A question for Americans

[Pebkac]

Uttering death threats has never been protected by free speech.

It all depends on context. There are ways you can point a gun at someone in completely non-threatening and non-criminal manners (it's extremely common in the film industry). Likewise, there are ways to speak or write in completely criminal matters. Conspiracy to commit murder is one of those crimes. Threats are another.

In most countries, making racist comments isn't illegal. Of course, it can get you into a lot of trouble with the locals depending on who is present and who you're insulting (yay, more context)... Obviously this is true even in the United States.

 

[Setsuri21]

It's supposed be but everyone is America is too sensitive and easily offended these days. So slowly it's going away in my opinion.

^ This times 1000

People are being a bunch of pansies now adays about political correctness that our speech is not only limited but being watered down to such a disgusting degree.

Our new Motto over here is "If everyone doesn't like it, you can't say it" ....-_-

Sadly, its more like "If anyone at all takes any offence to it, you cannot say it" -____-''

 

[Skeleton Jelly]

Because then people could walk around saying they want to kill this person and that person, and utter threats and spread hate and genocide propaganda and what not.

Just like what happends all the time anyway?

It's better that we could actually punish said people though. And having those boundaries in place stop some of the people from doing so.

No.
Cant really see how its better to "punish" people for saying stuff you dont like...
Besides, the threats, hate spreading and genocide propaganda will always be here.. Just turn on the tv or read the newspaper...

I would hate not having my freedom of speech. Even though i dont really talk that much, i appreciate being able to say what the fuck i want to when needed...

I'm not saying punish people who think this band sucks and such. I'm talking about threats and speech that promotes hate or instills fear into someone else. Everyone should be entitled to peace right? Or are you too edgy for that as well?

And sure, it's obviously going to be there for quite some time. But it's a lot more reasonable to do something or at least try to do something, than just let it happen. It's better to stop one hate speech, than none. So what you're saying is that just because we can't stop them all, it shouldn't really matter?

And so you're one of those people who likes saying these things? You can say whatever the fuck you want. I agree. But I'm saying when it comes to hate speech and threats, it's not alright.

Complete and utter free speech would make countries so much more worse.

I don't think you get what I'm saying. At all .

I do get what you are saying, actually quite well thank you, and i partly agree...
But i just cant see how removing freedom of speech because a couple of idiots cant shut up, is going to make this world a better place to live in...

You say remove free speech in such a way that it makes it sound like we should be oppressed to the point where we have to think about what we're going to vocalize. I'm just saying that if you're spreading such harsh words, that you shouldn't be protected by rights. What the hell is the use of rights if it can be used to infringe upon someone else's peace and peace of mind?

And a couple of idiots? Like you said, turn on the TV, it's not just a couple of idiots saying terrible things.

 

[Gudrests]

everyone is America is too sensitive and easily offended these days.

Yet we still teach children that "Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me". Funny, eh?

I COMPLETELY AGREE...people are very winey... but it boils down to..what politician is goign to get re-elected if he says no one can get in trouble for what he says if its "offencive" think about it...that would make a ton of people happy..and cause uncle al (Al Sharption) to jump on the "this is just an excuse to tell black people that they are ni...(that word) and not get in trouble about it) mean while if you say that word while in a fight its offically a hate crime (which is federal) even if they are calling you just as bad....its a terrible system and thats why im out to change it... GUDRESTS IN whatever year i run in

 

[Mcface]

Just a question, do you really have free speech if the government decides what speech is protected or not? For instance, the government can decide that videogames aren't protected as free speech, and ban them. What's to say the government can't decide that films aren't protected as free speech. So my question for the day is, is your speech truly protected?

At the moment our speech is protected, so long as it's not threatening. (even then, only if you feel it will be followed through is any action ever taken) But people are complaining more and more these days, telling people how to talk. Mostly white rich liberals thinking everything is offensive, but it is causing a bit of a problem.

 

[Tsunimo]

everyone is America is too sensitive and easily offended these days.

Yet we still teach children that "Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me". Funny, eh?

I've tested that theory, and despite popular belief, words can hurt you, especially when they are made out of steel, and coated in lemon juice and salt...

 

[Something Amyss]

Well, this question starts to get into some unusual areas in American Constitutional law. To give a basic, blunt answer: yes. Speech is protected by the First Amendment. If the government tried to break up a peaceful rally, there would be popular outrage and likely some impeachments.

Didn't happen when they were breaking up anti-war protests in the mid--00s.

 

[ratchet573]

We have free speech, but you can't say some things because it is too insensitive. Which is annoying at some points, but I can see the point. Some people are chastised for not saying something politically correct, but the whole freedom of speech thing makes it perfectly alright.

