8 ms·
> speech inciting violence has a solid definition. ...which is?
by johndevor 4y ago
> speech inciting violence has a solid definition.
...which is?
- denton-scratch 4y agoSpeech directing people to hurt other people physically. Sorry, I don't approve of definitions of "violent" that include saying mean things to them.
- Rebelgecko 4y agoHow "direct" does the direction need to be? "Hey, here's a knife, use it to go stab this person" is pretty direct. What about "So-and-so ought to be stabbed" or "Golly I sure wish someone would get around to stabbing $whoever"
- dTal 4y agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Will_no_one_rid_me_of_this_turbulent_priest%3F https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Will_no_one_rid_me_of_this_tur...
- denton-scratch 4y ago1 and 2 are clear incitements to violence, and are clearly illegal already. I don't know about 3; that appears to be a possibly truthful statement about the speaker's state of mind, and truthful or not, it seems legitimate to me. IANAL.
- pessimizer 4y ago> What about "So-and-so ought to be stabbed" > [That is a] clear incitement to violence, and [is] clearly illegal already. Not in the US it's not. Clear and present danger, not hypothetical horseshit. I'm shocked at how unfamiliar censorship maximalists are with the current state of speech rights. I think it's why they think that censoring anti-vanilla ice cream speech or anti-Nolan Batman films speech is such a small step. Every single would-be censor thinks it's illegal to shout fire in a crowded theater, and don't realize that phrase was used to jail someone for anti-war speech. What makes you think that "incitements to violence" are illegal? Is is that "incitement" is a very legal-sounding word?
- denton-scratch 4y agoThe law in both the UK and the USA is that it's a crime to tell other people to commit violence. I think these are sensible laws. [Edit] I'm no censorship maximalist! But populist politicians can stir up real violence just by speaking through their megaphone, and people die as a result. I think it's perfectly proper to forbid speech that exhorts violence.
- nradov 4y agoSo are you stating that President Roosevelt (a populist politician) should have been forbidden from telling other people to commit violence against German and Japanese people during WW2?
- denton-scratch 4y agoI have not made any such statement. I have opinions about how USAians might better organize their affairs, but it's not my place to express them.
- tekknik 4y ago> USAians we call ourselves Americans.
- MichaelCollins 4y agoHe knows, he's trying to get a rise out of Americans.
- denton-scratch 4y agoYou are free to call yourselves whatever you like; I prefer to distinguish between inhabitants of the USA, inhabitants of Canada, and inhabitants of Guatemala. And for clarity: no - I'm not trying to wind anyone up.
- 4y ago
- Rebelgecko 4y agoMay not be the case where you live, but 2 is definitely legal in the US (although obviously very rude)
- grapeskin 4y agoI think calling for someone to kill someone in a serious tone or from a position of power generally meets the requirements. Eg, a politician saying citizens need to take to the streets and kill someone, or an average citizen saying quite sternly that we should meet up at 10 PM outside someone’s house.
- sebastianconcpt 4y agoThat case doesn't require additional legislation nor justifies diminishing freedom of speech. Anyone should be free to say stupid things or self-incriminating things at their own peril.
- johndevor 4y agohttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eg3_kUaYFJA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eg3_kUaYFJA