(July 8, 2014 at 10:03 pm)Minimalist Wrote:Quote:Just because there is free speech it doesn't mean it can't get restricted if threatens a common good,
This is still the determining case on the subject.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandenburg_v._Ohio
Quote:Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 U.S. 444 (1969), was a landmark United States Supreme Court case based on the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The Court held that government cannot punish inflammatory speech unless that speech is directed to inciting, and is likely to incite, imminent lawless action.[1] Specifically, it struck down Ohio's criminal syndicalism statute, because that statute broadly prohibited the mere advocacy of violence.
There is no point in arguing this divergence between europe in the US. Another difference, you have those determining cases that solve similar cases for the future and pretty much have an 'executive' or 'legislative/legal' force, while here a decision by a court only has effect on the case sentenced, all other similar cases can be decided differently as long as the interpretation can still fit the law. Unless it's our constitutional court forbidding a law because it goes against the constitution, but those are extreme cases, and have been happening frequently
Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And if you gaze long enough into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you