I don't know, it's kind of stupid.

 

[Skeleton Jelly]

It's not really free speech but free speech would be terrible anyways.

LOL What.

Because then people could walk around saying they want to kill this person and that person, and utter threats and spread hate and genocide propaganda and what not.

That isn't that bad. I'd rather we have open society that has the freedom to voice anything it wants than a polite society that is kind. We're America. We're not nice at all. We hate each other. We hate others. And yet, we still all can get behind the fact that we can at least voice our hatred about things.

I've been pushing the limits as to what can be said in my school. Things that I would never say, I say simply because I have the freedom to do such. I can tell everyone in my classes a bunch of dead baby jokes that even I slightly cringe at? Fantastic! I'm exercising my rights!

Dark humor is perfectly fine. And in no way should be frowned upon. So don't treat it as something serious, because it's not. I'm talking about spreading hate. Promoting racism, anti-semitism, sexism and what not. The longer these group are tolerated (if we're going by your open society), they will most likely be a minority. What happens when a minority tries to get a point across but no one listens? Especially if they're really deeply rooted in their beliefs? You get terrorism. You'll get riots. Even worse, what if they become a majority?

An open society is a damned bad society. There's a quote, "Evil unchecked grows. Evil tolerated poisons the whole system." I honestly don't believe that if someone has such a evil and terrible ideology, they should be allowed the right of free speech. Too much freedom is why exactly this world is such a shit hole.

And I mean the world outside of your high school where you think it's edgy to tell dead baby jokes.

 

[subject_87]

To use a famous example, you can't yell 'Fire!' in a crowded theater. Although some people (Not naming names, they know who they are) have interpreted 'free speech' as 'free speech for things that don't offend me'. I try to avoid this trap; as horrible a human being as Fred Phelps may be, he has every Constitutional right to spew his hateful bigotry without censorship.

 

[Skeleton Jelly]

Because then people could walk around saying they want to kill this person and that person, and utter threats and spread hate and genocide propaganda and what not.

Just like what happends all the time anyway?

It's better that we could actually punish said people though. And having those boundaries in place stop some of the people from doing so.

No.
Cant really see how its better to "punish" people for saying stuff you dont like...
Besides, the threats, hate spreading and genocide propaganda will always be here.. Just turn on the tv or read the newspaper...

I would hate not having my freedom of speech. Even though i dont really talk that much, i appreciate being able to say what the fuck i want to when needed...

I'm not saying punish people who think this band sucks and such. I'm talking about threats and speech that promotes hate or instills fear into someone else. Everyone should be entitled to peace right? Or are you too edgy for that as well?

And sure, it's obviously going to be there for quite some time. But it's a lot more reasonable to do something or at least try to do something, than just let it happen. It's better to stop one hate speech, than none. So what you're saying is that just because we can't stop them all, it shouldn't really matter?

And so you're one of those people who likes saying these things? You can say whatever the fuck you want. I agree. But I'm saying when it comes to hate speech and threats, it's not alright.

Complete and utter free speech would make countries so much more worse.

I don't think you get what I'm saying. At all .

"I disagree with what you are saying, but I would die to allow you to say it."
Paraphrased from Voltaire. I think.

Do I hate racists and homophobes? Yes. Do they have the right? Yes. Would I stand up for them in court for their right to do what I hate? Yes.

In our current society, I agree with you. But personally I think the right of speech should be greatly restrained. Freedoms in general allow too much to go tolerated.

 

[GWarface]

Because then people could walk around saying they want to kill this person and that person, and utter threats and spread hate and genocide propaganda and what not.

Just like what happends all the time anyway?

It's better that we could actually punish said people though. And having those boundaries in place stop some of the people from doing so.

No.
Cant really see how its better to "punish" people for saying stuff you dont like...
Besides, the threats, hate spreading and genocide propaganda will always be here.. Just turn on the tv or read the newspaper...

I would hate not having my freedom of speech. Even though i dont really talk that much, i appreciate being able to say what the fuck i want to when needed...

I'm not saying punish people who think this band sucks and such. I'm talking about threats and speech that promotes hate or instills fear into someone else. Everyone should be entitled to peace right? Or are you too edgy for that as well?

And sure, it's obviously going to be there for quite some time. But it's a lot more reasonable to do something or at least try to do something, than just let it happen. It's better to stop one hate speech, than none. So what you're saying is that just because we can't stop them all, it shouldn't really matter?

And so you're one of those people who likes saying these things? You can say whatever the fuck you want. I agree. But I'm saying when it comes to hate speech and threats, it's not alright.

