Societal Scapegoat or Guilty as Charged?

[Napoléon]

This is the difference between limiting the actual freedoms of speech, and criminalizing the outcomes of it. Looking at the "FIRE!" example again, let me compare the two:

1) Under a system which limits the freedom of speech, shouting "FIRE!" in a crowded building / room without their being any actual fire would be an arrestable offense in itself, even if nobody reacted to it.

2) Under a system which criminalizes the outcomes of freedom of speech, shouting "FIRE!" itself would not be a crime, but the person may still be arrested based on the outcomes of the event. For instance, if it causes a mass panic, then an arrest could be made; if not, then no action should be taken.

It's an important difference.

How about shouting bomb on a plane?

See above.

Wait, just because the outcome may not cause panic it doesn't make the person who shouted fire (or bomb in my analogy) any less a person who intended to cause panic. I think people should be held accountable for intent not just the outcome of that intent. If someone intends to murder someone, and tries to do so, but fails, they still get punished for attempted murder so why should shouting fire in a building be any different just because no one was alarmed by it. Is it not the same principle??

I realise it's extreme but what's the difference?

[Ace Otana]

There were a few lads and a girl living right next door. Since the end of the violence, they've simply...disappeared....
I reckon they got caught and have been evicted. Good riddance I say. Lowlife scum bags. I fucking hate yobs. Immoral selfish brain dead bastards.