Watch what you Tweet. . Alyssa Douglas Someone needs to assassinate bbama... eike ASAP serial are tmt mast gates -year's ' ya: "icing as tweet about President [ Watch what you Tweet Alyssa Douglas Someone needs to assassinate bbama eike ASAP serial are tmt mast gates -year's ' ya: "icing as tweet about President [
Upload
Login or register
Hide Comments
Leave a comment Refresh Comments (365)
[ 365 comments ]
> hey anon, wanna give your opinion?
asd
#7 - ckys
Reply +127 123456789123345869
(09/10/2012) [-]
MFW i post something that "threatens national security"
#10 to #7 - anon id: 789319ba
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/10/2012) [-]
**anonymous rolls 33** proxies is enough, 1 less and it's bad apples maaaan.
4 more and it would've been dubs



unless it already is
#55 to #7 - anon id: 5133b5e9
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/11/2012) [-]
okay this amy just me being stupid, i use tor, but how the **** does one hide behind multiple proxxies? Like all it does is change your ip.... so it doesnt really matter if you change your ip 7 times...
#206 to #55 - ckys
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(09/11/2012) [-]
Very good question anon. It doesn't change your IP 7 times at once. But say someone decides to hack the proxy to try to get IP info, then they would be direct to the next proxy with a different IP. and so forth. On the other hand ********* must get the proxy's owner's permission to get IP info, witch they can decline.
User avatar #18 to #7 - heartlessrobot
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(09/11/2012) [-]
Might want to make that 10, and use ToR as well. Everyone has about 3 governments monitoring them 24/7.
#20 to #7 - paperwing
Reply +139 123456789123345869
(09/11/2012) [-]
#44 to #20 - Moog
Reply +37 123456789123345869
(09/11/2012) [-]
User avatar #60 to #44 - SnugglyWuggly
Reply +8 123456789123345869
(09/11/2012) [-]
Good luck, I'm behind 7 asses.
#76 to #60 - Moog
Reply +17 123456789123345869
(09/11/2012) [-]
There we go c:
#341 to #76 - unlimitedsmoof
Reply +3 123456789123345869
(09/11/2012) [-]
Amazing post 7/7 asses
Amazing post 7/7 asses
#145 to #76 - grahamernazi
Reply +3 123456789123345869
(09/11/2012) [-]
Is...is that lotad? It looks ******* ridiculous if it is.
#241 to #76 - jetthunder
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(09/11/2012) [-]
************ gamegrumps
User avatar #77 to #76 - SnugglyWuggly
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/11/2012) [-]
:D
#186 to #20 - ckys
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(09/11/2012) [-]
******* saved
User avatar #85 - BeardOfJesus
Reply +55 123456789123345869
(09/11/2012) [-]
that's what she gets for bandwagoning **** she doesn't understand.
User avatar #382 to #85 - failtolawl
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(09/11/2012) [-]
"obummer"
"libtards"

generic replies when people don't know what they are talking about
User avatar #39 - ninjastarthrow
Reply +47 123456789123345869
(09/11/2012) [-]
Anyone who says that goes against her freedom of speech doesn't know what they are talking about. Saying stuff like that is like yelling "BOMB!" In an airport or "ALLAHU ACKBAR!" on a plane. You can't just say those things. Now if she said "I don't like Obama, he should resign." Then that is freedom of speech. But she is just a stupid bimbo by the looks of it and deserves all this.
#50 to #39 - karson
-7 123456789123345869
has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #75 to #50 - eternalcorn
Reply +5 123456789123345869
(09/11/2012) [-]
schenck vs the united states
User avatar #316 to #50 - tkfourtwoone
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/11/2012) [-]
...and it is because dumb ***** like you that I would officially ban hate speeches if I was in charge.
Hate a person with all your heart, but keep it to yourself.
And that should get rid of organizations like KKK or WBC. Inciting to violence against a person or group of persons? BOOM - 5000$ fine.
That should help the economy!
User avatar #420 to #316 - karson
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/11/2012) [-]
it's not like the group that had the hate speech against it can't just do one right back. And it's a damn good thing you're not in charge, you authoritarian self-righteous little cunt.
User avatar #419 to #316 - karson
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/11/2012) [-]
Because I had a hate speech? are you too stupid to realize free speech isn't ******* free speech if it's limited? I don't give a **** what courts say, they must be retarded too. the thought "free speech to a limit" is ******* stupid nonsense. limiting it because it offends someone doesn't make it ok. the US was founded as a free country, when the forefathers said free speech, they meant it, because most of them probably talked **** about the brits anyways and about assasinating them. and why do you sound so ******* butthurt in your comment?
User avatar #425 to #419 - tkfourtwoone
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/12/2012) [-]
Then clearly you do not understand basic common sense about freedom.
Like "your freedom stops where my freedom and rights begin".
User avatar #426 to #425 - karson
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/13/2012) [-]
I'm fully aware of the philosophies of...John Locke, I believe? well, anyways, your rights and freedoms don't start by deciding what someone can and can't say about you because it might hurt your feelings.( I'm sorry I was a bit nasty earlier, but you replied in a very hostile way, which was 100% uncalled for, but eh, it is the internet after all.) The very thought is ridiculous, and anyone who believes that their right is to not hear insulting said about them clearly does not believe in freedom.
User avatar #427 to #426 - tkfourtwoone
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/13/2012) [-]
I'm not talking about insulting one's feelings, I'm talking about personal safety & security.

