DU gets all... Legally and stuff about political "assasinations".

[asdf2231]

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x3795326

PaulHo  (1000+ posts)       Thu Aug-14-08 08:42 AM
Original message
Att: DU lawyers and legal types: re. political shootings.....
 Advertisements [?]... is it not illegal to incite people to violence

as seen here :


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...


in at least *some* jurisdictions? That is to say.. are there not NOW laws on the books that prohibit speech that is designed to inflame and incite (as it appears recent political murderers have been incited and inflamed) via print, TV and esp, RADIO?

Weren't the Chicago 8 indicted... for among other things... "crossing state lines with intent to incite to riot."

And if there ARE such laws what would it take to get them enforced?

This is getting to be like the weather: "everyone talks about it", but....

atreides1  (1000+ posts)        Thu Aug-14-08 08:47 AM
Response to Original message
1. Good question
 If such laws exist the only way to get them enforced is to get the DOJ to...sorry I forgot.

PaulHo  (1000+ posts)       Thu Aug-14-08 08:54 AM
Response to Reply #1
4. Must it be DOJ? Aren't there any relevant *local* statutes?
 Hard to believe there are none.

And if there are... couldn't/shouldn't local DAs impanel grand juries to evaluate the existing evidence?

baldguy  (1000+ posts)      Thu Aug-14-08 08:49 AM
Response to Original message
2. Proximate cause
 It must be proven that one's actions are the proximate cause of the violence in question, and that there were no other conditions which may have contributed to it.

 

theboss  (1000+ posts)      Thu Aug-14-08 09:05 AM
Response to Reply #2
7. You just cited a test for an intentional tort 
 That's not really the standard here.

onenote  (1000+ posts)      Thu Aug-14-08 08:54 AM
Response to Original message
3. incitement is a very narrow and rarely applied crime -- not applicable here
 In the US, the crime of "incitement" to the extent it exists, is very narrow, thanks to some very smart and progressive justices of the Supreme Court, including William O. Douglas, Thurgood Marshall, William Brennan, Hugo Black etc, all of whom participated in the unanimous decision in Brandenburg v. Ohio in 1969, where the conviction of a KKK leader for "advocacy" of violence was overturned. The court made it clear that in order constitute a criminal act, speech must be directed to inciting or producing "imminent" lawless action and must be "likely" to incite or produce such action. Given that limpballs and his ilk have millions of listeners, the fact that one occasionally goes off his rocker (and, by the way, the idea that the Little Rock shooter is rushbot is simply speculation at this point) hardly is evidence that the ravings of rw radio are directed to producing imminent lawless action or likely to have that effect.

Rush is a big fat idiot, but I'd rather put up with him than have the First Amendment eviscerated

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top

PaulHo  (1000+ posts)       Thu Aug-14-08 09:36 AM
Response to Reply #3
8. So if Ms. Coutler , for instance, says liberals should be beaten...
 ... with baseball bats and no liberal is beaten "imminently" with a baseball bat ( BTW how is "imminent" defined, legally speaking?) but is instead beaten .....well, "post-imminently"; let's say a week later... by someone "off his rocker", with Coulter's sweet musings still rolling around in his/her head ( I'll grant that this would be hard to establish but let's assume)no harm is done and no crime has occurred?

OK.. harm is done; but no crime... other than that perpetrated by the bat-wielder.


>>>>hardly is evidence that the ravings of rw radio are directed to producing imminent lawless action or likely to have that effect.>>>>

There's that word again. But why should one assume that Coulter's ravings in this case would are "directed" in any other way than the way she appears to "direct" them?

Her intention, not so much the "imminence", it would seem is what's really at issue. No? If she wants to defend herself in front of a grand jury by saying she really didn't mean " liberals should be beaten with baseball bats" despite the fact that she said " liberals should be beaten with baseball bats", it seems to me grand jurors could responsibly find that she probably meant what she said. Especially if someone acts out her scenario and implicates her. ( All hypothetical at this point, to be sure)

Justice Douglas wisdom notwithstanding. Did you know ( off topic) that he was nearly twice picked by FDR for veep?

