HP3000-L Archives

May 2002, Week 5

HP3000-L@RAVEN.UTC.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Denys Beauchemin <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Date:
Thu, 30 May 2002 12:16:18 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (47 lines)
Not the same thing.  One keeps equating freedom of speech with the right to
say anything regardless of the consequences.

If you go into a theater and yell 'Fire', you will not be arrested for the
speech, you will be arrested for raising a false alarm and possibly causing
bodily harm to people.  Action ---> consequence --> penalty.  By the same
token, you cannot slander someone without consequences.  You are definitely
allowed to say what you want, but you have to bear the consequences.
Everyone keeps looking at what we have a right to do; they should spend more
time thinking about the responsibilities for their actions.

In the case of cross burning, I believe it is protected by the first
amendment.  I never understood the meaning of the action.  Perhaps I should
check with the only KKK member I know, Senator Byrd, Democrat-West Virginia.
Maybe he could explain it to me.  At any rate, provided the moron burns his
cross on his lawn and within all the local fire regulations, I could care
less.  Unpopular speech is protected by the constitution.  That's what it's
for.  There is no need to protect popular speech.

For extra points and as field exercise, go to an airport and say "there is a
b*o*m*b in my luggage" at the security checkpoint.  Drop me a note from the
Federal Prison and let me know how you enjoyed the body search.


Denys

-----Original Message-----
From: HP-3000 Systems Discussion [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of
Mark Wonsil
Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2002 10:36 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: OT: Supreme Court to hear Cross Burning Case

Larry says:
> If the Supreme Court rules in favor of this argument then I should be
> allowed to enter a movie theatre and yell 'FIRE' because I want to
> intimidate/scare people.

Well, you'll be able to go into a theater and yell "Cross on Fire".  That'll
be OK...

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *

ATOM RSS1 RSS2