what the fuck is up with how this was reported on the wired.com's article!!!!!!!!!!
:/
grrrrrrrrrr
http://www.wired.com/news/business/0...w=wn_tophead_3
NOTE THE BOLDED WORDS...biased reporting? oooooo myyyyy
"WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that a law meant to punish pornographers who peddle dirty pictures to Web-surfing kids is
probably an unconstitutional muzzle on free speech.
The high court divided 5-to-4 over a law passed in 1998, signed by then-President Clinton and now backed by the Bush administration. The majority said a lower court was correct to block the law from taking effect because it
likely violates the First Amendment. "
sounds like the asswipes who cry about 'maybe' citizens have the right to bear arms when we talk about 2nd Amendment rights...
you can either fucking own them or not, you can either speak your fucking mind or not....it's that simple...
oh well, although I've been copa-kosher for a long ass time....still makes me sick to see HOW CLOSE this one was....
I guess this'll let it slide for another year or so, it'll come up again and most likely be passed then or the following attempt....