 

theboss  (1000+ posts)      Thu Aug-14-08 09:00 AM
Response to Original message
5. There is nothing illegal on that list 
 Edited on Thu Aug-14-08 09:02 AM by theboss
The standard is that a state cannot "forbid or regulate 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.”

So, essentially, there have to be two things occuring.

1. A command for immediate violence. "Go shoot a Democrat right now!"
2. And the likelihood of violence occurring from such a command. "You old people in this rest home. Let's ****ing riot!"

"Mere advocacy of the use of force or violence does not remove speech from the protection of the First Amendment."

Howard Stern can have on that Ku Klux Klan guy every morning who talks about lighting gay people on fire. And unless you can prove that he is seeking to produce imminent lawless violence (in the moment) and that someone is actually likely to listen to him, he is free to say what he wants.

This is why those Black Israelites in Times Square can say whatever they want, as loudly as they want.

PaulHo  (1000+ posts)       Thu Aug-14-08 12:11 PM
Response to Reply #5
10. Can someone legally advocate the assassination of an elected official?
 Edited on Thu Aug-14-08 12:12 PM by PaulHo
As long as he/she doesn't say "now!"?

This seems highly improbable.

 

norepubsin08  (167 posts)       Thu Aug-14-08 10:39 AM
Response to Original message
9. There could be other charges as well...
 voter intimidation, aiding and abetting a murder, treason for subverting the political process, civil rights violations, hate crimes, misuse of FCC airwaves. A good prosecutor as they say "can indict a ham sandwich if he puts his mind to it" a good prosecutor can also put the screws to a defendant and get him/her to plead to at least something that will give some jail time and more importantly: a ling long record to follow them!

DailyGrind51 (1000+ posts)      Thu Aug-14-08 12:24 PM
Response to Original message
11. What did Charles Manson get convicted for?
 He never "personally" killed anyone. He never even went along on the Tate or LaBianco murders.

 

 



 

[Lord Undies]

Liberals, as everybody knows, are peace-loving stewards of the Earth; people incapable of making vicious comments …

National Public Radio legal affairs correspondent Nina Totenberg on Sen. Jesse Helms: “I think he ought to be worried about what’s going on in the Good Lord’s mind, because if there is retributive justice, he’ll get AIDS from a transfusion, or one of his grandchildren will get it.”

… of wishing people dead…

USA Today syndicated columnist Julianne Malveaux, on US Supreme Court Justice and fellow African American Clarence Thomas: “I hope his wife feeds him lots of eggs and butter and he dies early like many black men do, of heart disease.”

… of making ethnocentric remarks …

During a 1984 conversation with a fellow African American reporter from the Washington Post, Jesse Jackson referred to Jews as “hymies” and called New York City, “Hymietown.”

… of calling for violence …

Liberal columnist Richard Cohen on Newt Gingrich in a Dec. 21, 2000 column: “For hypocrisy, for sheer gall, Gingrich should be hanged.”

… of acting out violence against conservatives …

Al Franken filmed himself committing a mock attack on an actor portraying a “right wing jerk” who dislikes his book.

… or of committing actual violence …

A 69-year-old man trying to counsel young women at a Harrisburg abortion clinic in late-2007 was knocked unconscious and suffered four broken vertebrae, two broken ribs and a broken shoulder. Police casually watched his assailant drive away.

OK, fine, the liberals will say, but no liberal ever killed anyone.

While this is categorically untrue, both directly and indirectly (there have been many documented murders and attempted murders of conservatives) long-standing liberal policies (such as late-term abortion, to name just one) are responsible for millions of deaths each year.

http://usconservatives.about.com/od/villains/a/MansonAdkisson.htm

This doesn't cover that Randy Rhodes harpy who called for the murder of President Bush.  That wild-eyed harpy got a visit from the Secret Service. 

You DUmbasses want to come over here and discuss this?  You lurkers are free to sign up and sign in.  We can have a real debate, one outside your little protective shell called DemocratUnderground.com.

I'd come to you, but you and I both know that isn't possible - DU can't have conservatives like me challenging your mindless idiocy on the pages of DU.  The DU rules are there to protect your dishonesty, wild imagination, delusions, and hate speech.  We conservatives have no need for such protection.  That tells the world a whole lot about the difference between liberals and conservatives.

