Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Is Cross-Burning "Free Speach"?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #76
    Originally posted by Oerdin
    Offensive free speech, as loathsom as it is, deserves protection as long as it doesn't cause clear and emminent harm.
    I agree with this statement, though I would consider instilling significant fear in the population or any part of the population is clear and emminent harm.

    Comment


    • #77
      Originally posted by gsmoove23
      I agree with this statement, though I would consider instilling significant fear in the population or any part of the population is clear and emminent harm.
      Fear would be enough unless a reasonable person would conclude that he's life is in danger. Emminent harm is more then just how people feel; it's a clear and present danger.
      Try http://wordforge.net/index.php for discussion and debate.

      Comment


      • #78
        Words have been know to spark action. Symbols as well.

        Question: If one to give a speach that resulted in a riot, would that person who gave the speach be held responsible if they encouraged such actions?

        I think they can, and do. It's called conspiring to incite riots and inciting communal frenzy. Federal jury's have prosocuted on this before and have actually convicted ppl on it, some with crossing state lines with intent to incite riots. One case in point was the riots at the 1968 democratic convention resulted in the prosocution of the "Chicago 7". 5 of whom were convicted.

        Why do I write this? Because the actions of buring a cross or flag could be considered as such, and I feel that it does.
        Monkey!!!

        Comment


        • #79
          To follow these inane arguments to their stupid conclusions. Whats next? I get arrested because 'you feel intimidated' by me in the workplace or while walking down the street despite that I've done nothing to you.
          We need seperate human-only games for MP/PBEM that dont include the over-simplifications required to have a good AI
          If any man be thirsty, let him come unto me and drink. Vampire 7:37
          Just one old soldiers opinion. E Tenebris Lux. Pax quaeritur bello.

          Comment


          • #80
            Sure, you would have to make a pretty good case saying the perpetrator knew that his actions would result in a riot or communal frenzy though or desired it or that his actions were the prime instigators.

            Comment


            • #81
              All these arguments would have to hold up in court and in various appeals. Not very easy I would imagine.

              Comment


              • #82
                Originally posted by SpencerH
                To follow these inane arguments to their stupid conclusions. Whats next? I get arrested because 'you feel intimidated' by me in the workplace or while walking down the street despite that I've done nothing to you.
                That there is a clear and likely probability that the statement of one person will lead to a direct illegal action by someone else or otherwise cause danger to public safety (ie, inciting someone to do something, or threatening them with a burning cross, or yelling theater in a public theater).

                These things aren't always clear, and thats what juries are for.
                "I read a book twice as fast as anybody else. First, I read the beginning, and then I read the ending, and then I start in the middle and read toward whatever end I like best." - Gracie Allen

                Comment


                • #83
                  THEATER!!!

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Or even "Fire!"
                    "I read a book twice as fast as anybody else. First, I read the beginning, and then I read the ending, and then I start in the middle and read toward whatever end I like best." - Gracie Allen

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      While I absolutely hate the Nazis and KKK, and even though if I were dictator, I would ban this type of protest, as an American citizen who cherishes the 1st Amendment; I am forced to say that cross burning is okay. Except, when you burn a cross on someone else's property, you could be charged with arson and trespassing. The actual act of cross burning is fine. I might want to do it someday in protest of Christianity if this nasty right-wing push to get religion in government continues.
                      To us, it is the BEAST.

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Under this law, could you burn an upside down cross, if say you wanted to demonstrate against satanism?

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Originally posted by Japher
                          Question: If one to give a speach that resulted in a riot, would that person who gave the speach be held responsible if they encouraged such actions?
                          The classic example is if a person yells "FIRE!" in a crowded theatre resulting in a stampeed for the exits. Is the perpitrator responsible for the people who got killed and injuried or was he simply excersizing his right to free speech? The supreme court actually heard a case just like this and they ruled that yelling "fire" was not covered by free speech since it the perpetrator either knew or should have known that it would result in people getting killed or injured.
                          Try http://wordforge.net/index.php for discussion and debate.

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Slowwhand,

                            I know. You're thinking that's no the same, but it is.
                            Your rights end when they infringe on mine, or another's.
                            Well no ****, if you ACTUALLY believe that, you should be a Libertarian. But burning a cross or flag on your property infringes on no one's rights.

                            Would you agree with the statement that keeping a gun in your house, and advertising that fact with a sign, infringes on the rights of others? If not, you have no basis for saying that burning a flag or cross on your own property infringes on anyone's rights. Someone can feel just as threatened by a gun as by a burning cross or flag.

                            Shi,

                            I put up a sign on my lawn saying "Kill All ******s"? No, even though it's done on my property can still initmidate.
                            I don't know what the law says, but you SHOULD be able to do that.

                            Sava,

                            as an American citizen who cherishes the 1st Amendment
                            Interesting how you seem to support some Amendments, and think they should be upheld, but have a totally opposite viewpoint on others, isn't it?
                            Follow me on Twitter: http://twitter.com/DaveDaDouche
                            Read my seldom updated blog where I talk to myself: http://davedadouche.blogspot.com/

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              I assume you are referring to the 2nd Amendment. Well, I am very much for strictly following and upholding the 2nd Amendment. Everyone should be able to own weapons that were available at the time the constitution was written. The founding Father's, in their infinite wisdom, did not bother to think about how the technology of firearms would evolve. In their time, one couldn't possess a weapon capable of firing 20 rounds a second; or possessing a concealed handgun that fires 15 semi-automatic rounds with exceptional muzzle velocity which creates high stopping power and penetration.

                              If the Fathers were alive today, I doubt they would approve of this libertarian idea about having no restrictions on weapons that are nightmarish compared to the slow-loading, inaccurate muskets of the Revolutionary Era.

                              But I'm sure you think that people shouldn't have to get driver's licenses, or even pilot's licenses. Yeah! It's so unfair that the government won't let you fly a commercial jet without getting a license... YEAH THE GOVERNMENT SUCKS

                              Gun control isn't about restricting the 2nd Amendment. It's about being smart and responsible. And likewise, if there were no restrictions on automatic weapons, grenade launchers, guided missiles, grenades, etc... it would be STUPID AND IRRESPONSIBLE... like most NRA card carrying, flag waving, 2nd Amendment protecting, right-wing gun nuts.
                              To us, it is the BEAST.

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                If the Fathers were alive today, I doubt they would approve of this libertarian idea about having no restrictions on weapons that are nightmarish compared to the slow-loading, inaccurate muskets of the Revolutionary Era.
                                Then obviously you aren't too clear about their feelings on the subject of "big government".

                                But I'm sure you think that people shouldn't have to get driver's licenses, or even pilot's licenses. Yeah! It's so unfair that the government won't let you fly a commercial jet without getting a license...
                                Who's talking about that? I've already stated that since the roads are public, I see little problem with driving regulations, but that I also think roads should be private and as such subject to private rules.

                                Gun control isn't about restricting the 2nd Amendment.
                                Yes it is, by definition.
                                Follow me on Twitter: http://twitter.com/DaveDaDouche
                                Read my seldom updated blog where I talk to myself: http://davedadouche.blogspot.com/

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X