The free speech thread

[CapnAwesome]

The freedom of speech ends nowhere. Including incitement for violence against people, the only thing I separate that from is specific plans to murder someone, which has to include more than just speech anyway. Saying that so and so should die, or deserves to die is how our country was founded. Criminalizing calls for violence criminalizes calls for revolution and a change in government if need be. There should be no limit on speech. If you are too stupid to realize that there isn't a fire in the theater, that is your problem.

Ah, but that's not what I was talking about in the slightest. Saying someone should die is not quite what I meant what I said: "explicitly and demonstrably threatens the safety of others." Planning to kill someone and inciting them to kill are more like it. At any rate, the law disagrees with you. Charles Manson never killed anyone. Do you know where he is?

Yeah, we may be talking about different things. I agree that planning someone's murder is (and should be) illegal, whether that is done privately or with public speech. I guess that's where I draw my limit.

[Shell B]

We're in complete agreement there. That is precisely where I draw my limit and my only limit. Even then, I would say that there are always mitigating circumstances. Crimes of passion, mental retardation, etc. Before anyone jumps on me, planning someone's murder can be a crime of passion. It can only take a few minutes, I imagine.

[Aractus]

[Something completely different]

[CliveStaples]

We're in complete agreement there. That is precisely where I draw my limit and my only limit. Even then, I would say that there are always mitigating circumstances. Crimes of passion, mental retardation, etc. Before anyone jumps on me, planning someone's murder can be a crime of passion. It can only take a few minutes, I imagine.

What about fraud? Slander? Falsely reporting a crime?

[Shell B]

I don't give a shit about those things, Clive. Every single one of those things is a crime because of a weakness in society, not the strength of the crime. Every single one of those crimes can be absolutely harmless if people bothered to investigate things further. Now, fraud becomes stealing, so free speech doesn't matter there. Stealing is not speaking. Slander is just stupid. Falsely reporting a crime can be considered an action as much as speaking as well. You have to actively go to the police station and bear false witness. It is no longer "free speech" there because you are under an expectation of honesty, by law. You're not just speaking to a group of people or yourself. Still, it is only an inconvenience if police bother to do their jobs properly. So, when you combine speech with another crime, it is no longer about free speech. And . . . free speech is too important a right to have it hindered in more ways than absolutely necessary.

[jonb]

For me, freedom of speech is directly related to how resilient the individual is expected to be. In a society where the individual is expected to react to the slightest remark, There can be no freedom of speech. For instance in the soviet union the individual was expected to follow the orders of the state without discrimination. In other words the individual was not expected to think just react. I think that there is no excuse for attacking somebody because someone said it would be a good idea, so I would say total free speech, but we do not live in a society where the individual is expected to think everything through for themselves. So we do not have total freedom.

[TaraJo]

Personally, I just want to see people held accountable for what they say. If Glen Beck gets some anti-government zealot all excited and he bombs government buildings, I think Beck need to be held accountable (and, yes, if leftist groups get their people all worked up, they should be held accountable as well).

[Darth]

Personally, I just want to see people held accountable for what they say. If Glen Beck gets some anti-government zealot all excited and he bombs government buildings, I think Beck need to be held accountable (and, yes, if leftist groups get their people all worked up, they should be held accountable as well).

Or we could just, you know, hold people responsible for their own actions while letting people speak their minds, there is always going to be a nutter. Not letting someone on fox rant and make diagrams about how harmful the government is isn't going to stop these nutters from picking a target.