firethewagonup said:

---

But you didn't say sheet to him did you? Didn't think so.

---

And that would've accomplished what exactly?

What is also sad, besides the histrionic behavior, are his five kids and subservient wife that have to stand there with him and suffer the ear damages.

The idea that it is anti-free speech to say a guy shouldn't be allowed to use a bullhorn to interrupt another public gathering. GTFO libertarians

Seamaster said:

---

An idea - set up a group of students. Give them some cash.

They go out and buy an even louder system and they just follow him around and wherever he stops, they stop 10 feet from him and blast salsa music or something louder than his clap trap.

---

Hold their microphone in front of his speaker.

Feedback would block everything

Agsttt said:

---

PascalsWager said:

---

texas2000 said:

---

Ags -

Did anyone come across the religious guy with the speaker on volume 500 in front of the MSC?

We were just trying to enjoy the band and Corps marching by and this A hole was screaming on a bullhorn. It was so loud it overpowered the band - he was annoying the living hell out of everyone around.

I am ALL for the 1st Amendment, but there is a point where someone's freedom of speech should not infringe on my right to peacefully enjoy the pre game activities.

---

You're not. It's ok that you're not. But you're not.

---

You don't have a damn clue what this guy's thoughts and beliefs are. Stop acting like you do.

---

Actually, anybody who was subjected to his rant knows exactly what his thoughts and beliefs are. Plus, it's evident he's a member of the "church of wells" whose views are all over the internet.

Hank the Grifter said:

---

Seamaster said:

---

Hank the Grifter said:

---

Seamaster said:

---

PascalsWager said:

---

texas2000 said:

---

Ags -

Did anyone come across the religious guy with the speaker on volume 500 in front of the MSC?

We were just trying to enjoy the band and Corps marching by and this A hole was screaming on a bullhorn. It was so loud it overpowered the band - he was annoying the living hell out of everyone around.

I am ALL for the 1st Amendment, but there is a point where someone's freedom of speech should not infringe on my right to peacefully enjoy the pre game activities.

---

You're not. It's ok that you're not. But you're not.

---

Howso?

Did the fathers of the constitution have irritating loud electrified bullhorns in mind when they wrote the 1st amendment?

Like everyone has the RIGHT to do THAT at all times?!

---

Oh boy.
First, I agree with you that this sort of behavior should be regulated somehow. Inserting yourself into thousands of people's lives against their will is problematic for sure. Yes he has freedoms, so do I. Mine don't end just because his exist.

That stated, your argument is one that the left has tried to use for years against the 2nd Amendment. The technology has nothing to do with it. I doubt the founding fathers could have envisioned computers and the internet. That doesn't mean that free speech is limited to people writing with quill and ink. A right is right and THAT'S what the founding fathers knew and cared about. They knew technology would advance but part of their genius is that they didn't add caveats to said rights.

---

With the quill and ink people had the right and ability to not read it.

With the internet and videos people have the right and ability to not read/watch it.

With a bullhorn in your hear, people are stripped of their right to not hear it.

---

A) The first part of my post says exactly what you said. You're agreeing with me
B) You've completely missed the point.

---

Pray tell what am I missing?!?

texas2000 said:

---

Ags -

Did anyone come across the religious guy with the speaker on volume 500 in front of the MSC?

We were just trying to enjoy the band and Corps marching by and this A hole was screaming on a bullhorn. It was so loud it overpowered the band - he was annoying the living hell out of everyone around.

I am ALL for the 1st Amendment, but there is a point where someone's freedom of speech should not infringe on my right to peacefully enjoy the pre game activities.

---

The Great Commission does not call for this method, regardless if your message is scripturally accurate.

A nice pair of wire cutters should do the trick

Quoting myself here:

Quote:

---

First, I agree with you that this sort of behavior should be regulated somehow. Inserting yourself into thousands of people's lives against their will is problematic for sure. Yes he has freedoms, so do I. Mine don't end just because his exist

---

That last sentence in particular is why I said we're saying the same thing.

Hank the Grifter said:

---

Quoting myself here:

Quote:

---

First, I agree with you that this sort of behavior should be regulated somehow. Inserting yourself into thousands of people's lives against their will is problematic for sure. Yes he has freedoms, so do I. Mine don't end just because his exist

---

That last sentence in particular is why I said we're saying the same thing.

---

Ok.

And then you said:

"That stated, your argument is one that the left has tried to use for years against the 2nd Amendment. The technology has nothing to do with it. I doubt the founding fathers could have envisioned computers and the internet. That doesn't mean that free speech is limited to people writing with quill and ink. A right is right and THAT'S what the founding fathers knew and cared about. They knew technology would advance but part of their genius is that they didn't add caveats to said rights."

