We can all agree this partisan divisive shit needs to go away but "illegal" as a remedy is a very slippery slope. Once we open that Pandora's box the definition of what "hate speech" or whatever we choose to call it, starts to become very fluid. Then we find ourselves enforcing infamous travesties of Liberalism such as "sedition" laws, "blasphemy" laws, or the insidious idea this orange kkklown suggested:
As a Liberal I have to resist legislating opinion same as I have to resist dealing with gun violence by throwing laws at it. In neither case will it stem the flow of the insidious intent behind it. Consequently I still think the approach is via cultural mores, i.e. make the idea of issuing death threats, mock-style or not, socially unacceptable. Does it make the source-desire go away? No, it can't. But at least it starves the offender of the fuel that keeps its hate-flame going -- social approval. While Ted Nugent is to be despised for his machine-gun-in-the-mouth threats, Sean Hannity is equally to be despised for enabling and approving it. Hannity is as much part of that problem as if he had originated the threat himself. By showcasing it as if it's a big joke, he fuels it and encourages more.
We did it with overt racism, we did it with smoking, we did it with drinking and driving, we did it with spouse and child abuse, all of which used to be rampant killers. Three of those did have laws thrown at them, but it was the social construct that really made a dent.