Complete and utter free speech would make countries so much more worse.

I don't think you get what I'm saying. At all .

I do get what you are saying, actually quite well thank you, and i partly agree...
But i just cant see how removing freedom of speech because a couple of idiots cant shut up, is going to make this world a better place to live in...

You say remove free speech in such a way that it makes it sound like we should be oppressed to the point where we have to think about what we're going to vocalize. I'm just saying that if you're spreading such harsh words, that you shouldn't be protected by rights. What the hell is the use of rights if it can be used to infringe upon someone else's peace and peace of mind?

And a couple of idiots? Like you said, turn on the TV, it's not just a couple of idiots saying terrible things.

Everyone spreads harsh words when angry... be it at a demonstration, political rally or whatever... Should they have their rights removed? Hell, even politicians spead this mouthshit all the time. Thats their job... I would like to see you convince them to remove their own rights they made up themselves...

 

[Kahnmir]

Yes and no. When you have a government as large and powerful as ours it can basically do whatever it wants. After that its simply a matter of motivations, that is to say, votes and/or money; Our politicians are only limited by their shortsighted desire for votes (and money, which of course will come if one us elected/re-elected). Ultimately its a very mercenary system because Our politicians will do anything (and I mean anything) if they think it will get them votes and/or money.

but is that really different from any other government?
I think that if there is any real difference it is in that most of us Americans just don't giver a damn so long as things don't change to much, so the only ones that usually end up involved are the ones that stand to profit (Special interests and corporations) from whatever laws/programs are started.

So yeah, my whole take on the "censor videogames" thing is that some politician thinks he stands to get a bunch of idiots to vote for him (because championing "just causes" is a great way to do that)or make a lot of money, you know, so he can get that new yacht and pay his mistresses off >.<

Probably both.

 

[Shynobee]

What's to say the government can't decide that films aren't protected as free speech. So my question for the day is, is your speech truly protected?

Well, in theory, whats supposed to happen when the current govt. makes a law that we don't like, we vote out that govt. and bring in a new one that will implement laws that we do like. So, in essence, we do have free speech.

 

[Bocaj2000]

We have more freedoms than we think.

The only problem is that money = free speech according to congress, so censorship is based on convenience at this point. Clerks was almost rated NC-17 (a death sentence for filmmakers) for language alone and they weren't even told what to change. So yeah, if you have money, your free speech is unlimited.

 

[Skeleton Jelly]

Because then people could walk around saying they want to kill this person and that person, and utter threats and spread hate and genocide propaganda and what not.

Just like what happends all the time anyway?

It's better that we could actually punish said people though. And having those boundaries in place stop some of the people from doing so.

No.
Cant really see how its better to "punish" people for saying stuff you dont like...
Besides, the threats, hate spreading and genocide propaganda will always be here.. Just turn on the tv or read the newspaper...

I would hate not having my freedom of speech. Even though i dont really talk that much, i appreciate being able to say what the fuck i want to when needed...

I'm not saying punish people who think this band sucks and such. I'm talking about threats and speech that promotes hate or instills fear into someone else. Everyone should be entitled to peace right? Or are you too edgy for that as well?

And sure, it's obviously going to be there for quite some time. But it's a lot more reasonable to do something or at least try to do something, than just let it happen. It's better to stop one hate speech, than none. So what you're saying is that just because we can't stop them all, it shouldn't really matter?

And so you're one of those people who likes saying these things? You can say whatever the fuck you want. I agree. But I'm saying when it comes to hate speech and threats, it's not alright.

Complete and utter free speech would make countries so much more worse.

I don't think you get what I'm saying. At all .

I do get what you are saying, actually quite well thank you, and i partly agree...
But i just cant see how removing freedom of speech because a couple of idiots cant shut up, is going to make this world a better place to live in...

You say remove free speech in such a way that it makes it sound like we should be oppressed to the point where we have to think about what we're going to vocalize. I'm just saying that if you're spreading such harsh words, that you shouldn't be protected by rights. What the hell is the use of rights if it can be used to infringe upon someone else's peace and peace of mind?

And a couple of idiots? Like you said, turn on the TV, it's not just a couple of idiots saying terrible things.

Everyone spreads harsh words when agry... be it at a demonstration, political rally or whatever... Should they have their rights removed? Hell, even politicians spead this mouthshit all the time. Thats their job... I would like to see you convince them to remove their own rights they made up themselves...

And logical people can control themselves when angry. I guess I might have worded it a bit wrong. I don't mean you can have rights, but if you say this or that, they're gone. I just believe that our rights should be reduced and restricted. And most politicians don't spread hate speeches. And I know what I say will go against MANY peoples beliefs. But they're just my beliefs and I sure as hell don't expect them to be appreciated by many and certainly not recognized.

