cause and effect.