Re: Free Speech No Defense for Urging Suicide
Mike Findlay <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.music.dadl.ot |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
I'm pretty sure these people were an ocean away and these were online statements. The causal connection is weak at best, but that shouldn't be the issue. Are people who yell "jump" at people on top of bridges/buildings guilty of a crime, (regardless of whether the person jumps or not - just yelling it, under this theory, be considered an attempt)? Obviously I don't think it should be and I've never heard of it being charged. True free speech means tolerating speech we think is loathsome and it should be an absolute freedom. Once you start regulating one person's speech who is to say that yours or mine can't be regulated? It becomes a matter of who is power and what words/speech they like of dislike. I predict this will be overturned on appeal. Mike F. ________________________________ From: Bruce Geerdes <[email protected]> To: DADL (off topic) <[email protected]> Sent: Wed, March 16, 2011 12:17:17 PM Subject: Re: [DADL-OT] Free Speech No Defense for Urging Suicide On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 7:48 AM, Mike Findlay <[email protected]> wrote: He should have gone with the jury trial. Only a judge, with the usual Black Robe Disease, would make such a ruling. Does the fact that suicide is technically a crime make a difference? How much latitude does "free speech" give people as far as encouraging others to commit crimes go? -- dadl-ot mailing list http://mail.thehood.us/mailman/listinfo/dadl-ot_thehood.us http://news.gmane.org/gmane.music.dadl.ot