To which I said,

"With the quill and ink people had the right and ability to not read it.

With the internet and videos people have the right and ability to not read/watch it.

With a bullhorn in your ear, people are stripped of their right to not hear it."

So I guess we agree that these guys are annoying but you think they have a constitutional right to do it that way and I don't think they do.

Rights have limits, thank God. We all have the right to pursue happiness but a pedo who gets happy pursuing the kids in the neighborhood park doesn't have the right to do that just because it makes him happy.

Speech is a right but a person has no right to libel and slander another person.

And - there is no right to put a bullhorn to somebody's ear and scream at them.

Interesting factoid - the three founders of the Church of Wells went to Baylor according to the Google.

Seamaster said:

---

Hank the Grifter said:

---

Quoting myself here:

Quote:

---

First, I agree with you that this sort of behavior should be regulated somehow. Inserting yourself into thousands of people's lives against their will is problematic for sure. Yes he has freedoms, so do I. Mine don't end just because his exist

---

That last sentence in particular is why I said we're saying the same thing.

---

Ok.

And then you said:

"That stated, your argument is one that the left has tried to use for years against the 2nd Amendment. The technology has nothing to do with it. I doubt the founding fathers could have envisioned computers and the internet. That doesn't mean that free speech is limited to people writing with quill and ink. A right is right and THAT'S what the founding fathers knew and cared about. They knew technology would advance but part of their genius is that they didn't add caveats to said rights."

To which I said,

"With the quill and ink people had the right and ability to not read it.

With the internet and videos people have the right and ability to not read/watch it.

With a bullhorn in your ear, people are stripped of their right to not hear it."

So I guess we agree that these guys are annoying but you think they have a constitutional right to do it that way and I don't think they do.

Rights have limits, thank God. We all have the right to pursue happiness but a pedo who gets happy pursuing the kids in the neighborhood park doesn't have the right to do that just because it makes him happy.

Speech is a right but a person has no right to libel and slander another person.

And - there is no right to put a bullhorn to somebody's ear and scream at them.

---

We're going down a rabbit hole here and I'm sure the rest of the board doesn't appreciate. We might oughtta move it to the Politics board or even email if you'd like to continue the discussion (I love a good, respectful debate).

My second paragraph was a reply in principal to the flawed argument made often by those on the left, usually regarding the 2A in particular but not limited to it . The notion that our rights should be limited to the contemporary technology of the founding fathers is deeply flawed.
My post was meant to serve two purposes…lament this disrespectful behavior with the OP and others but also to argue that restricting rights based on the available technology in 1791 is both naive and contrary to the founding father's intentions.

Gnome Sayin said:

---

He's not economically viable!

---

Underrated.

I fear that his methods may have the opposite effect than what he desires.

Is there an actual affiliated church? Maybe we can get 20-30 students to attend?

Gave our tickets to our neighbors this weekend and the first thing they asked when they got back is why do we have religious nuts talking on bull horns at our games.

Seems the University is scared of this guy.

Vitani said:

---

They are part of this group: https://www.thechurchofwells.com/

---

A deep faith.

It's unfortunate. As a Christian, I want to encourage people spreading the Gospel in public. What I've seen from this guy in the past, however, is different. He's just telling us how evil we are as we walk to a football game He's not presenting salvation or offering to pray with or for anyone. He's not proselytizing, he's just judging. It's not quite Westboro Baptist level of bad, but maybe the next step down from that.

Last year my 11 year old had a good laugh about the guy saying that football is "satanic, because it's not in the Bible." He had just been baptized a couple of months before that and has been pretty active in church. He'd never seen someone profess to be Christian and act like that before.

The Church of Wells did the same thing at SFA while my son was there. I guess that is their gig, to show up on college campuses on gamedays and yell at everyone. That church is a cult.

Bottom line is this nut job yelling in a bullhorn in our ears that we are going to hell for attending a football game is protected free speech. I say bull***** If he was yelling unhinged liberal stuff, I bet that wouldn't be considered protected free speech. Shut it down. It ain't free speech at these dB levels.

Are they actually trying to convert anyone, or are they lawsuit trolls hoping to get assaulted or shut down?

I remember watching that Tom Short psycho on campus, and his whole schtick seemed to be try to provoke confrontation.

The guy is soft in the head.

Drum5343 said:

---

The idea that it is anti-free speech to say a guy shouldn't be allowed to use a bullhorn to interrupt another public gathering. GTFO libertarians

---

First Amendment


Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.


You should look into what a majority of libertarians believe about things like this. I know yhou won't, but you should,

ProTip - individuals aren't congress nor are they the government. His right to say what he wants ends where my ears begin.