|
Hiro Pendragon
bye bye f0rums!
Join date: 22 Jan 2004
Posts: 5,905
|
02-17-2005 02:05
Free Speech in the US is unrestricted, with some exceptions that include:
- Revealing government secrets
- "Fighting words" - speech so overtly offensive that it immediately offends everyone. (Example: Nazi swastikas have been excluded from white supremacist rallies)
- Libel / Slander (writing / saying something untrue and financially hurtful about someone)
- Captive audience (where the recipient of the speech can't turn it off / walk away, etc.)
- Enciting violence / chaos (fire in a crowded theater when there is no fire)
- Where contractually obligated (private business secrets, employees being rude to customers can't claim they have freedom to do that and not be fired, etc)
- Lude behavior in public (allows public nudity laws, etc)
_____________________
Hiro Pendragon
------------------
http://www.involve3d.com - Involve - Metaverse / Emerging Media Studio
Visit my SL blog: http://secondtense.blogspot.com
|
|
Bruno Buckenburger
Registered User
Join date: 30 Dec 2004
Posts: 464
|
02-17-2005 09:48
From: Hiro Pendragon Free Speech in the US is unrestricted, with some exceptions that include: - Revealing government secrets - "Fighting words" - speech so overtly offensive that it immediately offends everyone. (Example: Nazi swastikas have been excluded from white supremacist rallies) QUOTE] Everyone is on-target here which is nice to see for a change. No beating each other up or name calling -- which I was just accused of in another thread  Off topic but -- Hiro, I was under the impression that the removal of swastikas was a voluntary thing because of the potential to incite rioting and not restricted. I thought only the Europeans outright banned them. If so, it tells you something about American laws and how some of our politicians think. A KKK robe and pointy hood is somehow uninciteful (non-inciteful?) but the swastika is? Hmmm, isn't it the Tibetian monks that actually use the swastika symbol (which Hitler 'borrowed')? They must be really confused LOL |
|
Hiro Pendragon
bye bye f0rums!
Join date: 22 Jan 2004
Posts: 5,905
|
02-17-2005 11:20
From: someone Off topic but -- Hiro, I was under the impression that the removal of swastikas was a voluntary thing because of the potential to incite rioting and not restricted. I thought only the Europeans outright banned them. If so, it tells you something about American laws and how some of our politicians think. A KKK robe and pointy hood is somehow uninciteful (non-inciteful?) but the swastika is? Hmmm, isn't it the Tibetian monks that actually use the swastika symbol (which Hitler 'borrowed')? They must be really confused LOL Wearing swastikas is legal. Wearing swastikas at a protest march through the center of town is up to the judge who rules on giving the permit. Same would go for the KKK hoods. As for the Tibetan symbol, Hitler reversed the direction, as far as I know.
_____________________
Hiro Pendragon
------------------
http://www.involve3d.com - Involve - Metaverse / Emerging Media Studio
Visit my SL blog: http://secondtense.blogspot.com
|