Loading...

KJ5RQ Josh WA6ABC. So I'm not smart enough to participate in this argument without checking sources. So it looks like from the interwebs here, let's see, while the phrase yelling fire in a crowded theater is a famous example of the limits of free speech, the act itself is illegal and can lead to serious charges, especially if it causes public panic. The charges can range from disorderly conduct to reckless endangerment, clear and present danger. The legal concept was introduced in the 1919 Supreme Court, Schenck versus the United States, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, hypothetical example to explain that free speech protections do not extend to words that create a clear and present danger. So clear and present danger apparently is enough to make that illegal. Look, that's the Internet and Supreme Court both then and in 1969 there was another case that the new standard allows speech to be restricted if it is likely to incite imminent lawless action. So it says that, and Bill is one I agree with the most, also to the degree that you do these things and then that's on this side of the grave and who knows what happens on the other side of the grave. But if you read your Bible then you know you're not supposed to do stuff like that. The other one, hate speech, legality of hate speech varies depending on the country. In the United States there is no legal definition of hate speech in offensive or hateful languages generally protected by the First Amendment. So yeah, you win on that one and if you believe the interwebs then that was the first one. Let me break for a second.