That's what I said earlier, it should be completely illegal to incite against a person or group of persons; by that I mean no more "God wants US troops dead", "Kill the fags", etc.

It's mainly because, well, we've seen what too much freedom can bring or how it can be abused/misunderstood. Therefore I would employ a "you're gonna tolerate each other, even forcefully if needed"
User avatar #428 to #427 - karson
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/13/2012) [-]
well when you put it that way, it's understandable.
User avatar #135 to #50 - ronyx
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(09/11/2012) [-]
Sorry but no.
User avatar #192 to #50 - nigeltheoutlaw
Reply -2 123456789123345869
(09/11/2012) [-]
That's not at all what freedom of speech means. Time after time the courts have reinforced that there are reasonable limits on free speech. If you don't like it, go to Somalia.
#48 to #39 - anon id: c61ceb63
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/11/2012) [-]
What's wrong with saying that on a plane? It just means that god is the greatest.
User avatar #52 to #48 - lolollo
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(09/11/2012) [-]
Anon, I'd like the be the first one to formally introduce you to this wonderful world of a little thing I like to call "context". It's what makes both stressful situations, and hilarious innuendos possible. Since you're new to this concept, I suggest you start slow. Make a few "That's what she said" jokes before moving on to much more complicated situations.
#183 - pariahlol
Reply +46 123456789123345869
(09/11/2012) [-]
Bitch used to go to my school. Yearbook photo from 4 years ago or so.
User avatar #347 to #183 - sammyjankiis
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(09/11/2012) [-]
What a dumbass!
User avatar #224 to #183 - robskul
Reply +3 123456789123345869
(09/11/2012) [-]
was she always stupid?
#227 to #224 - pariahlol
Reply +16 123456789123345869
(09/11/2012) [-]
yup
User avatar #265 to #227 - angelbur
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(09/11/2012) [-]
Sadly shes in prison now
#417 to #265 - pariahlol
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(09/11/2012) [-]
*Gladly
#46 - shadowfox
Reply +34 123456789123345869
(09/11/2012) [-]
"It's extremely illegal to say 'I want someone to kill the president of the united states of america. Extremely extremely illegal!'"
#27 - juiceboxninja
Reply +29 123456789123345869
(09/11/2012) [-]
Worst part is:
she probably doesn't even know any of his policies, or the other party's policies.
She's just Bangwagoning what her parents or friends believe.
#430 to #27 - awsomepk
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/16/2012) [-]
So are you, your opinions of the world come from your experiences and what you're taught, which are mainly influenced by your parents and friends. We're all bandwagon faggots.
#13 - pepsismash
Reply +29 123456789123345869
(09/10/2012) [-]
#291 - foolycooly
Reply +27 123456789123345869
(09/11/2012) [-]
>post a treasonous comment on a website heavily monitered by the CIA
>MFW

stupidity at its finest.
good luck getting into college/getting a job you dumb ****
#305 to #291 - anon id: 109c4faa
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/11/2012) [-]
I dont think she was aiming that High anyway.
User avatar #307 to #305 - usernameluisdjlols
Reply -8 123456789123345869
(09/11/2012) [-]
she's a girl, she probably was
User avatar #84 - baditch
Reply -27 123456789123345869
(09/11/2012) [-]
We live in a country where you can't say whatever you want anymore.
User avatar #86 to #84 - BeardOfJesus
Reply +27 123456789123345869
(09/11/2012) [-]
freedom of speech doesn't cover anything that:
A.) is vulgar or profane
B.) threatens national security
C.) threatens the well being of others
User avatar #415 to #86 - baditch
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/11/2012) [-]
From what i understand, you can say anything you want, but you can't always act on these things. For example: talking about the president being killed is legal. Killing the president, however, is not legal. I didn't think my comment would rustle everyone to such an extent.
#92 to #86 - anon id: 034be2c6
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/11/2012) [-]
it covers profanities
User avatar #142 to #92 - BeardOfJesus
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(09/11/2012) [-]
I apologize, your right, it doesn't cover threats and Words used to express hatred or violence but it does cover profanity.
#96 to #92 - BeardOfJesus
-1 123456789123345869
has deleted their comment [-]
#150 to #96 - wishanonscouldpost
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(09/11/2012) [-]
Using "fighting words" as a legal term. Sounds legit.

