3 ms·
> You really do get to say whatever the fuck you want in this country, as long as it doesn't cause direct harm to someone else The Supreme Court disagrees.
by monochromatic 10y ago
> You really do get to say whatever the fuck you want in this country, as long as it doesn't cause direct harm to someone else
The Supreme Court disagrees.
- JBReefer 10y agoCan you cite a case? Hate speech etc has a long history of being court-supported.
- foobarchu 10y agoThat's because prohibiting hate speech would be nothing but suppression of speech. If you use hate speech to incite a riot, that is a crime. Simply saying it is not. Similarly, simply saying "i am an engineer" is obviously not a crime. Students do it all the time, despite not being licensed. Using it to lend credence to your ideas around traffic lights, however, may be a different story. I think thats the crux of the dispute.
- nxc18 10y agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fighting_words https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fighting_words for example. There are more limitations but that's an easy and possibly counterintuitive example.
- JBReefer 10y agoThat and the Shouting Fire thing are both directly harmful. Calling yourself an engineer, not a PE, without a a PE is not directly harmful, and the Constitution overrides state laws that claim otherwise. My money is on him in this one.
- wl 10y ago"Shouting fire" is a reference to Schenck v. US which has been overturned. It applied the "clear and present danger" standard. The current standard is "incitement to imminent lawless action" as articulated in Brandenburg v. Ohio.
- dragonwriter 10y ago> "Shouting fire" is a reference to Schenck v. US which has been overturned. It's a reference to dicta in that case, which would be dubious to cite as meaningful even had Shenck not been overturned.