Comments about killing the President = "free speech" to 9th Circus

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Liability, Jul 20, 2011.

  1. Liability
    Offline

    Liability Locked Account. Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2009
    Messages:
    35,447
    Thanks Received:
    5,049
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Mansion in Ravi's Head
    Ratings:
    +5,063
    Before I even read the decision (story was linked on Drudge), I knew it was the 9th Circus.

    Call for Obama’s assassination ruled free speech - Los Angeles Times

    The idiot defendant spoke of the then candidate Obama getting some 50 cal ammo in his head. When the Secret Service investigated the tip from another user of that same message board, they found not only that the idiot was "armed" but armed with -- you guessed it -- a 50 cal weapon. Of course, the idiot had said even more in other internet communications.

    He got indicted, tried and convicted.

    But the 9th Circus reversed the conviction on the ground that the "threat" wasn't a threat in context and that what the idiot said was protected "free speech."

    Fucking 9th Circus.
     
  2. The T
    Offline

    The T George S. Patton Party Supporting Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2009
    Messages:
    48,072
    Thanks Received:
    5,473
    Trophy Points:
    1,773
    Location:
    What USED TO BE A REPUBLIC RUN BY TYRANTS
    Ratings:
    +5,502
    Yeah I read a story of this earlier. This from the most overturned Court in the land...
     
  3. Mad Scientist
    Offline

    Mad Scientist Deplorable Gold Supporting Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2008
    Messages:
    23,936
    Thanks Received:
    5,211
    Trophy Points:
    270
    Ratings:
    +7,676
    Threatening the President is Free Speech? Horse Hockey!
     
  4. manifold
    Offline

    manifold Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2008
    Messages:
    48,682
    Thanks Received:
    7,224
    Trophy Points:
    1,830
    Location:
    your dreams
    Ratings:
    +20,718
    As I understand it, he wasn't president at the time.
     
  5. manifold
    Offline

    manifold Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2008
    Messages:
    48,682
    Thanks Received:
    7,224
    Trophy Points:
    1,830
    Location:
    your dreams
    Ratings:
    +20,718
    I don't know enough about the context myself to have an opinion about the ruling. But I certainly take no issue with context being a crucial consideration in the decision. I would take serious issue if it wasn't.
     
  6. Sallow
    Offline

    Sallow The Big Bad Wolf. Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2010
    Messages:
    56,535
    Thanks Received:
    6,132
    Trophy Points:
    1,840
    Location:
    New York City
    Ratings:
    +7,394
    Liability..if I could rep ya I would.

    Threatening any President of the United States does not constitute Free Speech.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  7. xsited1
    Offline

    xsited1 Agent P

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2008
    Messages:
    17,750
    Thanks Received:
    5,299
    Trophy Points:
    198
    Location:
    Little Rock, AR
    Ratings:
    +5,306
    Hillary was counting on Obama being assassinated so she could get the 2008 Democratic Presidential nomination. :thup:
     
  8. Baruch Menachem
    Offline

    Baruch Menachem '

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2008
    Messages:
    14,204
    Thanks Received:
    3,235
    Trophy Points:
    185
    Ratings:
    +3,305
    I would doubt that threatening any person with a 50 cal weapon constitutes free speech.

    Were I to write on this board that my X is a such and such and so and so and intend to deal with her with a 50 cal weapon, I would expect a visit from some government agency within a few hours. Obama is entitled to the same protection.
     
  9. manifold
    Offline

    manifold Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2008
    Messages:
    48,682
    Thanks Received:
    7,224
    Trophy Points:
    1,830
    Location:
    your dreams
    Ratings:
    +20,718
    I agree. But a determination about whether particular speech constitutes a threat is necessarily a subjective determination based, in significant part, on the overall context.

    This decision isn't that threats are protected speech. This decision is a subjective determination by that court that in this particular instance, the speech did not constitute a threat, and is therefore protected speech.

    A distinction that makes all the difference.
     
  10. Moving to USA
    Offline

    Moving to USA Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2011
    Messages:
    99
    Thanks Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    6
    Location:
    Maryland
    Ratings:
    +12
    It did when it was President Bush that was the center of attention, or when they hung a likeness of Sarah Palin, that was ok too.

    Why should obama be different?
     

Share This Page