Seriously though the only thing the amendment says is "freedom of speech". The constitution does not say what freedom of speech is, but based off the previous ideas of the founders it is clear that freedom of speech should allow you to be critical of others and allow you to speak your own ideas without any legal action. The constitution did not say that violent words are not covered under freedom of speech, and violence was obviously used for political purposes during the times of the founding fathers.

Profanity can't even be considered violent. If you consider harsh speech not covered under the amendment then it defeats the purpose of the amendment. The entire purpose of it is to allow for harsh speech against others (mainly government.)
User avatar #164 to #150 - BeardOfJesus
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/11/2012) [-]
I already admitted my fault on that above.
#178 to #164 - wishanonscouldpost
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(09/11/2012) [-]
But why would it cover profanity?
User avatar #202 to #178 - BeardOfJesus
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(09/11/2012) [-]
I believe it's because that would allow mild censorship, i mean who would get to decide what is and isn't profane? If profanities are used to threaten someones well being, that's where it should cross the line, in my opinion.
User avatar #170 to #150 - nigeltheoutlaw
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(09/11/2012) [-]
"Fighting words" is actually a real thing. If you egg someone into hitting you, you are just as liable as them in the assault, as you encouraged it.
User avatar #121 to #86 - sirformidio
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(09/11/2012) [-]
So what you're saying is "Your freedoms end where my feelings begin."
Am I right?
User avatar #133 to #121 - BeardOfJesus
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(09/11/2012) [-]
What i'm saying is, "your freedoms end where the well being of others and the amendments set forth by our forefathers for the benefit of our nation begin." If you don't agree with the amendments of the U.S. constitution that's your opinion.
User avatar #138 to #133 - sirformidio
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(09/11/2012) [-]
But if they are allowed to censor what I say, which is an opinion, that can be interpreted as being prosecuted by federal law for having an opinion. Of course,this also correlates thought, so where does it stop? The answer: It should never begin.
User avatar #156 to #138 - BeardOfJesus
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/11/2012) [-]
I disagree, freedom of speech should allow us to have a voice in our government as it always has, but I do not believe you should have the freedom to shout threats to people and threaten their well being. I also agree that it should be unconstitutional to slander people or make up lies and claim them as truth without proper evidence to support it.
User avatar #172 to #156 - sirformidio
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/11/2012) [-]
Your point is valid, true, but still. Who would shout threats to others like what she tweeted? Idiots and the insane. The insane literally get away with murder, and idiots aren't taken seriously.
User avatar #193 to #172 - BeardOfJesus
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/11/2012) [-]
Yes, but if you let everyone to say death threats or slander others, it would be even more difficult to tell between the two?
User avatar #196 to #193 - sirformidio
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/11/2012) [-]
Wouldn't be hard to differentiate between the serious and the idiocy.
Furthermore, he probably gets hundreds of death threats a day, why on Earth do they arrest her?
User avatar #210 to #196 - BeardOfJesus
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/11/2012) [-]
I don't think it said they arrested her, just that they started an investigation, i'm pretty sure all his death threats are put under some investigation.
User avatar #221 to #210 - sirformidio
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/11/2012) [-]
They considered words spouted from the mouth of a 16 year old was worth investigating? Nice to know they use the budget well.
User avatar #228 to #221 - BeardOfJesus
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/11/2012) [-]
I think it depends on how specific the threat is, i don't think it'll be that deep of an investigation in this case.
User avatar #232 to #228 - sirformidio
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/11/2012) [-]
Deep enough to get A.) a mugshot if what I see here is true and B.) a news report.
User avatar #240 to #232 - BeardOfJesus
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/11/2012) [-]
it's not her, that's just and ad for a mug-shot slideshow, i looked into it, and it's just a local news website for Tampa bay Florida, must have been a slow news day.
#245 to #240 - sirformidio
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/11/2012) [-]
Nice to see you at least defending a point.
I'm currently trying to find out why the **** my computer and application languages are in Chinese, so I haven't much want to continue. And no, near 9/11 it's never a slow news day. Can't wait for the jokes I've heard for the past 4 years to surround me again this year.
Cheers.
User avatar #249 to #245 - BeardOfJesus
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/11/2012) [-]
Have a good one man, it was nice to have a civil conversation on this site for once, and at the least lets hope that 9/11 yields some originality this year.
User avatar #155 to #138 - Sunburn
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/11/2012) [-]
It's one thing to explain your dislike about someone, but a whole other thing to say you want the LEADER OF YOUR COUNTRY dead. People have been killed for less than that.
User avatar #160 to #138 - nigeltheoutlaw
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(09/11/2012) [-]
If anything you say or do interferes with the rights of another person, then it is no longer covered by the Constitution.
User avatar #176 to #160 - sirformidio
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(09/11/2012) [-]
Words do not interfere with rights of others.
User avatar #207 to #176 - nigeltheoutlaw
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/11/2012) [-]
Additionally, you can not incite violence or do things such as yell "FIRE" in a crowded room. The judicial system has repeatedly enforced this. Check and mate.
User avatar #212 to #207 - sirformidio
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(09/11/2012) [-]
That's covered under "Inciting Riots"
User avatar #223 to #212 - nigeltheoutlaw
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(09/11/2012) [-]
Which is illegal.
User avatar #231 to #223 - sirformidio
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/11/2012) [-]
inciting riots are context sensitive.
for instance, in some places saying "Free Pies at the corner store" is usually harmless and would not be considered illegal. But if the conditions are wrong, you can cause a stampede that could end in death. Unlikely, yet possible. See the difference?
#365 - anahbell
-38 123456789123345869
has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #393 to #365 - mrsirius
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(09/11/2012) [-]
Then you are as stupid as Mid Robney, because if he does not win, and hope to **** he docent, WE ARE ALL ******.
#371 to #365 - anon id: 6d8b9b24
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/11/2012) [-]
so you want osama bin laden alive?
User avatar #373 to #371 - anahbell
Reply -5 123456789123345869
(09/11/2012) [-]
No, that happens to be the one thing he did right.. and all in all, it wasn't actually HIM that did it. It was our military. Yes, in his command.. but they carried out the work.
User avatar #403 to #373 - newsmyrna
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(09/11/2012) [-]
He also got the dow jones from 6,626 to 13,254 in a matter of three years, bailed out the US Auto Industry, basically saving it, got us out of Iraq, passed the most comprehensive health care law since medicare, brought unemployment down from 10.1% to 8.1% and all this after the biggest financial crisis in 70+ years
#377 to #373 - anon id: b2d45194
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/11/2012) [-]
yeah he totally did that and the body vanished just like in your vidya game kids
#389 to #365 - anon id: 6e1b9aaf
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/11/2012) [-]
How dare you post an opinion on funnyjunk
#386 to #365 - draxdiesel
Reply +3 123456789123345869
(09/11/2012) [-]
i concur. i support romney because i believe america can be a better america than america by keeping america american, america. or whatever.
i concur. i support romney because i believe america can be a better america than america by keeping america american, america. or whatever.
User avatar #404 to #386 - sgtwilliam
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(09/11/2012) [-]
Yeah, who needs a healthcare plan anyhow? Look at Norway, they suck so much that no one has a **** life in that country. Silly Norwegians and their healthcare..
User avatar #368 to #365 - datargumme
Reply +4 123456789123345869
(09/11/2012) [-]
It does not matter who the president is, it matters who is in gongress, it is them who make all the laws who **** up everything.
#367 to #365 - bokkos
Reply +12 123456789123345869
(09/11/2012) [-]
#370 to #367 - anahbell
-18 123456789123345869
has deleted their comment [-]
#372 to #370 - bokkos
Reply +11 123456789123345869
(09/11/2012) [-]
If I had a nickel...
#388 to #370 - ruinsage
Reply +4 123456789123345869
(09/11/2012) [-]
This image has expired
yeah yeah, all those damn college kids, with their fancy educations and jobs

