Although one may sympathize with young impressionable youth who grow up in socioeconomically deprived circumstances and seek emotional sanctuary and tribal-protection in the form of criminal gangs, it is indeed a personal choice, and the substantive severe consequences of such a decision (prison, or death) does not require much time spent researching legislation on the topic.
The reasons for such a life-shattering decision can satisfy many theses, however, I simply believe that the First Amendment (right to peacefully assemble) does not apply to the nefarious intentions of so-called street gangs.
The recruitment methodology practiced by seasoned gang veterans is replicated by terrorist organizations throughout the world and is unfortunately a very primordial maladaptive-instinct ingrained in the human psyche to rally support for misadventure. Perhaps only evolution of the human psyche can overcome this genetic flaw?
I wholeheartedly believe in the right to free speech and certainly living outside the CONUS, one really appreciates the freedoms which the Constitution bestows upon the citizenry of the U.S. Here in Germany, freedom of speech is non-existent and any semblance of slightly off left kilter, or even centralist thinking is immediately quashed, and one is labelled a far-right merchant of hatred by the government backed media.
One may say that this is because of the decades of anti-fascist conditioning post WWII, and the utter shame which generations of Germans carry, and the still strong dislike and discrimination they suffer from their fellow Europeans.
However, as much as I sympathize with them, I find their censorship deplorable and counter-active to harmonizing social order.
An example of this censorship was the approach by Angela Merkel to Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg during a visit to Germany, beseeching him to remove anti-immigrant sentiments from its content, to which he enthusiastically and unabashingly complied with, almost delighted to be unshackled by the constraints of the U.S. Bill of Rights. (The Guardian, 2016)
The attempts at stifling free speech from the community of tech giants such as Google and Facebook are unnerving and has all the warning of George Orwell’s 1984 encapsulated in its omnipotent, all-seeing entity.
It’s campaign of scrubbing its platforms of what it deems offensive has had knock-on political connotations not just in the U.S. but throughout western civilization. For instance; in Britain today, awash with overwhelming, soaring crime rates, the police have been instructed to drop serious crime enquiries if someone complains that they have been offended by e.g. misgendering online, and subsequently the person accused is arrested charged with hate speech.
This may sound quite absurd to U.S. citizens, however, if given the leeway, as in Europe, these tech giants will not honor the First Amendment, unless it favors their narrative completely, alas. (Fukuyama, 2018)
References
Bill of Rights Institute. (2019). Bill of Rights. Retrieved from https://billofrightsinstitute.org/founding-documen…
Fukuyama, F. (2018, August 9). Social media and censorship. Retrieved from https://www.the-american-interest.com/2018/08/08/s…
The Guardian. (2016, February 26). Zuckerberg on refugee crisis: ‘Hate speech has no place on facebook’. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/feb/26…
National Gang Center. (2018, December). Highlights of gang-related legislation. Retrieved from https://www.nationalgangcenter.gov/Legislation/Hig…
0 comments