Opinion Why restrict child porn but not guns? - From a wife-beating journo


It is what allows columnists — or anybody else — to write whatever we want without fear the government is going to haul us off to jail. In Russia, you can go to prison for calling their war against Ukraine “a war.” In China, you get sent to a camp for adhering to certain religions.

Free speech is so important in the United States, it is the First Amendment to our Constitution: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech.” Not only am I allowed to air the truth as I see it — Donald Trump is a traitor who should be in prison — but all sorts of salacious material are permitted. Courts decided, grudgingly, that offensive artworks and obscene comedy sketches and extreme pornographic videos are also free speech and cannot be banned.

There are, of course, exceptions. Free speech doesn’t permit you to shout “Fire!” in a crowded theater. I didn’t just grab that example by accident. During World War I, a pacifist was arrested for distributing a leaflet claiming the draft was unconstitutional. In upholding his conviction in 1919 in Schenck v. The United States, Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes wrote:

The most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man in falsely shouting fire in a theatre and causing a panic. ... The question in every case is whether the words ... create a clear and present danger ... that Congress has a right to prevent.
A half century later, the Supreme Court decided we are a great enough nation that our freedoms extend even to resisting a war we are currently fighting, and Schenck was dialed back. Now to be illegal, speech usually must be libelous, or promote imminent lawless action — you are not free to deliver a speech urging your neighbors to kill someone.

Nor can you own child pornography, and it’s important to understand why. Child pornography is among the most restricted material in our society. You don’t have to produce it or sell it to commit a crime; it’s a crime simply to possess it.

Why does child pornography merit such a unique level of suppression? I’ll give you a hint: it’s called “child pornography.” Children cannot consent to sexual acts with adults and are severely damaged by being forced to do so. Child pornography hurts children, so we fight it with all the legal might our nation can bring to bear, even if it infringes on fundamental freedoms.

To summarize: an essential part of the Constitution gives Americans a right, but that right is limited when the free exercise of it harms children.

So why all the trouble with guns? Why does a logic universally accepted regarding the First Amendment completely fall apart when we get to the Second? The harm to children from guns far exceeds the harm done by child pornography.

“Over the last two decades, more … children have died from guns than on-duty police officers and active-duty military combined,” Joe Biden said in his June 2 speech on the need for sane gun laws. “Think about that: more kids than on-duty cops killed by guns, more kids than soldiers killed by guns.”

Unlike the words of our previous president, that’s not only true, but an understatement.

The far right have a twisted logic about gun laws that goes like this: the Second Amendment is such an absolute value that even the most common-sense restriction — don’t sell assault rifles to teenagers — is a step toward the bogeyman of total confiscation. Ban .50-caliber bullets, their thinking goes, and the black helicopters are on their way.

As they repeat that, over and over, remember: by their reasoning, child pornography should be legal, out of respect for the First Amendment, with the harm it causes children shrugged off.

Among Republicans, 44% say schoolroom slaughters are the price we pay for living in a free society — ignoring that a) if kids are being regularly gunned down at school, then this isn’t a free society, and b) we already create all sorts of exceptions to our rights in order to preserve a sane and humane nation. We already do so with guns — no machine guns, no sawed-off shotguns. We can do more. As another Supreme Court Justice, Robert H. Jackson, once wrote, the Bill of Rights is not a suicide pact.

The author:
Screenshot_20220608-123653_DuckDuckGo.jpg

...who flunked a background check:
FUvnBZdWIAAns9g.jpg
 
What these anti-gun people don’t understand is it’s not that we THINK we can win against the government; it’s that an armed society is harder to suppress solely because the population can fight back.

The government must fear the public to avoid tyranny and the tyrants know that, which is why they’re working too hard to disarm us.

They’re slowly raising the temperature and I’m just hoping I die before the water boils.
 
Neil Ira Steinberg
10 June 1960

2000 Center Ave.
Northbrook, IL
60062-4515

Democuck

Dude's blogspot is a salt and goldmine of lunacy. He even has a piece about snipping off peckers automatically makes a dude a chick way somewhere around 2015 to act like he's owning cuckservatives.


So much to archive.
This fedora rant was kind of amusing. This guy is constantly on the verge of stroking out with rage.

Archive of his old columns.

Linkedin, Twitter, Muckrack, publisher and his books. Facebook. Odd, odd guy if you read a few of his social media comments, just comes off as real weird.

Wife is Edie Goldberg Steinberg (lmao). She is a lawyer.

Here is an article about when he beat her up.

His claim to being the city’s most famous drunk stems from an incident in September 2005. It all happened so quickly, and yet it had been building to that moment for a long time. Late at night, Steinberg was arrested on a domestic-battery charge for striking his wife—for slapping her because she said she was afraid of him and she started to call 911. He was also charged with interfering with the reporting of a domestic battery—that happened when he ripped his kitchen phone off the wall and hurled it across the room. Steinberg was immediately placed on leave from his job. He announced through the Sun-Times that he had been drinking before the domestic-battery incident, and that under court order, he would be entering an alcohol-recovery program.

