Online Call To Shoot President Ruled Free Speech 395
Hugh Pickens writes "USA Today reports that the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has reversed the conviction of a man who threatened to shoot President Obama, saying his Internet message board comments amounted to free speech and ruled that prosecutors 'failed to present sufficient evidence to establish beyond a reasonable doubt' that the man 'had the subjective intent to threaten a presidential candidate.' Walter Bagdasarian was found guilty two years ago of making threats against the presidential candidate in comments he posted on a Yahoo.com financial website after 1 am on Oct. 22, 2008, as Obama's impending victory in the race for the White House was becoming apparent. Bagdasarian told investigators he was drunk at the time. The observation that Obama 'will have a 50 cal in the head soon' and a call to 'shoot the [racist slur]' weren't violations of the law under which Bagdasarian was convicted because the statute doesn't criminalize 'predictions or exhortations to others to injure or kill the president,' said the majority opinion, written by Judge Stephen Reinhardt."
One small step for man (Score:4, Interesting)
All I can say is "You did the right thing, judge(s)!".
If the US lauds itself as the freest (did I spell that right?) country of the world, as its founding fathers imagined, then it should be all right to say " Obama 'will have a 50 cal in the head soon'". In my books, such a line only amounts to a threat if there's a reasonable possibility of its execution.
Re:One small step for man (Score:4, Interesting)
Vikram Buddhi (Score:5, Interesting)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vikram_Buddhi [wikipedia.org]
Good call (Score:5, Interesting)
What a lame racist (Score:5, Interesting)
Who actually says "Shoot the racist slur"? What a lame racist. A real racist would have called him a nigger. Nigger. Its ok to write it, its just a word. It is especially ok to write it, when quoting someone else who said it.
I mean do we really need to edit what a racist said to make it more genetic and palatable? I mean seriously.... of all the things to PC up....
I am sure he isn't embarrassed to be known as the guy who called Obama a nigger.. if thats even what he said...since he obviously wasn't quoted correctly.
Re:One small step for man (Score:4, Interesting)
My point is that this is precisely the kind of speech that your constitution shouldn't protect. That document was written in an age of slavery, and I'm sure that the fact that racist speech was protected wasn't seen as a problem at the time. Not that I think that racist speech should be a criminal offence on its own, but it should be an aggravating factor when inciting violence.
Nor is it necessary to protect free speech in a constitution when you have a society that values it, and is democratic. Americans seem to be prone to seeing things in black and white, but it's not the case that a lack of de-jure free speech protection is widespread censorship and silencing of dissent. And as I pointed out in my original post, it leads to the unfortunate scenario where people don't seem to give due consideration to what they're actually saying, before they say it.
Looking from across the water (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Obligatory (Score:4, Interesting)
why is this modded down?
Where to draw the line for free speech? Most agree that "shouting fire" in a crowded theatre is not allowed. Many western nations also ban speech that incites violence, especially against an individual or an easily identified group. I believe that free speech is an important right, but I think that a credible call to kill someone crosses the line. I don't think a drunken online rant should be illegal, but it should be investigated.
Re:How long before civil war breaks out in America (Score:5, Interesting)
TP Michelle Bauchmann claiming that slavery was good for black families is not what the Republican Party needs at this juncture.
What she said was tactless and foolish, but she didnt say what youre claiming she did.
In fact, she didnt actually say it at all, it was a pledge she signed, and the controversial language was
Slavery had a disastrous impact on African-American families, yet sadly a child born into slavery in 1860 was more likely to be raised by his mother and father in a two-parent household than was an African-American baby born after the election of the USA's first African-American President
Which is to say, it was lamenting the state of family values, and trying to emphasize its point with hyperbole.
It would be much the same as if someone had said
Even under Hitler, people had more speech rights
A rational interpretation of that statement will not read an endorsement of the Nazi regime into it, but rather a gross and insensitive use of hyperbole to emphasize how bad you think things are NOW.
Although I suppose if the goal is to demonize your political opposition, it sure is convenient to simply call it racist, and to make the claim that republicans are hankering for the days of slavery again; and a fig to any reasonable attempt to use context and language skills.
It's OK If You Are a Republican (Score:2, Interesting)
Everyone knows that if this fool had threatened to kill Bush like that, he would have been kidnapped and sent to a secret torture prison.