Pinky said:
Maybe, can you provide me with a single example containing obvious hyperbole and calling it out as a joke specifically?
You mean the JK added after the fact?
Probably not. But then, that's a bit inane.
Are you going to sit here and say serial killers, school shooters and the like don't speak in metaphor and hyperbole? From religious quotes to Beatles lyrics, dude. Seriously. From "rivers of blood" to the Columbine shooters....Some serious intent behind some serious hyperbole.
But they were obviously all joking, because hyperbole. And this is apparently the only real measuring stick we need. Oh, also harassment, as seen below. That could probably also extend to Klebold and Harris, given the reports.
So do we now argue that Columbine was just a joke, or can we move on from the inane argument that one can tell a school shooter from a kidder based on the circumstances immediately being offered.
Areloch said:
How easy it was to make a false parallel? Yes, but I didn't even have to be involved to see that.
option1soul said:
Actually, it does... Or it's supposed to. Shouting "fire" in a crowded theater is something different. This was neither a threat nor calling for someone's death nor "inciting imminent lawless action".
And it's obviously not a threat because you say so after the fact. Which is still weirdly reminiscent of Klebold and Harris.
If what you claim is true than every single person who says "I'm going to kick his ass" would be held on legal grounds; not to mention the amount of depraved hate and violent speech that passes for normal on websites, forums, and gaming blog sites.
"They didn't do it elsewhere" isn't proof that it's wrong here. That's like saying that personally attacking someone on the Escapist is okay because so-and-so didn't get warned.
Of course, I do wonder how often saying you're going to shoot up a school occurs in day-to-day life if you think it's on par with "I'm gonna kick your ass."
I'd add as a final note to this, I wonder how often these are actually, you know...Reported. People often run to this excuse, like the police troll every single Facebook looking for death threats. But then, I would hope we would be so reasonable as to understand the difference between a case that was reported to the police and an instance that likely wasn't.
The inability of a system to be comprehensive does not mean you haven't violated the system.
This was his personal facebook page
Which could be seen publicly. Saying it was his private page is pointless. People were able to see it. Some woman in Canadia was able to see it. You yourself pointed that out. It wasn't said in private.
and he was responding to someone's harassing comments (regardless of how "bad" the comment was or wasn't)
Ohhhh...I get it. If someone's harassing me I can say I'm going to shoot up a school.
At best this argument amounts to a "two wrongs make a right" argument.
This is EXACTLY what kind of free speech is supposed to be protected by the constitution.
No. It's designed to protect unpopular speech and the issue here is not its popularity no matter how hard you try and force it. But again, you've supported non founder logic to try and argue how this is different.
Similarly, any of the "we're not allowed to be sarcastic anymore" arguments (which are apparently not criticisms of the ruling because of obvious hyperbole) because it's not about sarcasm. It's not about hyperbole. It's not about someone else harassing him. There are numerous ways to respond to such a harassing claim without risking getting flagged by the cops or your place raided.
Why? Because sarcasm and hyperbole and the other guy's actions don't really change what they reacted to or why.
I'd be surprised to find any real precedent for the "I'm just kidding!" school of thought, but then....
I'm shocked that you claim to "know what it says and it means" but seem to think we wouldn't be able to say things like this.
Well, yeah. I do know what it says, and I know what legal precedent and Constitutional rulings from the SCOTUS have said in the past. I'm versed on it, which is why I both know what it says and means (to the degree anyone can of a living document) and not find myself swayed by people who can only repeat that it was just a joke (obviously). You can try and "shame" me for not pretending that tacking jk on after the fact makes a world of difference, but....Be serious.
An obvious joke is George Carlin's "Elmer Fudd raping Porky Pig" joke.