Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Depends on what you mean by "reprisal". Spitting in someone's face is considered to be assault in most jurisdictions, so getting arrested for doing so would be expected. Getting beaten, lynched, or otherwise attacked for it would be a bit of an overreaction though.Just so I'm clear, you're good with reprisal for spitting in cops' faces, but you're not OK with reprisal for cussing out cops?
One is assault. The other is protected in our constitution.
Case law is fairly clear on this. The article you cited notes it is only when it crosses over into "fighting words" that it becomes illegal.I'm not sure that I would agree "cussing out" anyone is protected by our constitution.
The federal courts have found increasingly severe verbal abuse to be protected speech. The First Amendment generally protects the right to free speech, but that right is subject to limitations. Threats, fraudulent speech, and obscenity are not protected.
Case law is fairly clear on this.
Yeah, I don't think it is as clear as you're trying to portray.
At times, profanity is a non-protected speech categoryProfanity can be regulated, however, under certain circumstances consistent with the First Amendment. Profane rants that cross the line into direct face-to-face personal insults or fighting words are not protected by the First Amendment.Profanity.
There's those "fighting words" again. Would you agree that "cussing out" someone rises to the level of "fighting words" that are not protected by the First Amendment?
As a law enforcement officer when someone cussed me out on their own property that was their right. But when it happened in public they were usually guilty of some other offense that they could be arrested for, frequently public intoxication, sometimes disorderly conduct and on a few occasions inciting a riotNo, as noted by your own source it is very rare that it does rise to the level of "fighting words". It requires something on the order of a verbal threat.
That may be the case but it remains that cussing out a cop is protected by the first amendment.As a law enforcement officer when someone cussed me out on their own property that was their right. But when it happened in public they were usually guilty of some other offense that they could be arrested for, frequently public intoxication, sometimes disorderly conduct and on a few occasions inciting a riot
That is correct unless someone makes a threat. A police officer is considered immune to offensive language but not threats.That may be the case but it remains that cussing out a cop is protected by the first amendment.
Saying (expletive) the police is not enough to arrest someone for.That is correct unless someone makes a threat. A police officer is considered immune to offensive language but not threats.
Can you point out where the song calls for violence?
Yet another mischaracterization of what I wrote. I wish it were surprising that this was the best that could be offered.I am glad to see we've moved on from the blatant mischaracterization of "saying the wrong thing".
Well, try that in a small townSee how far ya make it down the roadAround here, we take care of our ownYou cross that line, it won't take longFor you to find out, I recommend you don'tTry that in a small town
Saying (expletive) the police is not enough to arrest someone for.
One guy gave me the middle finger and I arrested him for disorderly conduct. The judge said that is not disorderly conduct and found him not guilty. I went out and came back in the back of the courtroom.True, but the song mentions "cussing out" a cop, not just saying #%$! Cussing out would be more like...
#%$! #%$! #%$! #%$! you #%$! and#%$! #%$! #%$! #%$! #%$! #%$! #%$! #%$! #%$! #%$! and another thing....#%$! #%$! #%$! #%$! #%$! #%$! #%$! #%$! #%$! #%$! #%$!
You'd be hard pressed to pretend like "cussing out" a cop (or anyone for that matter) is protected speech. You can't just berate someone endlessly and pretend like you're just exercising your first amendment right to be verbally abusive to people.
Profanity can be regulated, however, under certain circumstances consistent with the First Amendment. Profane rants that cross the line into direct face-to-face personal insults or fighting words are not protected by the First Amendment.
It isn’t pro violence by going against local order. It’s against going against local order in the wrong way other than peaceful.Sure....but it is very pro- violence and othering. It makes it clear that you should not go against the local order, though that is a key part of American history.
The song also summons up feelings of "walking when black", so I can understand why people are calling it a lynching song.
I notice there's no other reasonable interpretation, just a vague implication that I'm doing something wrong and an attempt at being smug. I doubt anyone's falling for that.So you're inferring violence. That's what I thought.
Are you contending that violence was not implied by those lyrics?So you're inferring violence. That's what I thought.
Yes, stern looks would keep you from making it to the edge of town.Are you contending that violence was not implied by those lyrics?
Okay...so why not try that in a small town? What do you think Aldean believed would happen?
-- A2SG, a lot of wagging fingers and stern looks, maybe?
Never underestimate the power of a good, stern talking-to.Yes, stern looks would keep you from making it to the edge of town.
Of course the implication is violence.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?