Freedom of Speech -- When Does A Rally Cross The Line, If It Does?

[esskreemr]

I support the idea of the right to speak freely. There are times, however, that this right crosses the line. Where is the line? We all know that yelling 'Fire!' in a crowded theatre, calling in a fake bomb threat, or carving your favorite poem on the back of a dead prostitute is not considered protected speech.

This was sparked by the recent events in Toledo, Ohio. To summarize, a group of Neo-Nazis rallied in a predominantly black neighborhood. Protestors gathered and a violent incursion with the police ensued (the Neo-Nazis skipped out immediately) complete with the obligatory fires, looting, rock throwing, tear gas, pepper spray and over 100 people arrested.

Soooo... if the Neo-Nazi's speech protected speech in this case? I've watched a few Klan rallies on tv, let's assume the Neo-Nazis were screaming racial slurs and their usual ignorance. If you lived in that neighborhood, were black, and one low-brow Aryan supremist started walking up the sidewalk screaming "Niggers go home!" What would you do? What would you be allowed to do by law? Fighting words are not protected speech, the person speaking thusly can be held accountable for the violence that occurs. Why is a group of people (if you call these idiots people, they are mostly trash) given a protection that an individual isn't?

[Purple Fencer]

Anytime Louis Farrakhan or Al Sharpton open their mouths the line's pretty much crossed....Farrakhan is the worst of the lot, tho...he recently said that the govt purposely breacked the levees in Louisiana during Katrina in order to flood out blacks in the area.

If ever there was someone deserving of having his 1st Amendment rights stripped, it's him.

[esskreemr]

There are complete nutjobs on both side of the fence. You're not addressing the question.

Former Secretary of Education William Bennett:

"If you wanted to reduce crime, you could -- if that were your sole purpose -- you could abort every black baby in this country and your crime rate would go down.

"That would be an impossibly ridiculous and morally reprehensible thing to do, but your crime rate would go down,"

Ann Coulter, FoxNews's favorite rabid lapdog:

"I think we had enough laws about the turn-of-the-century. We don't need any more." Asked how far back would she go to repeal laws, she replied, "Well, before the New Deal ... [The Emancipation Proclamation] would be a good start."

[ReverseLunge]

Anytime Louis Farrakhan or Al Sharpton open their mouths the line's pretty much crossed....Farrakhan is the worst of the lot, tho...he recently said that the govt purposely breacked the levees in Louisiana during Katrina in order to flood out blacks in the area.

If ever there was someone deserving of having his 1st Amendment rights stripped, it's him.

Take away the black man's freedom of speech. You would love that wouldn't you?

[JackOfHearts]

I support the idea of the right to speak freely. There are times, however, that this right crosses the line. Where is the line? We all know that yelling 'Fire!' in a crowded theatre, calling in a fake bomb threat, or carving your favorite poem on the back of a dead prostitute is not considered protected speech.

This was sparked by the recent events in Toledo, Ohio. To summarize, a group of Neo-Nazis rallied in a predominantly black neighborhood. Protestors gathered and a violent incursion with the police ensued (the Neo-Nazis skipped out immediately) complete with the obligatory fires, looting, rock throwing, tear gas, pepper spray and over 100 people arrested.

Soooo... if the Neo-Nazi's speech protected speech in this case? I've watched a few Klan rallies on tv, let's assume the Neo-Nazis were screaming racial slurs and their usual ignorance. If you lived in that neighborhood, were black, and one low-brow Aryan supremist started walking up the sidewalk screaming "Niggers go home!" What would you do? What would you be allowed to do by law? Fighting words are not protected speech, the person speaking thusly can be held accountable for the violence that occurs. Why is a group of people (if you call these idiots people, they are mostly trash) given a protection that an individual isn't?

People are free to believe what they want. However one shouldn't try to force ones beliefs on another. One can present ones views in a logical and intelligent discussion, and invite others to do the same, but stomping about yelling racial slurs in a primarily black neighborhood is just asking for trouble. If a group of people were standing outside my house holding signs and yelling "GO BACK TO MEXICO, BEANERS!" I would not react too kindly to that. I would take their "speech" as a threat on me and my family, and I would move to defend myself. That seemed to be the case here. Some neo-nazi nutjobs wanted to incite violence, and that's exactly what they did. And they should be held as accountable as the other rioters.

[Slim]

There are complete nutjobs on both side of the fence. You're not addressing the question.

Former Secretary of Education William Bennett:


Ann Coulter, FoxNews's favorite rabid lapdog:

Did Ann Coulter actually say the Emancipation Proclaimation should be repealed, is that your idea of what she meant?

[esskreemr]

Did Ann Coulter actually say the Emancipation Proclaimation should be repealed, is that your idea of what she meant?

"I think we had enough laws about the turn-of-the-century. We don't need any more." Asked how far back in time would she go to repeal laws, she replied, "Well, before the New Deal." When asked, "You're talking about the Emancipation Proclamation?" she replied, "That would be a good start." - Politically Incorrect May 7, 1997

[YankeeRebel]

Speech is protected. Violence isn't. Anybody who engages in violence is subject to punishment under the law.

[ReverseLunge]

If a group of people were standing outside my house holding signs and yelling "GO BACK TO MEXICO, BEANERS!" I would not react too kindly to that. I would take their "speech" as a threat on me and my family, and I would move to defend myself.

Well it depends. Did your family come to America legally or illegally. If it is the latter then people have a right to be pissed. I myself don't like people who cut in line like the Mexican. If your family originally came here legally then it would be more acceptable.

[Slim]

Anytime Louis Farrakhan or Al Sharpton open their mouths the line's pretty much crossed....Farrakhan is the worst of the lot, tho...he recently said that the govt purposely breacked the levees in Louisiana during Katrina in order to flood out blacks in the area.

