ANTIFA group at UT - Austin proposes "Law Enforcement Incineration Day"

[theDoctorisIn]

There's a legal test for incitement or threats - and it's applied to both sides

That's because you're a fuckwit who doesn't understand the First Amendment.

Ask a lawyer, they can help you out.

 

[Timmy]

God, you guys are a bunch of whiny little snowflakes.

what is whiny here?

should these statements (IE - let's incinerate police officers) constitute a hate crime?

if a group were to propose hanging black people, I suspect that type of charge would have a better chance of becoming reality

the problem is, these types of statements do not seem to garner any outrage from prominent leftists nor their allies in traditional media

my 2nd point, that Trump was unfairly maligned for lumping this type of group in with white racist groups, stands

what do you disagree with here?

and where do you see a whine?

A random anonymous tweet joke ! Oh nooooo !!! Sure it's bad taste, like you can't find bad taste in Twitter land .

For example , Trumps attack on law enforcement that you righties seem cool with .

 

[Wacky Quacky]

The article you posted doesn't even have the word ANTIFA in it. Go back and read your own link, stop trying to be like your dear leader and make random shit up.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

The tweet – sent out by the Autonomous Student Network (ASN) at UT-Austin – states “Instead of #LawEnforcementAppreciationDay how about #LawEnforcementIncinerationDay”

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”?

Intent is not required for conviction

It most certainly is. Read you own damn link.

I can threaten anyone with violence and be IMMEDIATELY arrested regardless of my intent.

You're not to bright.

Earlier in this thread, Tank and deltex both threatened violence against these students.

Do you think they're going to be arrested?

Tank is a moron and deltex made no threat that I saw.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Do you think that meets the threshold of a "true threat", according to your know for link?

I don't know for sure, but I believe the threshold is "credible threat"

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.

More nonsense. Inciting violence is a crime. It is up to the discretion of local municipalities if they wish to charge or not.
With our over crowded criminal system MANY criminal statute violations are simply ignored.

The Supreme Court disagrees with you - and I think I'll take their word for it over yours.

 

[Mac1958]

NOW the Regressives are all about freedom of speech.

 

[dcbl]

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”?

What I think is that the" hate crime" laws are really a tool to circumvent the 1st amendment and allow for persecution of unpopular speech

And I'm hoping that you understood that coming in...

 

[theDoctorisIn]

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”?

Intent is not required for conviction

It most certainly is. Read you own damn link.

I can threaten anyone with violence and be IMMEDIATELY arrested regardless of my intent.

You're not to bright.

Earlier in this thread, Tank and deltex both threatened violence against these students.

Do you think they're going to be arrested?

Tank is a moron and deltex made no threat that I saw.

Well, if you think these students should be arrested, do you think that Tank should be arrested too?

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

It's another Holocaust, just this time it's by Anti-Fascists.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

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”?

What I think is that the" hate crime" laws are really a tool to circumvent the 1st amendment and allow for persecution of unpopular speech

And I'm hoping that you understood that coming in...

I think we should add "hate crime laws" to things you don't understand.

There's no law against "hate speech" in this country. You know that, right?

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Intent is not required for conviction

It most certainly is. Read you own damn link.

I can threaten anyone with violence and be IMMEDIATELY arrested regardless of my intent.

You're not to bright.

Earlier in this thread, Tank and deltex both threatened violence against these students.

Do you think they're going to be arrested?

Tank is a moron and deltex made no threat that I saw.

Well, if you think these students should be arrested, do you think that Tank should be arrested too?

I think tank should be in a padded cell but that's not my call.

 

[Timmy]

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”?

What I think is that the" hate crime" laws are really a tool to circumvent the 1st amendment and allow for persecution of unpopular speech

And I'm hoping that you understood that coming in...

1st amendment doesn't protect crime. Show me one example where hate crimes laws persecute free speech.

 

[dcbl]

And no - there's no legal difference between posting on a message board, and posting on twitter.

I never said there was

I made the comment that if a comment was made here that was serious and credible, that I would expect it to be reported

 

[theDoctorisIn]

It most certainly is. Read you own damn link.

I can threaten anyone with violence and be IMMEDIATELY arrested regardless of my intent.

You're not to bright.

Earlier in this thread, Tank and deltex both threatened violence against these students.

Do you think they're going to be arrested?

Tank is a moron and deltex made no threat that I saw.

Well, if you think these students should be arrested, do you think that Tank should be arrested too?

I think tank should be in a padded cell but that's not my call.

And yet, it appears that you think that the arrest of these students is your call.

Why is that?

 

[theDoctorisIn]

And no - there's no legal difference between posting on a message board, and posting on twitter.

I never said there was

I made the comment that if a comment was made here that was serious and credible, that I would expect it to be reported

If someone on this board made a serious and credible threat against someone, they would be reported. Same as if someone did so on twitter.

What I'm trying to make clear to you is that not all "threats" are "real threats".

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

I can threaten anyone with violence and be IMMEDIATELY arrested regardless of my intent.

You're not to bright.

Earlier in this thread, Tank and deltex both threatened violence against these students.

Do you think they're going to be arrested?

Tank is a moron and deltex made no threat that I saw.

Well, if you think these students should be arrested, do you think that Tank should be arrested too?

I think tank should be in a padded cell but that's not my call.

And yet, it appears that you think that the arrest of these students is your call.

Why is that?

I never said it was my call lol

 

[dcbl]

The threshold is intent - the legal difference between free speech and threatening or inciting speech is called the "Brandenburg test".

Determining intent is subjective

do you really believe the standards for this are applied equally?

 

[theDoctorisIn]

The threshold is intent - the legal difference between free speech and threatening or inciting speech is called the "Brandenburg test".

Determining intent is subjective

do you really believe the standards for this are applied equally?

Determining intent is not as subjective as you think.

Do you have any evidence that they're not being applied equally?

 

[dcbl]

What I'm trying to make clear to you is that not all "threats" are "real threats".

I understand that

Back to my point/question in OP

If a student group made a similar tweet about hanging black people, do you believe they would face charges?

I do

And it would be the lead story in our traditional media, Trump would be asked about it

Do you doubt that?

 

[dcbl]

That's because you're a fuckwit who doesn't understand the First Amendment.

This is what happens when someone is bested in a debate, they fall back on personal insults good job