Dear BSL Advocates,
Even though Freedom of Speech in the United States is a constitutional right, its a very limited right. I understand that this topic can be rather difficult since it basically says that: even though you can say anything you want to say- you are not always protected by the 1st amendment. In fact- the majority of your violent rants about killing things are not protected and that includes Mr. Richard Prince’s violent instructions on how to kill and torture pit bulls.
Lets take a gander at what’s not covered by the 1st amendment:
1. Incitement
Schenck v. United States (1919), which simply decided that a “clear and present danger” could justify a congressional rule limiting speech.
You know, when Jeff’s new fishing buddy was talking/encouraging people to stab, beat, duct tape, chain saw, sledge hammer, choke, run over and anally probe a pit bull? Nope, not protected.
2. False statements of fact
In Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc. (1974), the Supreme Court decided that there is “no constitutional value in false statements of fact.
A great example: “ALL pit bulls are purpose bred fighting dogs that will eat you for Thanksgiving.” Nooooope. Not protected either!
3. Fighting Words
In Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire (1942), the Supreme Court held that speech is unprotected if it constitutes “fighting words”. Fighting words, as defined by the Court, is speech that “tend[s] to incite an immediate breach of the peace” by provoking a fight, so long as it is a “personally abusive [word] which, when addressed to the ordinary citizen, is, as a matter of common knowledge, inherently likely to provoke a violent reaction“. Additionally, such speech must be “directed to the person of the hearer” and is “thus likely to be seen as a ‘direct personal insult’. Along with fighting words, speech might be unprotected if it either intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly inflicts severe emotional distress.
You know, when you attack innocent dog owners and their families? When you post their address and steal pictures of their children and you threaten to go kick their asses or pay “visits”? Riiiiiiight- totally not protected.
4. Threats
Threats of violence that are directed at a person or group of persons that has the intent of placing the target at risk of bodily harm or death are generally unprotected.
Well…. every day you threaten bodily harm and death….
So, yes- you are free to say whatever you want, however- stop trying to hide behind the 1st amendment because it won’t protect you…
billy the bartender is pure entertainment for me…and the fact that he defended that guy made my day…and most of the night…ahahahaha…
LikeLiked by 2 people
What’s even funnier is the founding board member of a victims advocacy goes fishing with a guy who promotes torture of animals!
LikeLiked by 1 person
yeah…the irony is always off the charts with the cult members and their leaders
LikeLiked by 1 person
Geez Louise! Again with defending freedon of speech. Listen carefully Johnson. You do not havr Freedom Of Speech when you are ar work, using company time and equipment. You are expected to comply with the rules regarding use of property and also to behave in such a manner as to present a respectable and trustworthy image for the company you work for. Since this man was a public servant he had much higher expectations of behavior and trust to uphold. Your lack of critical thinking regarding this quite obvious result of his misbehavior just boggles my mind Johnson. I swear you are full on stupid!! Just stupid.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Blast…*have* *at*
LikeLiked by 1 person
Right on Debra! Jennifer Bishop did a great job explaining this as well in the screen cap.
I’m UK-based but have lived in the U.S. in the past. I have zero patience when people start spouting about protected speech as if it means protected from EVERYTHING.
I like the analogy that if you, as a teenager, called your mother a b – – – – -, the government would not protect you from being grounded. If you told a teacher to go to hell, the government would not protect you from detention. If you got caught spreading terrible rumours about your closest friends, the government would not protect you from having to eat lunch alone every day for the rest of the school year.
Actions have consequences. Most humans figure this out by the time they are two, but apparently not DBO & Co.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Apparently this is a tough concept for Billy.
LikeLiked by 1 person