1st Amendment
You will often hear someone still spouting something like the following:
It's wrong, and primarily because the standard of incitement changed in 1969. A lot of people aren't aware of the decision in Brandenburg vs. Ohio. The "clear and present danger" standard was restricted to the Brandenburg test in 1969. Incitement has to be likely and intended to cause imminent, lawless action. If any one of those elements is missing, the speech is not incitement.
The false shouting of "fire" does not meet that test, necessarily. More must be shown.
-
Just replace "Word" and replace it with firearm or a tool and bingo your 2nd amendment just got abridged. Not to far of a stretch for the supreme court to agree to. What do they say? Without the 2nd amendment there would be no first.
serf
0 -
Sorry Serf that makes exactly zero sense.
3
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
2 comments