 

[Nekros22]

If you believe America has free speech, perform this simple scientific test.

Stand in a shopping mall, get someone to film you.

Start speaking audibly to passers by, saying "I hate N***ers, and i hope everyone here agrees with me. N****ers will be the death of us all." and repeatedly say it over and over.



If you last beyond 10 minutes before security chucks you out, id be amazed. If you made it past 30, id be dumbfounded and shocked.

Make it a full hour and you can say the U.S has free speech.




The truth is - NO country has true "free speech". Americans just like chest thumping and using the claim its in their constitution as a means to belittle other countries and make themselves feel superior.

They dont have it, and the reason they dont have it is because in reality you dont want it. Because common sense and a civilized country require intelligent people to step in when nutbags, sickos, degenerates and low-life evil people would seek to abuse it.

Ok, let's just establish that you're mad. That's on the table.

You're one of those people who thinks a small minority of people represents an entire country. It doesn't work that way.

THE 1ST AMENDMENT PROTECTS YOU FROM INFRINGEMENTS ON YOUR FREEDOM OF SPEECH BY THE GOVERNMENT!

If you walk up to a black man, call him a "n****r" and inevitably be thought of as a lesser person (or punched in the face, more likely), segwaying from that to "AMERICA DOESN'T HAVE FREE SPEECH" is illogical. That man you just called the n-word is a person entitled to every right you have.

The reason us "chest-thumping" Americans claim the Freedom of Speech is in our Constitution is because it is. The government cannot stop you from believing, saying, thinking, and writing what you want to. Granted, some things you say, believe, think and write can get you into a lot of trouble, but everyone will know about it because everyone will be told about it, i.e., the media is free to report it.

except they can and do
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_speech_zone

You honestly think a "Free Speech Zone" is intended to limit public opinion? You really believe that in a public protest with possibly thousands of people screaming at each other, you can trust that everyone will behave themselves? You are honestly telling me that at a Nazi rally in the middle of a Jewish community or a KKK rally in the middle of a black community without some form of barricade or protection is a good idea?

Tell you what, tough guy. Don your white robes, light up a cross, and walk into your nearest minority neighborhood to test your freedom of speech. I guarantee it won't be the government trying to stop you.

does it not stop people from speaking freely to their government?

and i dont believe its a good idea but thats the point, free speech is over-rated

What in the hell are you talking about when you say "free speech is overrated?"

You have this "V for Vendetta" view of the government, you've watched "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington" one too many times. What's going to be accomplished if I run up on stage, plant my feet on the ground, and shout in Barack Obama's face that he's a socialist weasel who's ruining this country? Nothing. You change the government by becoming involved in it, not shouting at it from the side lines.

I have never watched that, and i don't have that view at all. What im saying is americans hoot and holler about their amazing right to free speech when in actuality its not so much better than any of the developed world. And protest doesnt mean shouting at some1, i for one have done peaceful marches before placard held high. calm down bro ^^

You said that "Free Speech Zones" hinder a person's right to speak freely to their government, but a Free Speech Zone is only used at protests or similar events. Flip flopping on your position isn't helping you.

Americans "hoot and holler" about free speech because we, unlike other countries, appreciate it.

free speech isn't just vocal.
You exagerate something the rest of us just accept as a given.

We don't exaggerate anything (angry typing, lol). The "rest" of you seem to have a problem with Americans actually enjoying what we have. You act as if we don't accept it as a given. We know it's a given, that's why we're vocal about it. Freedom of speech is entirely vocal. Media outlets, magazines, political elections, all of it vocal. I don't think you understand what you're talking about.

 

[ryanxm]

with freedom come responsabie

so no your not suppost to publicly say son of a b-wait i cant say that on the forums...um go watch apocolypse lane episode two i think, its called "poker night" you'll get the idea

 

[Naeo]

Nominally we do, but you say the word "niggardly" (it's a real word, look it up if you don't know it) and, as a new York treasurer found out, the ignorant public will sooner hound you out of office and force your resignation before they pick up a dictionary.

That and we're such a conservative, freedom-hating country (no, seriously, we have almost always been farther behind in things like civil rights than any other developed/first-world nation) that we like a very narrow definition of what's "okay to say". Though I guess there's a certain irony in people having huge campaigns against "you shouldn't be allowed to say this".

 

[minarri]

The funny thing about free speech is the part where it's free speech to the extent it doesn't infringe on others' rights under the law. It's just unfortunate that many people misinterpret that to mean "I can say whatever I want."