View Poll Results: Are there any examples of free speech that you believe fall under restrictions?

Voters
26. You may not vote on this poll
  • Screaming fire and guns in a crowded auditorium/theater/church etc

    25 96.15%
  • Not acting on it yet making a film about the joys of children sexuality

    9 34.62%
  • Writing or speaking reasons why one might want to shoot or kill a candidate running for POTUS

    9 34.62%
  • Speaking inflammatory words to a culture where our troops and tax revenues are invested

    3 11.54%
  • Media produced inciting hatred while troops/citizens in that culturein order to incite violence

    5 19.23%
  • Protesting military funerals by taunting the fallen as our pay back for not being perfect

    5 19.23%
  • Making a film or writing a book about that denigrates women as not worthy except for sex services

    1 3.85%
  • Distributing a film in a country where our troops are stationed saying they represent Satan

    2 7.69%
  • Loudly bellowing sexual, political, and religious insults

    4 15.38%
  • Intentionally speaking of unproven deviant sexual inuendo of another to their community

    8 30.77%
Multiple Choice Poll.
Page 12 of 13 FirstFirst ... 210111213 LastLast
Results 111 to 120 of 130

Thread: The First Amendment

  1. #111
    Whoa, daddy!
    MadLib's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Upstate New York
    Last Seen
    12-14-17 @ 04:39 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    6,225

    Re: The First Amendment

    Quote Originally Posted by Henrin View Post
    That is very good point. :P I will consider it.
    Well played
    Quote Originally Posted by ecofarm View Post
    Hah. If someone put me in their sig, I'd never know. I have sigs off.

  2. #112
    Sage
    SmokeAndMirrors's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    RVA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:33 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    18,170

    Re: The First Amendment

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    Well it seems to me that we ALREADY have those designations. More laws, more policing, more jail time, more government.
    No, we don't. A hate motive is distinctly different from any other kind of motive. Not necessarily better or worse; just different.

    How is it "more government?" Any crime that could have a hate motive is STILL a crime even if you didn't commit it out of hate. You're going to jail either way.

  3. #113
    global liberation

    ecofarm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Miami
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:18 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    66,413

    Re: The First Amendment

    Some studies have indicated that assaults motivated by hatred are more violent, and more likely to result in serious injury to the victim, than other types of assaults. That is particularly so with respect to victims in the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) community. Studies have also shown that most hate crimes are carried out by persons who do not know their victim, and that the victims are selected based on how they are perceived rather than something they said or did. The arbitrary manner in which victims are targeted in hate crimes can be profoundly unsettling, because victims can do nothing to change their appearance or how their characteristics are perceived by others.

    Hate crimes also have a much broader impact within communities than many other types of violent crimes or property crimes. Because they are motivated by bias, hate crimes are often intended to, and do, send a broader message of violent intolerance toward a broad class of persons. Like terrorist incidents, the “message” aspect of the offender’s motive can be profoundly threatening to people far removed from the actual scene of the crime. The fact that the victims of such crimes are selected based on characteristics such as their race or religion can cause all those in the community who share that characteristic to experience similar feelings of vulnerability and secondary victimization. In its impact on the community, the fear of becoming a victim of violence can be nearly as debilitating as suffering through an actual crime. The message of intolerance that is communicated through a hate crime can have broadly disruptive social effects as well, and can lead to greater distrust of law enforcement or friction between racial or religious communities.

    Investigating and prosecuting hate crimes is a challenge. Victims are often afraid to come forward or lack the confidence that law enforcement will vigorously pursue the offenders. Some victims are reluctant to acknowledge their sexual orientation or immigration status to law enforcement. There may be cultural or linguistic impediments to effective cooperation with law enforcement. Because establishing motive is a key aspect to proving the crime, investigations often must range far beyond the criminal act itself to locate evidence relevant to the defendant’s state of mind before and during the crime.
    USDOJ: Executive Office for United States Attorneys

    I don't get how people can manage to not understand the above quote.


    I still remember quoting statutes that specifically required the exclusion of other motive and possession of paraphrenalia or membership. But I have not located the prosecutorial requirements, perhaps in Byrd.
    Last edited by ecofarm; 09-22-12 at 04:39 PM.

  4. #114
    global liberation

    ecofarm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Miami
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:18 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    66,413

    Re: The First Amendment

    The arbitrary manner in which victims are targeted in hate crimes can be profoundly unsettling, because victims can do nothing to change their appearance or how their characteristics are perceived by others.
    Citation above.

    The bold part means gender. Be it old, young, black, white, gay, straight, Christian or Muslim, targetting based on gender is terrorism. Does this mean pedo is terrorism? I think so.

  5. #115
    Sage
    SmokeAndMirrors's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    RVA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:33 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    18,170

    Re: The First Amendment

    Quote Originally Posted by ecofarm View Post
    Citation above.

    The bold part means gender. Be it old, young, black, white, gay, straight, Christian or Muslim, targetting based on gender is terrorism. Does this mean pedo is terrorism? I think so.
    Pedophiles aren't trying to send a message. They get more pleasure out of their victims being children. Terrorists pick targets based on hate or political motives. Pedos, like rapists in general, pick targets based on vulnerability. Reasons why terrorists target who and what they do are more complex. Pedophiles pick targets based on a gut enjoyment of it, and the powerlessness of the victim.

  6. #116
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    54,124

    Re: The First Amendment

    Quote Originally Posted by SmokeAndMirrors View Post
    No, we don't. A hate motive is distinctly different from any other kind of motive. Not necessarily better or worse; just different.

