3 ms·

I guess the debate is should that include the freedom to threaten people. Personally I think that the current laws are used irrationally at times but in cases w

I guess the debate is should that include the freedom to threaten people. Personally I think that the current laws are used irrationally at times but in cases where someone is being threatened (even if that threat is unlikely to be carried out) I think it's fine. We need to look at it from a bigger perspective than is it good/bad for web freedom or even freedom of speech. Is it in the public interest to allow or disallow specific types of speech? That's the important question.

sarciszewski 12y ago
Yes
diminoten 12y ago
Material threats, the ones that seem actionable, seems like a good line to draw, and I think it's the current state of the law in the U.S. E.g., if I threaten to "kill you" because of a bad book review, I'm allowed to say that. But if I threaten to "kill you in your living room tomorrow night at 7pm", that's illegal, because I've provided specific detail about when/where. Honestly I don't know the specifics of the US law, if someone else could chime in and clear things up a bit, that'd probably be better than me butchering the law.