When should free speech be limited, if at all? Do you make exceptions for inciting violence or disturbance? Fire in a crowded theatre? Discuss.
>>56670237
We should consider hate speech limited. The end game does more harm than people think.
>>56670237
All stupid people should not be allowed to speak. /pol/ should be deleted.
>when should a constitutional right be infringed
Yeah, I'm going to need you to go ahead and GTFO of our country.
>>56670237
Fire in a crowded theatre is so cliche. It comes from Justice Holmes in U.S. v. Abrahams and his clear and present danger test.
Controlling speech cases:
Cohen v. California
NY TImes v Sullivan
Brandenburg v. Ohio
FCC v. Pacifica
Content based must meet strict scrutiny, content neutral intermediate
Fighting words, obscenity, child pornography not protected. Pornography is subject to regulation
Traditional public forums
Limited public forums
Non public forums
>>56670237
Free speech was awesome until liberal started yelling about rape with giant dead fetus pictures by my sons elementary school.
>>56670430
No, we should not.
>>56670430
hate speech can mean anything
>>56670591
So I can just run down Pennsylvania Ave and shout "I have a bomb!" Over and over?
>>56670882
SHALL. NOT. BE. INFRINGED.
>>56670882
Committing crimes is not free speech.
Inciting violence is ok, because only a scumbag that wants be be violent would listen. It's basically just smoking criminals out.
Yelling 'fire' is not ok, because innocent people could get hurt by accident, stampede, trampling etc.
private property: stfu
public property: unimpeded
>>56670996
But I don't have a bomb. They are only words. Why is it a crime?
I like the thought 'You wouldn't shout fire in a crowded theatre', because people so very rarely finish with the disclaimer 'unless there actually was one'
Which leaves me hearing the implication that they'd rather people at large remain ignorant of a huge dangerous problem just because they don't want to deal with the panic and distress.
>>56671056
Because either way you are a terrorist.
>>56670430
This post is hate speech please delete it mods.
Send IP address to fbi.
>>56670591
You are aware that Libel and Slander are both illegal right?
>>56670882
If you want to get shot down I guess?
>>56670725
We should at least examine the situation.
>>56670782
Any reasonable person knows what it is. It's pejorative terms and oppressive speech on marginalized groups in the country.
>>56671110
Really mature.
>>56671056
A terrorist doesn't need a bomb to cause terror They only need to do/say something that causes it
>Thats why they're call terrorist
>>56671485
>Really mature
It's literally where "hate speech" will go if you actually take it seriously.
Heck it's happening already, look at Mizzou.
>>56671485
What happened to the days of "sticks and stone can break my bones but words will never hurt me?"
If you start outlawing hate speech based on how it makes you feel there is no end to where it will stop. We cannot allow any infringement on our rights or they will be slowly eroded away to nothing.
Fire in a crowded theater (not just in a crowd) has nothing to do with restrictions on free speech (not informing people of a legitimate danger). It has to do with not inviting a panic that leads to destruction of private property (the theater). You have the right to declare fire. You don't have the right of that speech over the rights of the property owner to protect their property and not have you destroy it with the incitement from your speech.
This is hugely misunderstood because most uneducated people only know 'you can't yell fire in a theater' but have no real idea why. It's not a limit on free speech, it's a protection of property rights which are equal to your speech.
>>56670237
>Niggers ban hate speech
>overnight violent black music is taken down
>95% of blacks in the streets lose half their vocabulary.
The 4th Reich doesn't need free speech anyway.
>>56670237
>mfw he's probably a millennial
>>56672347
forgot pic
>>56670237
trump keeps putting his foot in his mouth
>>56670237
“If we don't believe in freedom of expression for people we despise, we don't believe in it at all.”
>>56671485
>Any reasonable person knows
How do you know the enforcement will be reasonable?
When you are arrested for shouting fire in a crowded theater, you're arrested for disturbing the peace, not specifically for shouting fire. That being said, free speech all the way. If you say "I believe in free speech, but" you don't believe in free speech.
>>56670237
FIRE in a crowded theater and death threats aren't exactly expression. Those are my only exceptions.
>>56672374
I'm a "Millennial" and it's your goddamn right to be an offensive asshole.
Granted, I'll call you an asshole for doing it, but I won't try to physically prevent you.
>>56670430
No, kill yourself you authoritarian fuck
>>56671485
>being this retarded
You don't belong in this country if you can't handle free speech.
There is a difference between free speech, and just being a cunt. If you want the ability to go into a busy public area and yell threatening things and not expect there to be consequences.... then you should rethink your existence.
>>56673131
lol he probably thinks he's brave or something
isn't it the bigotry and disrespect that caused these riots?
50 years after watts and nothing was learned
>>56670430
"Hate speech" is a vague term that can cover anything. The Supreme Court right now has it basically right: unless you're directly advising someone to commit a crime, it's not "inciting" or "hate speech."
>>56670430
Hate speech is a crime in France and you know what?
There's still sexism, racism, antisemitism, fascism, salafism etc. That didn't do a single good thing and it can be used against political incorrect people.
For example we have persons here who where put in court because they said that Israel was a right wing state under the assumption it was antisemitism and so hate speech.
If you burgers have a good amendment, it surely is the first one and the one you should consider in danger today instead of the second.
