Lock them up? Free speech there buddy. So now you guys are not only anti-capitalist but anti-constitution. You guys are on a roll.
Typical Commie excuse. It is against the law look it up 18 USC 871. "The essence of the offence is knowing and willful making of a true threat. So,if it is proved within a reasonable doubt that the person made a true threat against the President, willfully intending that it be understood by others as a serious threat, then the offense is complete; it is not necessary to prove that the person actually intended to carry out the threat". It's is Evil that Anti-American Commie Liberals insist this is free speech, but do not allow right wing speakers to speak at college campuses.
Typical Commie excuse. It is against the law look it up 18 USC 871. "The essence of the offence is knowing and willful making of a true threat. So,if it is proved within a reasonable doubt that the person made a true threat against the President, willfully intending that it be understood by others as a serious threat, then the offense is complete; it is not necessary to prove that the person actually intended to carry out the threat". It's is Evil that Anti-American Commie Liberals insist this is free speech, but do not allow right wing speakers to speak at college campuses.
I mean I'm sure you read that statute before you cited it, but here's the link for everybody else.
Even after a few years of hooky, Wakeworld never ceases to entertain...
Crazy eh? Legal experts complaining on a wakeboard forum that the govt won't arrest the people they want arrested. It's like the whole govt is against them. And why did they pick a wakeboard forum?
Please, I beg of you to show me hate speech laws. I'll be waiting.
"speech that poses an imminent danger of unlawful action, where the speaker has the intention to incite such action and there is the likelihood that this will be the consequence of his or her speech, may be restricted and punished by that law"
"Beauharnis v. Illinois, the Supreme Court developed a free speech jurisprudence that loosened most aspects of the free speech doctrine.[85] In 1942, Justice Frank Murphy summarized the case law: "There are certain well-defined and limited classes of speech, the prevention and punishment of which have never been thought to raise a Constitutional problem. These include the lewd and obscene, the profane, the libelous and the insulting or 'fighting' words – those which by their very utterances inflict injury or tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace."[86]"
We could also discuss the over 350 "speech codes" enforced by our universities & other Gov agencies, if you'd like.
"speech that poses an imminent danger of unlawful action, where the speaker has the intention to incite such action and there is the likelihood that this will be the consequence of his or her speech, may be restricted and punished by that law"
"Beauharnis v. Illinois, the Supreme Court developed a free speech jurisprudence that loosened most aspects of the free speech doctrine.[85] In 1942, Justice Frank Murphy summarized the case law: "There are certain well-defined and limited classes of speech, the prevention and punishment of which have never been thought to raise a Constitutional problem. These include the lewd and obscene, the profane, the libelous and the insulting or 'fighting' words – those which by their very utterances inflict injury or tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace."[86]"
We could also discuss the over 350 "speech codes" enforced by our universities & other Gov agencies, if you'd like.
You realize there have been more rulings since Beauharnis that have essentially led to that being null right? And that ruling was basically an extension of libel laws that is now looked at to be bad ruling/law.
You realize there have been more rulings since Beauharnis that have essentially led to that being null right? And that ruling was basically an extension of libel laws that is now looked at to be bad ruling/law.
Bring up the speech codes, I would love to!
It didn't make the incite violence part null. What part of the speech codes would you like to discuss? There are over 350 of them so pick one.
It didn't make the incite violence part null. What part of the speech codes would you like to discuss? There are over 350 of them so pick one.
Again, show me one that has held up in court. There aren't any, so it shouldn't take too long to look them
Up. Even Berkeley allows hate speech. Fighting words don't fall under free speech, so inciting violence is null.
You realize there have been more rulings since Beauharnis that have essentially led to that being null right? And that ruling was basically an extension of libel laws that is now looked at to be bad ruling/law.
Bring up the speech codes, I would love to!
Wow this Communist anarchist needs to be put away for good. Lost her job as teacher and the commie bitch got it back. Thank You Calif. Teachers Federation for putting her back into the classroom and filling young empty heads with hate and terror.
Hybrid Mode