    How is it "more government?" Any crime that could have a hate motive is STILL a crime even if you didn't commit it out of hate. You're going to jail either way.
    It is not distinctly different, in fact it's the same as any other irrational hate. It doesn't matter if you hate an individual because he's black or because she's your ex-wife and she took the kids so that bitch is going to pay! It's the same thing. Irrational hate that leads to planned violence. That's the true source, not some feigned "OMG hating because of color is so much worse than hating because of any other set of random circumstances!".
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

  7. #117
    Sage
    SmokeAndMirrors's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    RVA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:33 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    18,170

    Re: The First Amendment

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    It is not distinctly different, in fact it's the same as any other irrational hate. It doesn't matter if you hate an individual because he's black or because she's your ex-wife and she took the kids so that bitch is going to pay! It's the same thing. Irrational hate that leads to planned violence. That's the true source, not some feigned "OMG hating because of color is so much worse than hating because of any other set of random circumstances!".
    No, it isn't. If you hate an individual for your personal interactions with them, your hate ends at that person. You may be a generally volatile person, but you aren't a risk to anyone in particular.

    If you hate an entire race, you pose a threat to anyone else of that race you meet.

    How that person may be rehabilitated looks very different from someone who committed a crime of passion. What sort of risk they pose to society is also very different.

    No one ever said anything about "worse." What I said is "different." Different motive, different rehabilitation, different risk.

  8. #118
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    54,124

    Re: The First Amendment

    Quote Originally Posted by SmokeAndMirrors View Post
    No, it isn't. If you hate an individual for your personal interactions with them, your hate ends at that person. You may be a generally volatile person, but you aren't a risk to anyone in particular.

    If you hate an entire race, you pose a threat to anyone else of that race you meet.
    If they assault the entire race, maybe. But these crimes are against INDIVIDUALS and thus, on the individual basis it stands. Let me know when they can assault all black people, and maybe I'll agree that hating on race is worse. But since hating on race makes a person lash out against another person, the reason for that is similar to other premeditated reasons for lashing out against anyone else.

    You cannot punish people for crimes they have not committed, not justly. And thus when you look at any of these cases its a case of individual vs individual. You cannot prosecute them for society's ills.

    Quote Originally Posted by SmokeAndMirrors View Post
    How that person may be rehabilitated looks very different from someone who committed a crime of passion. What sort of risk they pose to society is also very different.

    No one ever said anything about "worse." What I said is "different." Different motive, different rehabilitation, different risk.
    Prison is not so much rehabilitation as much as it is punishment, though it is oft wise to inject rehabilitation programs into the jail. But this is exactly what I'm talking about. You do want a new crime, you want Hate Crime. It didn't exist before, it extends punishments because you think their crime, similar to so many others, is so much worse because it was done because of race or whatever all our protected classes are these days. Prison isn't about minimizing Society's risks per say, it's to punish individuals who have infringed upon the rights of others; it's for the individual. And while it has aggregate effects for society, it doesn't mean that just because you think a crime is worse that it's then OK to extend punishments on it.

    In the end you base this decision on this assumption that it's more dangerous because their hate doesn't end at some specific individual (even though their crime will have) and thus they are more dangerous and deserve to be locked up longer. But while that may be statistically true, it cannot be held to the individual. You don't have a crystal ball, you don't know the future, and you do not know if that individual will commit another crime. Yet you are increasing punishments as if it's a forgone conclusion that he will. Improper justice, improper use of government force, improper expansion of crime.
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

  9. #119
    Sage
    SmokeAndMirrors's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    RVA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:33 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    18,170

    Re: The First Amendment

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    If they assault the entire race, maybe. But these crimes are against INDIVIDUALS and thus, on the individual basis it stands. Let me know when they can assault all black people, and maybe I'll agree that hating on race is worse. But since hating on race makes a person lash out against another person, the reason for that is similar to other premeditated reasons for lashing out against anyone else.

    You cannot punish people for crimes they have not committed, not justly. And thus when you look at any of these cases its a case of individual vs individual. You cannot prosecute them for society's ills.
    Danger to society is based on likelihood of the person committing a similar crime again. If all it takes is a superficial aspect to trigger them to commit a crime, they obviously that represents a unique kind of threat. Worse than some, better than others, but unique, and thus a good reason to declare hate as a motive.

    Prison is not so much rehabilitation as much as it is punishment, though it is oft wise to inject rehabilitation programs into the jail. But this is exactly what I'm talking about. You do want a new crime, you want Hate Crime. It didn't exist before, it extends punishments because you think their crime, similar to so many others, is so much worse because it was done because of race or whatever all our protected classes are these days. Prison isn't about minimizing Society's risks per say, it's to punish individuals who have infringed upon the rights of others; it's for the individual. And while it has aggregate effects for society, it doesn't mean that just because you think a crime is worse that it's then OK to extend punishments on it.

    In the end you base this decision on this assumption that it's more dangerous because their hate doesn't end at some specific individual (even though their crime will have) and thus they are more dangerous and deserve to be locked up longer. But while that may be statistically true, it cannot be held to the individual. You don't have a crystal ball, you don't know the future, and you do not know if that individual will commit another crime. Yet you are increasing punishments as if it's a forgone conclusion that he will. Improper justice, improper use of government force, improper expansion of crime.
    No, I don't. Nowhere have I advocated for making more things crimes. Nowhere have I said that we should increase punishments.

    You are simply inventing BS strawmen to knock down as you go, and it has nothing to do with anything I've actually said.

  10. #120
    Educator Klown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Last Seen
    12-14-12 @ 04:29 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    982

    Re: The First Amendment

    All that the good people have now in the good old US of A are the Patriots acts and the NDAA.

    US constitution and bill of rights are currently suspended

    Remember you have to fight an imaginary enemy FOREVER and ever

    The corpocracy will protect you.

    Thats what NAZI Germany told its people too in the 1930s and during WW2

    Good luck folks!

Page 12 of 13 FirstFirst ... 210111213 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •