It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Whitney has been thoroughly discredited by later decisions. See Dennis v. United States, 341 U.S. 494, at 507 (1951). These later decisions have fashioned the principle that the constitutional guarantees of free speech and free press do not permit a State to forbid or proscribe advocacy of the use of force or of law violation except where such advocacy is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action.
Originally posted by getreadyalready
the government is also not tasked with providing protection for morons either.
Originally posted by muzzleflash
Originally posted by neformore
If you go into a bear pit with the intention of provoking a bear, chances are you'll provoke a bear.
Stupid is as stupid does.
All this crap about constitutional rights doesn't cover up deliberate provocative stupidity does it?
Yeah it does.
Unless of course you think the Constitution doesn't apply anymore? But that would make you wrong.
Very sad to see you would rather give up the Constitution just to put a couple of violent thugs on a pedestal and proclaim they are not criminals.
You need to reevaluate your opinions please.
Originally posted by SuperFrog
Originally posted by muzzleflash
That's pretty sick.
All of those kids should have been charged with assault and battery.
How about those provoking them on their holiday?
IMHO all extremism should be charged and under control, including those that are thanking God for dead soldiers.
Originally posted by Jordan River
the lack of faith on this message bored rears its ugly head in cynical jabs at a belief system older than the posters themselves.
Originally posted by rival
...Nothing to see here folks...move along....only Muslims and Christians hating on each other
....though it is a fine example of how organized religion has adversely affected this species
....and a little further down, as you can see, we have the monkey exhibit
....be careful, they tend to throw poop at each other for no apparent reason, and without warning
....from what we can tell, it has nothing to do with superstition, but rather seems to be an instinctual
....urge found in all primates
edit on 27-6-2012 by rival because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by MrXYZ
3) What about the fact that those Christians provoked the Muslims?
That doesn't really mean violence is ok. Personally, I'd call it even because I hate bigots like those Christians...but from a legal standpoint a provokation will only lead to a (maybe significantly) reduced sentence. So instead of a prison sentence for violence they might look at a couple of hours of community service and/or a fine.
edit on 27-6-2012 by MrXYZ because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by paratus
Originally posted by Indigo5
Originally posted by paratus
reply to post by Indigo5
There are more videos on the interwebs.
All of which could be used as evidence.
feel free to search
pics, and it DID happen
Provide one then...show me him actually getting hit by a rock....Until then I call BS.
Skip to nine minutes into the following video to see the “stoning” portion where large, grey projectiles that look very much like rocks are tossed into the air at the demonstrators as the crowd screams “Allahu Akbar” and closes in:
www.theblaze.com...
Originally posted by muzzleflash
Originally posted by neformore
If you go into a bear pit with the intention of provoking a bear, chances are you'll provoke a bear.
Stupid is as stupid does.
All this crap about constitutional rights doesn't cover up deliberate provocative stupidity does it?
Yeah it does.
Unless of course you think the Constitution doesn't apply anymore? But that would make you wrong.
Very sad to see you would rather give up the Constitution just to put a couple of violent thugs on a pedestal and proclaim they are not criminals.
You need to reevaluate your opinions please.
Originally posted by grey580
reply to post by muzzleflash
The constitution and supporting law is clear.
Source
Brandenburg v. Ohio
Whitney has been thoroughly discredited by later decisions. See Dennis v. United States, 341 U.S. 494, at 507 (1951). These later decisions have fashioned the principle that the constitutional guarantees of free speech and free press do not permit a State to forbid or proscribe advocacy of the use of force or of law violation except where such advocacy is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action.