- Feb 22, 2017
- 109,347
- 38,039
- 2,290
How do words hurt people?
Indeed, which is why we need to get rid of slander and libel laws!
Are you with me?
Oh wait, you lack the balls to say one way or the other...never mind
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
How do words hurt people?
People can easily be intimidated by words which could bias the proceedings.How do words hurt people?
I clearly stated earlier, that the only thing should come from words would be civil problems. Like a suit. Not criminal, like what a gag order could lead to.Indeed, which is why we need to get rid of slander and libel laws!
Are you with me?
Oh wait, you lack the balls to say one way or the other...never mind
There is no constitutional right to taint the jury pool or intimidate people.So people can lose constitutional rights because someone has an opinion something might happen?
So people can lose constitutional rights because someone has an opinion something might happen?
I know it happened, but I dont know any details about it.Interesting thought, in the thread about the Maine shooter is is being put forth his 2nd amendment rights should have been taken away based on his words and what people thought might happen.
Do you agree with them?
It seems that there's the basic assumption that, as soon as someone is indicted for a crime, they lose at least some of their rights. And they don't regain them until they're found not guilty, or found guilty and resolved whatever penalties are involved. That kind of sucks, if you haven't actually done anything, but I don't really see how the justice system can work without that temporary loss of rights.Lets ignore the peaches-and-chief for a minute. Lets forget him and his gag orders. This is a general question.
Are gag orders constitutional? How can ones speech be silenced with threat of hefty fines, jail, imprisoned to their home etc for talking about the government?
I know there is a Supreme court case about it, but that doesnt really mean anything in this thread. They also said it was constitutional for the tyrant FDR to imprison citizens simply for their heritage, forcing people to salute the flag was constitutional, and a state saying a black and white person couldnt get married was legal
Again, please leave trump out of this. I know TDS is a serious mental condition, but damn..When Silence Isn’t Golden: How Gag Orders Can Evade First Amendment Protections
Trials must be conducted at law, rather than in the press, and courts sometimes feel the need to assert control of the outflow of information around judicial matters to preserve the fair trial rights of litigants.law.yale.edu
So does that mean the justice system needs work, or the right to talk need work?It seems that there's the basic assumption that, as soon as someone is indicted for a crime, they lose at least some of their rights. And they don't regain them until they're found not guilty, or found guilty and resolved whatever penalties are involved. That kind of sucks, if you haven't actually done anything, but I don't really see how the justice system can work without that temporary loss of rights.
Yes.So does that mean the justice system needs work, or the right to talk need work?
Perhaps not words per se, but state of mind. That assumes prior incidents and probably court proceedings and psych evaluations. If that doesn’t happen, how do you stop a shooter?Interesting thought, in the thread about the Maine shooter is is being put forth his 2nd amendment rights should have been taken away based on his words and what people thought might happen.
Do you agree with them?
There are competing interests. The interest in fair judicial proceedings is greater the interest in shitposting on Twitter for a few months.So people should lose constitutional rights because someone might be a sissy?
Im not debating specifics, like certain people, or venues.There are competing interests. The interest in fair judicial proceedings is greater the interest in shitposting on Twitter for a few months.
I know it happened, but I dont know any details about it.
shoot up his base? What do you mean? Military?
Lets ignore the peaches-and-chief for a minute. Lets forget him and his gag orders. This is a general question.
Are gag orders constitutional? How can ones speech be silenced with threat of hefty fines, jail, imprisoned to their home etc for talking about the government?
I know there is a Supreme court case about it, but that doesnt really mean anything in this thread. They also said it was constitutional for the tyrant FDR to imprison citizens simply for their heritage, forcing people to salute the flag was constitutional, and a state saying a black and white person couldnt get married was legal
Again, please leave trump out of this. I know TDS is a serious mental condition, but damn..When Silence Isn’t Golden: How Gag Orders Can Evade First Amendment Protections
Trials must be conducted at law, rather than in the press, and courts sometimes feel the need to assert control of the outflow of information around judicial matters to preserve the fair trial rights of litigants.law.yale.edu
Do you disagree with slander and libel laws?