Supreme Court vs the Phelps

Status
Not open for further replies.
I do see it as inciting harm.

You would have every right to write a how-to guide on assassination...so long as you stressed that it was for entertainment purposes only.
Like Hitman...

Unless that's when they start putting the "any resemblance to people, real or fictional, is purely coincidence blah de blah..." inside book covers.
 
I do see it as inciting harm.
But what sort of harm? You have the right to physical safety, not to be safe from hurt feelings. Unless the words being said are intended to or are reasonably expected to cause imminent violence, you can be as mean as you want. Its called "fighting words doctrine" and it is far more complex than I adequately handle at midnight.

You would have every right to write a how-to guide on assassination...so long as you stressed that it was for entertainment purposes only.
Like Hitman...

Unless that's when they start putting the "any resemblance to people, real or fictional, is purely coincidence blah de blah..." inside book covers.
Um, yeah, I suppose like "Hitman" or "Manhunt" or the Grand Theft Auto series or whatever else Jack Thompson calls murder simulators. As far as I can tell, "this is how you murder" or "this how you make a bomb" or "the Jews need to be taken out of power" are protected speech in almost all cases. Stuff like "murder John Barrowman, I mean it, now" or "bomb Cobo Hall during the capitalist scum's auto show" or "we need to kill the Jews running CNN" would be direct incitements of violent action and therefore not protected. I think.
 
You, who believes our free speech is infallible
When did I say it was infallible? :wtf:

I think you missed the point by a wide margin. "Free speech" doesn't keep you out of jail because it is infallible, it protects your right to state an opinion in public because our government is not infallible.

---------- Post added at 02:27 AM ---------- Previous post was at 02:21 AM ----------

Its called "fighting words doctrine" and it is far more complex than I adequately handle at midnight.
Isn't the "fighting words doctrine" generally applied as an example of provocation, rather than an admonishment of speech? I.E. If someone insults you within arms reach despite being told to step away, and you punch him, it's not necessarily assault if the court agrees that you were deliberately provoked.
 
You would have every right to write a how-to guide on assassination...so long as you stressed that it was for entertainment purposes only.
Like Hitman...

Unless that's when they start putting the "any resemblance to people, real or fictional, is purely coincidence blah de blah..." inside book covers.
Um, yeah, I suppose like "Hitman" or "Manhunt" or the Grand Theft Auto series or whatever else Jack Thompson calls murder simulators. As far as I can tell, "this is how you murder" or "this how you make a bomb" or "the Jews need to be taken out of power" are protected speech in almost all cases. Stuff like "murder John Barrowman, I mean it, now" or "bomb Cobo Hall during the capitalist scum's auto show" or "we need to kill the Jews running CNN" would be direct incitements of violent action and therefore not protected. I think.[/QUOTE]

I don't think Rick Sanchez is going to jail.

Otherwise, you completely missed what I was talking about. Educate yourself.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top