If ever there was someone deserving of having his 1st Amendment rights stripped, it's him.

Everytime the guy speaks, it's basically to incite riots.

It's pretty funny how you bring this up, but since escrimer didnt like the answer, shot back that it didnt address the question, but came up with a couple of nice ones, (one by the way that is a complete fabrication, as Ann Coulter never said The Emancipation Proclaimation should be repealed (man Esc, you really dont care how you slander someone ,do you?).

Esc, shall we start playing "Trump this Quote"? If we are, at least get them correct.

[JackOfHearts]

Well it depends. Did your family come to America legally or illegally. If it is the latter then people have a right to be pissed. I myself don't like people who cut in line like the Mexican. If your family originally came here legally then it would be more acceptable.

My moms side of the family came here legally, though my father's side... that's questionable. But my folks are divorced, my dad is god knows where (hopefully in prison, dead or in mexico), and me, my mother, and my siblings were born here in the United States. How my family came to be is irrelevant to this discussion, especially considering that we're US citizens and we have the same rights as any other family, regardless of ethnicity. Nobody has the right to tell me, or anyone to go anywhere. I am an american. This country is my home, and no white racist punk is going to tell me to book it.

[Slim]

My moms side of the family came here legally, though my father's side... that's questionable. But my folks are divorced, my dad is god knows where (hopefully in prison, dead or in mexico), and me, my mother, and my siblings were born here in the United States. How my family came to be is irrelevant to this discussion, especially considering that we're US citizens and we have the same rights as any other family, regardless of ethnicity. Nobody has the right to tell me, or anyone to go anywhere. I am an american. This country is my home, and no white racist punk is going to tell me to book it.

Dont bother, he's just baiting you.

[ReverseLunge]

My moms side of the family came here legally, though my father's side... that's questionable. But my folks are divorced, my dad is god knows where (hopefully in prison, dead or in mexico), and me, my mother, and my siblings were born here in the United States. How my family came to be is irrelevant to this discussion, especially considering that we're US citizens and we have the same rights as any other family, regardless of ethnicity. Nobody has the right to tell me, or anyone to go anywhere. I am an american. This country is my home, and no white racist punk is going to tell me to book it.

Well now it is ok since you aren't an illegal. Settle down. So what if you father was an illegal? As long as you have citizenship then you have freedom of speech.

I have a question though. Why do you guys always fly the Mexican flag at events and on your cars when you are trying so hard to distance yourself from Mexico and from the immigration police?

[JackOfHearts]

I have a question though. Why do you guys always fly the Mexican flag at events and on your cars when you are trying so hard to distance yourself from Mexico and from the immigration police?

LMAO I haven't a clue.

Like I said earlier, I was born here. I'm too americanized to go all out mexican pride or whatever. I don't even have a mexican flag. I can't even speak spanish! Though I guess having a little recognition in ones heritage is important, but there is such a thing as taking it too far. i.e.: those aztec murals I see some cholos have on their lowriders. Whats up with that?

[ReverseLunge]

Yeah I know what you mean. I am from Socal too. I'm glad you are distancing yourself from your heritage. Come to Southern California, it is beginning to look more and more like Mexico, grafitti, people selling oranges on the side of the road, tiny dirty shops all over the place, hordes of welfare mothers pushing their babies up and down the street, crime, hispanic gangs... the list goes on and one. No wonder California is Bankrupt. Cheers.

[JackOfHearts]

Yeah I know what you mean. I am from Socal too. I'm glad you are distancing yourself from your heritage. Come to Southern California, it is beginning to look more and more like Mexico, grafitti, people selling oranges on the side of the road, tiny dirty shops all over the place, hordes of welfare mothers pushing their babies up and down the street, crime, hispanic gangs... the list goes on and one. No wonder California is Bankrupt. Cheers.

Don't get me wrong. I am americanized, yes, but I still respect my roots. And mexican gangs are just one part of the spectrum, theres a whole rainbow of thugs down here.

[Have At You]

Let me get this straight.

A handful of nazi idiots decide to have a "march." They announce that they're just going to walk down the sidewalk, nothing more, and they get all appropriate permissions from the civic authorities ahead of time. The "march" is to occur in a racially mixed area of town.

When these few numbskulls gather in a city park before their stroll down the sidewalk, a bunch of locals show up and start throwing rocks at... police officers. The nazi dorks go home immediately.

The locals then start trashing people's cars, breaking into stores, destroying private property. More than a hundred people are injured by the lawless out-of-control locals.

So you're asking why don't we prohibit the nazi dorks from engaging in their political speech, because clearly the locals are of such a nature as to go on a rampage should the nazis do so?

Have I got this straight?

Then let's ask the same question another way: suppose you wanted to hold a march for racial equality, but doing so was guaranteed to cause racist locals to engage in violence. Would it be proper to prohibit the political speech of the equal-rights marchers, because clearly the locals are of such a nature as to go on a rampage should they be allowed to march?

I think the answer should be obvious, Ess.

[Zilverzmurfen]

Why is a group of people (if you call these idiots people, they are mostly trash) given a protection that an individual isn't?

For a moment here I thought you were talking about...ehm...well, you know who.

[Mr Epee]

Essy-pie,

must be horrifically popular at his local coffee shop.

Poetry at 11.

[ReverseLunge]

Essy-pie,

must be horrifically popular at his local coffee shop.

Poetry at 11.

Seriously, I don't even know why Todd is worrying about all this freedom of speech and racism stuff. If I was a balding middle age man with no romantic interaction besides the internet I would start hitting the speed dating places....but then that costs money.