[x]

deviantART

 
:iconsgthartsock:

!SgtHartsock

The facts are out there...
About Me Banned Deviant Deviously Deviant SgtHartsockMale/United States Recent Activity Deviant for 2 Years
Needs Premium Membership
Statistics 0 Deviations
4,381 Comments
8,859 Pageviews
This person has been banned from deviantART permanently.

Comments


Lol you are weak for blocking that comment. you said alot of crap on
:iconeddboy:'s page and said he was weak for blocking your comments. You are a hypocrite Bigot.
what about freedom of speech you were talking about on his page? You clearly abuse it.
Flagged as Spam
You're an ignorant fool and should get banned for all your garbage you posted on other people's pages forcing your political views on others. Face it you may hate Obama and say he has no right to be President but he is the president and Mc Cain is not.

And it looks like you don't fully understand freedom of speech it has it's limits.
The freedom of speech is not absolute. Legal systems, and society at large, recognize limits on the freedom of speech, particularly when freedom of speech conflicts with other values or rights.Exercising freedom of speech always takes place within a context of competing values. Limitations to freedom of speech may follow the "harm principle" or the "offense principle", for example in the case of pornography or "hate speech". Limitations to freedom of speech may occur through legal sanction and/or social disapprobation.

In 1985 Joel Feinberg introduced what is known as the "offence principle", arguing that Mill's harm principle does not provide sufficient protection against the wrongful behaviours of others. Feinberg wrote "It is always a good reason in support of a proposed criminal prohibition that it would probably be an effective way of preventing serious offense (as opposed to injury or harm) to persons other than the actor, and that it is probably a necessary means to that end." Hence Feinberg argues that the harm principle sets the bar too high and that some forms of expression can be legitimately prohibited by law because they are very offensive. But, as offending someone is less serious than harming someone, the penalties imposed should be higher for causing harm. In contrast Mill does not support legal penalties unless they are based on the harm principle.

Basically if you are going to use freedom of speech just to say hurtful shit to other people which you are. then you are wrong for doing it.
OMGz LULZ AT FRIENDS AND IDIOTS

Haha. GOD WHY DO I TYPE LIKE THAT?!

--
-DangerB-

your world as I see it.
hell if I know :P

--
:rage: :megaphone: Obama is a FRAUD! [link] [link] [link] [link]
It's the liberal media rotting out my brains.

--
-DangerB-

your world as I see it.
I have the antidote - Bob Parks [link]

--
:rage: :megaphone: Obama is a FRAUD! [link] [link] [link] [link]
Flagged as Spam
I'm sorry, but I'm a genius, and the state has the paperwork to prove it... so How do I qualify being an idiot exactly?

Go find Jesus or something... learn to control your hate.

--
Everyone's wrong because everyone's right. Try to find the balance of listening to others whilst being true to yourself.
Thanks for the fav's dude

--
[link]
no prob dude. Hey, if you're on MSN sometime, give me a shout!

--
:rage: :megaphone: Obama is a FRAUD! [link] [link] [link] [link]

Site Map