[Carl]

Based on their reasoning it would seem that the same would apply to public Internet forums.

Wonder how many DUmmies would not be in jail at that point?

[Ralph Wiggum]

DailyGrind51 (1000+ posts)      Thu Aug-14-08 12:24 PM
Response to Original message
11. What did Charles Manson get convicted for?
 He never "personally" killed anyone. He never even went along on the Tate or LaBianco murders.

That's close to a new low for the DUmp, defending Charles Manson. 

[SSG Snuggle Bunny]

When did Coulter state liberals should be beaten with baseball bats?

When did Limbaugh advocate killing democrat apparatchiks?

[PatriotGame]

theboss  (1000+ posts)      Thu Aug-14-08 09:05 AM
Response to Reply #2
7. You just cited a test for an intentional tort 
 That's not really the standard here.

International Torts?
I had no idea they existed.
I just love Torts even though I am watching my weight, I would never refuse a Tort:



Yummy....

Of course there is another kind of Tort that is just so cute and lovable:




Cue Ptarmigan...


OOPS!! Wrong kind of Torts!
Silly me....carry on DUmmys.

[PatriotGame]

PaulHo  (1000+ posts)       Thu Aug-14-08 08:42 AM
Original message
Att: DU lawyers and legal types: re. political shootings.....
 Advertisements [?]... is it not illegal to incite people to violence

This is getting to be like the weather: "everyone talks about it", but....

Speaking of inciting violence and weather, let's take a look at REAL violence by extreme radical lefty liberals of the hippie sixties. One of them blew up buildings, police cars, and tried to kill people they DISAGREED with politically. Coincidentally, one of these radicals is a butt-boy supporter of Hussein Obama, a Mr. Bill Ayers.

"Ayers became involved in the New Left and the Students for a Democratic Society (SDS). He rose to national prominence as an SDS leader in 1968 and 1969. As head of an SDS regional group, the "Jesse James Gang", Ayers made decisive contributions to the Weatherman orientation toward militancy."

"During that time (1968) his infatuation with street fighting grew and he developed a language of confrontational militancy"

"Later in 1969, Ayers participated in planting a bomb at a statue dedicated to police casualties in the 1886 Haymarket Riot. The blast broke almost 100 windows and blew pieces of the statue onto the nearby Kennedy Expressway. The statue was rebuilt and unveiled on May 4, 1970, and blown up again by Weatherman on October 6, 1970"


Weatherman ideology

"The Weathermen were initially part of the Revolutionary Youth Movement (RYM) within the SDS, splitting from the RYM's Maoists by claiming there was no time to build a vanguard party and that revolutionary war against the United States government and the capitalist system should begin immediately. Their founding document called for the establishment of a "white fighting force" to be allied with the "Black Liberation Movement" and other "anti-colonial" movements to achieve "the destruction of US imperialism and the achievement of a classless world: world communism."


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Ayers

Obama is a close friend of Ayers and has had close political ties with him since the early 90's:

"In 1995, State Senator Alice Palmer introduced her chosen successor, Barack Obama, to a few of the district’s influential liberals at the home of two well known figures on the local left: William Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn.

While Ayers and Dohrn may be thought of in Hyde Park as local activists, they’re better known nationally as two of the most notorious — and unrepentant — figures from the violent fringe of the 1960s anti-war movement."

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0208/8630.html



A small bio of who they were and who they are. Sadly, most these PROGRESSIVES are teachers too.
http://www.pbs.org/independentlens/weatherunderground/today.html





[youtube=425,350]B2g7ds2CW-w[/youtube]

The reality is this cocksucker should be serving a life sentence for his PROGRESSIVE militant violence.

Come again DUmmys - who are the radical political activists?

[Ptarmigan]

Cue Ptarmigan...

Bunnies Doom Ptarmigans. God Hates Bunnies. Bunnies Die, God Laughs.

[Duchess]

And if they want to go there, what about Alec Baldwin wanting Henry Hyde and his family to be stoned to death? It was on Letterman, IIRC.