3 ms·

thinks the case of yelling fire in a movie theater jokingly

by soheil 5y ago

Clubber 5y ago
Yelling fire in a movie theater is perfectly legal and protected speech, even if false. It's only illegal if what is said is "likely to incite imminent lawless action," like a riot. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shouting_fire_in_a_crowded_theater https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shouting_fire_in_a_crowded_the... It's funny, this is often presented as a supporting example to limit citizens' free speech or other rights, typically paired with something along the lines of, "no freedom is limitless." Of course many people don't realize this example is a) outdated and currently false, and b) the argument used against citizens speaking out against WWI using the Espionage Act of 1917, which is considered by many to be one of the worst and oppressive laws to our rights ever written. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Espionage_Act_of_1917 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Espionage_Act_of_1917 You may recognize the names of some of the act's victims: Among those charged with offenses under the Act are German-American socialist congressman and newspaper editor Victor L. Berger, labor leader and five-time Socialist Party of America candidate, Eugene V. Debs, anarchists Emma Goldman and Alexander Berkman, former Watch Tower Bible & Tract Society president Joseph Franklin Rutherford, communists Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, Pentagon Papers whistleblower Daniel Ellsberg, Cablegate whistleblower Chelsea Manning, WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, Defense Intelligence Agency employee Henry Kyle Frese, and National Security Agency (NSA) contractor and whistleblower Edward Snowden.
- soheil 5y ago
  Thanks for this. I think it is shocking that so many people still use this. What about yelling bomb on an airplane?
  - Clubber 5y ago
    I'm not sure that has been tested in court yet. If based on precedent, I would assume it would also be legal, but it would take a brave soul with a lot of money and free time to find out for certain.
    - d110af5ccf 5y ago
      SCOTUS could always overturn the existing precedent but if we assume they won't then it's legal right up until someone gets injured as a direct result. (Unless it somehow ends up running afoul of our ridiculous obscenity laws? I doubt it but you never know.) Agreed that anyone who decides to demonstrate the above is definitely going to want plenty of money and free time at their disposal.
- yoz-y 5y ago
  Surely though if you cause panic and people get trampled you would face consequences no? You probably won’t get accused of hate speech but I hope it could go up to manslaughter.
  - d110af5ccf 5y ago
    I think it's safe to assume it could go up to outright murder if intent could be demonstrated and someone actually died as a direct result.
  - Clubber 5y ago
    Do you think that the people who panic would bear some responsibility? If someone yelled fire in a movie theater that I was attending, I would at least look around and smell for it before I started flipping out trampling people. Let's use another hypothetical just for fun. Let's say I called someone a bad name and they punched me, would I bear the legal responsibility for their lack of self control? I would think not. I would think the person who threw the punch would be charged for assault and I would be charged with nothing. If that's the case, how would that be different from the fire example? Someone spoke and someone reacted with no self control. I would think the person who reacted with no self control would bear at least some responsibility.

thinks the case of yelling fire in a movie theater jokingly

by soheil 5y ago

thinks the case of yelling fire in a movie theater jokingly

Yelling fire in a movie theater is perfectly legal and protected speech, even if false. It's only illegal if what is said is "likely to incite imminent lawless action," like a riot. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shouting_fire_in_a_crowded_theater https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shouting_fire_in_a_crowded_the... It's funny, this is often presented as a supporting example to limit citizens' free speech or other rights, typically paired with something along the lines of, "no freedom is limitless." Of course many people don't realize this example is a) outdated and currently false, and b) the argument used against citizens speaking out against WWI using the Espionage Act of 1917, which is considered by many to be one of the worst and oppressive laws to our rights ever written. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Espionage_Act_of_1917 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Espionage_Act_of_1917 You may recognize the names of some of the act's victims: Among those charged with offenses under the Act are German-American socialist congressman and newspaper editor Victor L. Berger, labor leader and five-time Socialist Party of America candidate, Eugene V. Debs, anarchists Emma Goldman and Alexander Berkman, former Watch Tower Bible & Tract Society president Joseph Franklin Rutherford, communists Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, Pentagon Papers whistleblower Daniel Ellsberg, Cablegate whistleblower Chelsea Manning, WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, Defense Intelligence Agency employee Henry Kyle Frese, and National Security Agency (NSA) contractor and whistleblower Edward Snowden.

soheil 5y ago
Thanks for this. I think it is shocking that so many people still use this. What about yelling bomb on an airplane?
- Clubber 5y ago
  I'm not sure that has been tested in court yet. If based on precedent, I would assume it would also be legal, but it would take a brave soul with a lot of money and free time to find out for certain.
  - d110af5ccf 5y ago
    SCOTUS could always overturn the existing precedent but if we assume they won't then it's legal right up until someone gets injured as a direct result. (Unless it somehow ends up running afoul of our ridiculous obscenity laws? I doubt it but you never know.) Agreed that anyone who decides to demonstrate the above is definitely going to want plenty of money and free time at their disposal.
yoz-y 5y ago
Surely though if you cause panic and people get trampled you would face consequences no? You probably won’t get accused of hate speech but I hope it could go up to manslaughter.
- d110af5ccf 5y ago
  I think it's safe to assume it could go up to outright murder if intent could be demonstrated and someone actually died as a direct result.
- Clubber 5y ago
  Do you think that the people who panic would bear some responsibility? If someone yelled fire in a movie theater that I was attending, I would at least look around and smell for it before I started flipping out trampling people. Let's use another hypothetical just for fun. Let's say I called someone a bad name and they punched me, would I bear the legal responsibility for their lack of self control? I would think not. I would think the person who threw the punch would be charged for assault and I would be charged with nothing. If that's the case, how would that be different from the fire example? Someone spoke and someone reacted with no self control. I would think the person who reacted with no self control would bear at least some responsibility.