In The News Today...

Quote: rxwine

A Texas jury convicted Army Sgt. Daniel Perry of murdering a protester. A day later, the governor says they got it wrong.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/a-texas-jury-convicted-army-sgt-daniel-perry-of-murdering-a-protester-a-day-later-the-governor-says-they-got-it-wrong/ar-AA19DcnD?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=b46fa196ae5645d1b4732936cfcc2ddc&ei=15

“Might Have to Kill a Few People”
And other texts that suggest Daniel Perry intended to commit murder at a Black Lives Matter demonstration

https://www.austinchronicle.com/news/2023-04-07/might-have-to-kill-a-few-people/

Watch this video to get an understanding of the issue of defending yourself with deadly force when the prosecution can argue you had other choices.

Not a fan of immediate pardon after a jury trial. There is an appeal process. That hadn't even occurred yet.

When a country goes politically sideways, most everyone is in the same boat. You may lose your home, job, all sorts of things could happen. I definitely would agree someone needs to specifically be insured for that sort of thing. I don't think many insurance companies would want to be on the hook, unless they openly calculate that into the rates.

Quote:

Russian authorities seized 500 commercial aircraft owned by overseas leasing companies shortly after the outbreak of war against Ukraine.

The owners, mostly domiciled in Ireland, have tried to claim on insurance but have been rebuffed. They are now suing Lloyd’s of London insurers for their refusal to pay out up to $10bn (£8bn) in claims. A legal showdown in the High Court is scheduled for next year.

Mr Howden said insurers are legitimately refusing to pay under the terms of certain types of cover.

He said: “Ultimately, war has never been something that insurance has been there to cover.”

If insurance policies were broad enough to cover the impact of war, it would force the Government to bail out companies “because there is not enough capital in the insurance market to pay for it,” he said.

At Stanford Law school a Dean took a stand for free speech in favor of the speech of a Conservative Judge.
The Judge was heckled by the students and the Dean issued a letter of apology.

It's a very tricky question.
A person has a right to free speech to state views on issues that are unpopular to many.
But how about my right or anybody else's right who attends the speech________?

Don't we have a right to free speech__________?

Don't we have a right to heckle the speaker if we choose______?



https://www.nytimes.com/2023/04/09/us/stanford-law-school-free-speech.html


.

Quote: PotPie

At Stanford Law school a Dean took a stand for free speech in favor of the speech of a Conservative Judge.
The Judge was heckled by the students and the Dean issued a letter of apology.

It's a very tricky question.
A person has a right to free speech to state views on issues that are unpopular to many.
But how about my right or anybody else's right who attends the speech________?

Don't we have a right to free speech__________?

Don't we have a right to heckle the speaker if we choose______?



https://www.nytimes.com/2023/04/09/us/stanford-law-school-free-speech.html


.

I would never go too far in some absolute that shuts down heckling. Nor would I say, one could never shut it down at some point. I think it is an argument for free speech, but at some point you could also argue that there are other competing concerns.

Quote: PotPie

At Stanford Law school a Dean took a stand for free speech in favor of the speech of a Conservative Judge.
The Judge was heckled by the students and the Dean issued a letter of apology.

It's a very tricky question.
A person has a right to free speech to state views on issues that are unpopular to many.
But how about my right or anybody else's right who attends the speech________?

Don't we have a right to free speech__________?

Don't we have a right to heckle the speaker if we choose______?



https://www.nytimes.com/2023/04/09/us/stanford-law-school-free-speech.html


.

“Free speech” is certainly not an absolute right in our society. Many localities have a crime called ‘disorderly conduct’. If you go into a steakhouse and stand up and repeatedly scream ‘AOC is a hypocrite’ at the top of your lungs you will be escorted out. (After the applause ended). Think of the loudmouth at the movie theater who is screaming ‘Trump is my god ’ repeatedly. Ousted.
Heck, the LEAST free speech you will get is in a Court of Law’. Depending on the circumstances, you may not be allowed to utter a single word!

Quote: SOOPOO

“Free speech” is certainly not an absolute right in our society. Many localities have a crime called ‘disorderly conduct’. If you go into a steakhouse and stand up and repeatedly scream ‘AOC is a hypocrite’ at the top of your lungs you will be escorted out. (After the applause ended). Think of the loudmouth at the movie theater who is screaming ‘Trump is my god ’ repeatedly. Ousted.
Heck, the LEAST free speech you will get is in a Court of Law’. Depending on the circumstances, you may not be allowed to utter a single word!

There is no free speech right on private property
Steakhouse is private property
A theater is private property
DT is private property
FB is private property
Twitter is private property
Free speech rights are practiced on public property
The public property grass mall in DC is the perfect example of where you can exercise your free speech rights.

Quote: SOOPOO

“Free speech” is certainly not an absolute right in our society. Many localities have a crime called ‘disorderly conduct’. If you go into a steakhouse and stand up and repeatedly scream ‘AOC is a hypocrite’ at the top of your lungs you will be escorted out. (After the applause ended). Think of the loudmouth at the movie theater who is screaming ‘Trump is my god ’ repeatedly. Ousted.
Heck, the LEAST free speech you will get is in a Court of Law’. Depending on the circumstances, you may not be allowed to utter a single word!

Stanford Law School, the place in question is a private school. However, I think I'd still apply a somewhat lenient approach at a university setting to hecklers.

That is, neither encourage it, nor crack heads over it either.

Quote: terapined

There is no free speech right on private property
Steakhouse is private property
A theater is private property
DT is private property
FB is private property
Twitter is private property
Free speech rights are practiced on public property
The public property grass mall in DC is the perfect example of where you can exercise your free speech rights.

Not an expert…. but aren’t there rules for ‘public property’ as well that restrict free speech? Like you can’t give a soliloquy in a public library? Like you need a permit to give your speech in certain public parks? You aren’t allowed to protest within XX feet of a private business (abortion clinic as an example). Aren’t there also laws against ‘hate speech’ that extend to public spaces?
I interpret ‘free speech’ as protecting me from being arrested for making political type statements against those in power.

Quote: SOOPOO

Not an expert…. but aren’t there rules for ‘public property’ as well that restrict free speech? Like you can’t give a soliloquy in a public library? Like you need a permit to give your speech in certain public parks? You aren’t allowed to protest within XX feet of a private business (abortion clinic as an example). Aren’t there also laws against ‘hate speech’ that extend to public spaces?
I interpret ‘free speech’ as protecting me from being arrested for making political type statements against those in power.

Public property is pretty vague, you can generally say anything on a public right of way (sidewalk, street, etc....)

Parks and libraries can be different because they may be government-owned, but they are government-owned establishments, so they can require things like event permits if a large group wants to have a picknick or whatever. And, of course libraries can regulate noise levels. And, any government building can remove people causing a disruption to operations. You have more free speech in government owned lands/buildings than private owned lands, but not absolute free speech such as sidewalks (if that makes sense, I may have worded that poorly).

As for distance from abortion clinics, I think our lovely conservative judges have ruled as long as it is on a public sidewalk you can protest as close to a clinic as you want. I used to work next to one, and people would camp out in the front and the rear alley (also considered public) and the police would not do anything.

There are no hate speech laws in the U.S. You can be as racist as you want. Now, private businesses can ban you, but the government will not care.

U.S. probably has more free speech than anywhere in the world (and the hardest bar for libel to solve things in civil court), you can say almost anything in public.

If anything case law is making free speech less regulated not more. (Recent cases saying cities can't arrest people for panhandling, soliciting, etc.....)

You would be hard pressed to find a country with less speech regulations that the U.S.