“Everyone focuses on the slap—and that was the only time I ever hit my wife,” Steinberg says. “But the big issue was really the drinking. I had been drinking.” In less than 24 hours before the incident leading to his arrest, Steinberg had consumed a third of a bottle of Cognac in the early-morning hours, knocked back two vodka tonics and a beer before a 10 a.m. editorial meeting, taken a “long and boozy lunch” with a college friend, had several drinks before boarding his evening Metra train, where he consumed two glasses of wine in the bar car, and then slammed back a drink at a local pizzeria when he picked up the family dinner. He topped the evening off with a snifter of Cognac. Drinking, he admits, is the greatest love of his life.

This POS still thinks he can brag because he only hit her once (allegedly).

Of course he turned terrorizing his family while acting like a drunk retard into a book for asspats and attention:

In his new book, Drunkard: A Hard-Drinking Life (due from E. P. Dutton on June 19th), Steinberg examines in unrelenting detail how he had been drinking—sometimes up to 40 ounces of hard liquor a day—for a long time. Somewhere along the line, it stopped being fun. The book starts the day before the domestic-battery incident and then takes the reader through Steinberg’s 28-day rehab and his struggles to stay sober (under the threat of a divorce) in the first months afterward. His wife, Edie, is a pivotal yet aloof character in the account. She is a driving force in his quest for sobriety, yet she moves quietly around the edges of much of the book, reading her Al-Anon pamphlets and refusing to indulge her husband. Drunkard is, by turns, horrifying (Steinberg drinks the bottle of vanilla used for his kids’ French toast), exasperating (he turns a speech in New York into a scene from The Lost Weekend), frightening (he leaves his young son Ross alone in the children’s section of the Northbrook library so he can run out and buy a pint of bourbon), and funny (home from jail, he wishes he had spent half as much time thinking about his life as he had planning his kitchen renovation). The book is a compelling read, sad and wistful and breathtakingly forthright. Amazingly, it also has a lot of laughs.

His sons appear to both be going into the law. Interesting.

Anyhow Neil is in the Illinois LGBT hall of fame.
 
This fedora rant was kind of amusing. This guy is constantly on the verge of stroking out with rage.

Archive of his old columns.

Linkedin, Twitter, Muckrack, publisher and his books. Facebook. Odd, odd guy if you read a few of his social media comments, just comes off as real weird.

Wife is Edie Goldberg Steinberg (lmao). She is a lawyer.

Here is an article about when he beat her up.



This POS still thinks he can brag because he only hit her once (allegedly).

Of course he turned terrorizing his family while acting like a drunk retard into a book for asspats and attention:



His sons appear to both be going into the law. Interesting.

Anyhow Neil is in the Illinois LGBT hall of fame.
Here's an archive of an article from around when he was charged. https://web.archive.org/web/20181009070210/https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-xpm-2005-10-02-0510020260-story.html
 
This fedora rant was kind of amusing. This guy is constantly on the verge of stroking out with rage.

Archive of his old columns.

Linkedin, Twitter, Muckrack, publisher and his books. Facebook. Odd, odd guy if you read a few of his social media comments, just comes off as real weird.

Wife is Edie Goldberg Steinberg (lmao). She is a lawyer.

Here is an article about when he beat her up.



This POS still thinks he can brag because he only hit her once (allegedly).

Of course he turned terrorizing his family while acting like a drunk retard into a book for asspats and attention:



His sons appear to both be going into the law. Interesting.

Anyhow Neil is in the Illinois LGBT hall of fame.

He drank out of a bottle of vanilla? LMFAO. That settles it. He revoked his white passing card and jew card. He's one of the people he likes to look down on for being the darker hue. That's fucking ghetto levels of pathetic. At least make it fucking mouthwash or rubbing alcohol.
 
I don't think Loli is enough for actual Pedos. If it's not a real kid, I don't think it satisfies them. Given how they will always reoffend anyways. Loli's more a Libertarian thing, "It's not Pedophila, mom, she's a 1734 year old demon!"
Totally anecdotal, but I had a faggot sperg out at me about pedophillia in isekai (the kind of isekai where you're reborn as a baby, so defining age is weird). I'm not familiar with the series so I can't give details, but he was really really adamant that isekai pedophillia is bad and I should join him in hating the series I didn't give a fuck about in the first place.

He has never once informed me about anything to do with real world pedophiles, if I want to figure out if Eliza Bleu ever launched her podcast then I have to do that myself.

Fictional and real world pedophillia are definitely different to some people, and I get the feeling that certain people just use fictional pedophillia to performatively demonstrate that they care about kids while they ignore actual pedophillia.
 
Atrás
Top Abajo