<< ALERT >>: Federal judge says Forest Service broke law not regulating Snowmobiles!!

[YAMA S]

After reading a bunch on WMC I've come to the conclusion that they truly don't want to "ban all" snowmobiling.... Just everything that doesn't fit in with their super tree hugging agenda. They believe that NO snowmobile should ever be off a "designated trail". They truly think that EVERY good skiable hill, drainage, bowls and anything else that's OFF trail is there for them & them only. I found many times on their web site that the hill they hiked to ski was "ruined" because of these NEW high horsepower snowmobiles. It's their true want to put us ALL back on lets say 250 bravo's... All groups like these are only into sharing if we trade in all our new sleds for the sleds of old. I think the attached photo proves what they think is a acceptable sled. Just remember they are fighting for "THEMSELVES" and not for the rights of all

 

[03RMK800]

Why can't you just ban this guy Christopher?

Yeh, the guy is obnoxious and doesn't truly like sleds and sledders and thinks the solution is to kick us all out. He doesn't have a right to post on this website, just as the newspaper editor can choose to not print letters global warming naysayers.

However, we don't gain any thing by not hearing the opinions of others, ill- considered and unfounded as the statements might be. Strike a blow in favor of free speech and against political correctness. Encourage your editors (website, forum, listserve, newspaper and broadcast) to let the rants happen so the recipients can be informed about "the others" or to choose not read/listen to "crackpot" views. Its often humorous.

I cringe when I hear of college rules about word usage, labels, etc. I couldn't conform, good thing I am more than thirty years beyond universities.

Now, its spreading beyond universities to demands to newspaper editors to not print letters from people with "X" view. Several newspapers have decided global warming is such a well established fact that they will not print articles, studies or letters from those who say otherwise. Are we as afraid of words that do not fit our mindset as the Libyans whom our President said rioted over a YouTube rant, and Iran, which issued a death command for Salmon Rushdie, or the immigrants living in Europe, who went batty over editorial cartoons?

Watch out for the EU, (and to some extent GB and Canada (sorry, but...)), too. Most of the rest of the free world does not understand free speech doesn't mean speech that never causes discomfort and allows certain acts and behaviors not in the mainstream.

 

[Devilmanak]

Good view. He does more damage to his "cause" by opening his mouth than we could gain by silencing him.

 

[sunkist]

Hey 03RMK800, could you elaborate on that last paragraph please...

 

[03RMK800]

Many countries have "polite speech" laws prohibiting the expression of views and opinions that might be hurtful, or that resurrect past bad events and acts. Germany has laws strictly confining speech/activity with ties to Nazism. Some Scandananvian country (one or more) actively encourages play nice groupthink. The islamists-- that's a whole restrictive world that is trying to impose its restrictions on the rest of the world. Us in the US? We allow it, encourage it, and mystify the rest of the world by allowing insult, nutcake opinion, and much, much more as protected speech.

This weekend's headline-- the Egyption satire broadcaster is off the air. Years ago, Salman (misspelled above) Rushdie wrote a book. He is under a death bounty from islamic leaders. Newspaper cartoons often draw ire if they depict Mohammed or Allah in any way, or "denigrate" the moslem religion.

The "artwork" of a crucifix in a jar of urine caused international outrage, calls for its destruction and imprisonment of the "artist." Many foreigners could not understand that it is protected speech in the US.

Few countries (none, to my knowledge) do not have the extensive First Amendment speech protection we have, even if (like GB, and perhaps even the EU) have some sort of free speech ideal. They can't and won't carry it out. Our First Amendment is nearly as mysterious to foreigners as our Second Amendment. That one really puzzles them.

Here is an excerpt of the EU take on free speech. The countries (and the EU) run amok under Par. 2. This is taken from the EU Charter Organization website:

Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers. The freedom and pluralism of the media shall be respected.

Legal Explanations

1. Article 11 corresponds to Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which reads as follows:

"1. Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers. This article shall not prevent States from requiring the licensing of broadcasting, television or cinema enterprises.

2. The exercise of these freedoms, since it carries with it duties and responsibilities, may be subject to such formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society, in the interests of national security, territorial integrity or public safety, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, for the protection of the reputation or rights of others, for preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence, or for maintaining the authority and impartiality of the judiciary."