Patriots in control?
(media.greatawakening.win)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (180)
sorted by:
We need to be consistent. If we argue for removing censorship from public communications, it must apply for everyone, including the misguided fools on the other side. There is no threat expressed and so this should not be censored.
Incitement to violence, perhaps?
How long before "I dislike x" becomes "incitement of violence"
Incitement is already unprotected speech outside the scope of the first amendment and it has elements. (1) intended to produce imminent lawless action, and (2) likely to produce such action.
The "imminency" requirement is the most developed term in modern jurisprudence.
So let's say some glowie gets a bunch of white supremacists together at a rural ranch and says we should "take revenge on the government if they continue to suppress the white race", that's not incitement because of no imminence.
However, if the KKK got in front of a black rape suspect's home and they say "let's burn down his house!" then that's incitement.
To answer your question more directly, as long as courts view what a "reasonable" person would likely construe as calling to violence, then we're good. But you have a point long term if we lose a culture war, because societal standards about what is "likely to produce" such action can change
Maybe it was the "burn down every federal building right now and slaughter them all" part that seemed threatening, I dunno
Then you do an inquiry. You don't threaten someone for "unwelcome remarks" and tell them to cease and desist. Unless you can prove the threat, this is massive overstepping.
Continuum from frustration to hatred to aspiration to planning and action. This is way at the beginning side. Remember, people prove every day that they have a right to be stupid...sad but notillegal
Right, this is not illegal because it is not personal or focused on a small number of targets; and there is no credible data suggesting the actual ABILITY to carry out the act exists.
That would be a LOT of burning and slaughtering; a person would need an organization and tons of heavy equipment and fire accelerant chemicals, etc.
Also not judged as illegal because it is coming from the Left...
Yep! Freedom means standing up for those you disagree with. If this letter is real, then we need to stand in solidarity with the person being harassed by the government. Even though I don't agree with them, I support their right to speak it without fear or intimidation. This person needs to get a civil rights attorney and sue for harassment.