Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
CorrectFree speech does not include violent threats, tough guyFree speech is free speech, and mindless emotional outrage is mindless emotional outrage.
And my example is a fair one
If a student group was advocating for hanging black people, they would be hunted down and charged with a hate crime.
Why is this different and where is the outrage?
When will CNN and MSNBC demand action on this?
I understand the 1st amendmentBut then again, I'm not surprised that you don't understand the First Amendment
This thread isn't about a sign.True Threats and the Limits of First Amendment Protection
God, you guys are a bunch of whiny little snowflakes.
yeah advocating killing police with fire is exactally the same as getting offended over the use of a racial epithet....or talking about a groups diet
Free speech is free speech, and mindless emotional outrage is mindless emotional outrage.
Class dismissed
Did you actually bother to read your link?
I don't think so, because it doesn't say what you think it does. A sign with a picture of a cop on fire is not a "true threat".
But then again, I'm not surprised that you don't understand the First Amendment.
Anymore spin in your pocket?
I understand the 1st amendmentBut then again, I'm not surprised that you don't understand the First Amendment
The same actions are treated differently based on who said something and what was said
Care to comment on that?
The tweet – sent out by the Autonomous Student Network (ASN) at UT-Austin – states “Instead of #LawEnforcementAppreciationDay how about #LawEnforcementIncinerationDay”This thread isn't about a sign.True Threats and the Limits of First Amendment Protectionyeah advocating killing police with fire is exactally the same as getting offended over the use of a racial epithet....or talking about a groups diet
Free speech is free speech, and mindless emotional outrage is mindless emotional outrage.
Class dismissed
Did you actually bother to read your link?
I don't think so, because it doesn't say what you think it does. A sign with a picture of a cop on fire is not a "true threat".
But then again, I'm not surprised that you don't understand the First Amendment.
Anymore spin in your pocket?
Then what is it about, exactly?
The tweet – sent out by the Autonomous Student Network (ASN) at UT-Austin – states “Instead of #LawEnforcementAppreciationDay how about #LawEnforcementIncinerationDay”This thread isn't about a sign.True Threats and the Limits of First Amendment ProtectionFree speech is free speech, and mindless emotional outrage is mindless emotional outrage.
Class dismissed
Did you actually bother to read your link?
I don't think so, because it doesn't say what you think it does. A sign with a picture of a cop on fire is not a "true threat".
But then again, I'm not surprised that you don't understand the First Amendment.
Anymore spin in your pocket?
Then what is it about, exactly?
An anonymous individual on a message forum =/= a student group at a public universityI can find a hundred posts on this messageboard that advocate killing black people, muslims, and basically any other group
An anonymous individual on a message forum =/= a student group at a public universityI can find a hundred posts on this messageboard that advocate killing black people, muslims, and basically any other group
also, if the threat made on this, or any other forum, was credible and serious enough it would be reported, wouldn't it?
I can be there in an hour if the fags need disciplining.
Oh and one of the crimes I was convicted of and served time for was terroristic threats & intimidation.
So for you to suggest I do not have an understanding of the limits of free speech shows how clueless you are.
Intent is not required for convictionThe tweet – sent out by the Autonomous Student Network (ASN) at UT-Austin – states “Instead of #LawEnforcementAppreciationDay how about #LawEnforcementIncinerationDay”This thread isn't about a sign.
Did you actually bother to read your link?
I don't think so, because it doesn't say what you think it does. A sign with a picture of a cop on fire is not a "true threat".
But then again, I'm not surprised that you don't understand the First Amendment.
Anymore spin in your pocket?
Then what is it about, exactly?
Do you think that meets the threshold of a "true threat", according to your link?
Do you think that the tweet is a "statement in which a speaker expresses a “serious” intent “to commit an act of unlawful violence to a particular individual or group of individuals”?
I don't know for sure, but I believe the threshold is "credible threat"Do you think that meets the threshold of a "true threat", according to your know for link?
Intent is not required for convictionThe tweet – sent out by the Autonomous Student Network (ASN) at UT-Austin – states “Instead of #LawEnforcementAppreciationDay how about #LawEnforcementIncinerationDay”This thread isn't about a sign.
Did you actually bother to read your link?
I don't think so, because it doesn't say what you think it does. A sign with a picture of a cop on fire is not a "true threat".
But then again, I'm not surprised that you don't understand the First Amendment.
Anymore spin in your pocket?
Then what is it about, exactly?
Do you think that meets the threshold of a "true threat", according to your link?
Do you think that the tweet is a "statement in which a speaker expresses a “serious” intent “to commit an act of unlawful violence to a particular individual or group of individuals”?
I can threaten anyone with violence and be IMMEDIATELY arrested regardless of my intent.Intent is not required for convictionThe tweet – sent out by the Autonomous Student Network (ASN) at UT-Austin – states “Instead of #LawEnforcementAppreciationDay how about #LawEnforcementIncinerationDay”This thread isn't about a sign.
Anymore spin in your pocket?
Then what is it about, exactly?
Do you think that meets the threshold of a "true threat", according to your link?
Do you think that the tweet is a "statement in which a speaker expresses a “serious” intent “to commit an act of unlawful violence to a particular individual or group of individuals”?
It most certainly is. Read you own damn link.
I don't know for sure, but I believe the threshold is "credible threat"Do you think that meets the threshold of a "true threat", according to your know for link?
Police officers have actually been targeted recently in TX
Irrelevant. That is nothing more than proof of the threat as well as the stupidity of the author.Oh and one of the crimes I was convicted of and served time for was terroristic threats & intimidation.
So for you to suggest I do not have an understanding of the limits of free speech shows how clueless you are.
Were you arrested for tweeting?
I can threaten anyone with violence and be IMMEDIATELY arrested regardless of my intent.Intent is not required for convictionThe tweet – sent out by the Autonomous Student Network (ASN) at UT-Austin – states “Instead of #LawEnforcementAppreciationDay how about #LawEnforcementIncinerationDay”Then what is it about, exactly?
Do you think that meets the threshold of a "true threat", according to your link?
Do you think that the tweet is a "statement in which a speaker expresses a “serious” intent “to commit an act of unlawful violence to a particular individual or group of individuals”?
It most certainly is. Read you own damn link.
You're not to bright.
There's a legal test for incitement or threats - and it's applied to both sides
More nonsense. Inciting violence is a crime. It is up to the discretion of local municipalities if they wish to charge or not.I don't know for sure, but I believe the threshold is "credible threat"Do you think that meets the threshold of a "true threat", according to your know for link?
Police officers have actually been targeted recently in TX
The threshold is intent - the legal difference between free speech and threatening or inciting speech is called the "Brandenburg test". It requires 2 elements to be proven - 1st, that there is serious intent on the part of the speaker for the crime to take place, and 2nd, that there is a credible belief that the violence will occur eminently.
This tweet meets neither of those elements.