But sure, the last republican president did so much better, having started two wars on empty grounds and driven the economy to the ground, leaving it o obama to clean up a world wide economic crisis while republicans, who caused the crisis in the first place, complain about the bad economy.

tl;dr:

Your an idiot
User avatar #413 to #388 - anahbell
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/11/2012) [-]
I'm not going to argue with you, I'll let you roll with what you think is right and what I think is right. Call me what you want too, I don't care. All I have to say is, that picture.. is utter ********. I'm not one of those ignorant people, Japan didn't deserve anything like that. Pearl harbor has come and past and we've buried the hatchet.. the morons posting that stuff are inbred little *****. Something I'm not.
#406 to #388 - anon id: 7c53d037
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/11/2012) [-]
Holy ****, that picture makes me rage.
#408 to #370 - Xyhpon
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/11/2012) [-]
Though I don't care for Obama, I don't like Romney either, honestly I don't really like anyone that wants to rule over hundreds of millions of people, but humans need a structure to keep them in check because they're stupid, violent, and primitive when left to their own devices..
#396 to #370 - deadfeds **User deleted account**
0 123456789123345869
has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #424 to #396 - keiishiyama
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/12/2012) [-]
I don't know. Romney is a businessman. He knows how to fix a budget and how to spend. I want him to win this term only because he could fix the economy better than I think Obama could, but I would definitely NOT elect that man based on his views.

Jesus Christ, conservative views make me hate my affiliation.
#369 to #365 - tweetyftw **User deleted account**
+25 123456789123345869
has deleted their comment [-]