A Couple Of Points On Illegal Free Speech.

As I've said, I often rethink old ideas others, and I, have had on things like free speech. I really don't think there is such a thing as obscene speech. But if they just want to outlaw speech that is offensive, why not just outlaw hate speech?

Also, ideas like inciting violence. How can someone incite violence? Either the person already wanted to do it or they didn't. I don't see how inciting at that point would make a difference.

Also, on other legal definitions. I don't know if I understand the crime of accessory after the fact. You are an accessory after the fact, and therefore part of the original crime, if you helped the person conceal the crime. Well, you should never help a person conceal a crime. But you are not responsible for it in anyway then, especially after it was done. Actually, an accessory before the fact is just someone who is guilty of conspiracy. I think I heard somewhere the only difference between the crimes of accessory before the fact and conspiracy are that accessory before the fact is easier to prove. And involuntary manslaughter makes no sense. Some people already think that. You commit involuntary manslaugher when you caused a death with a "reckless" intent. No, if you were acting recklessly you were endangering someone's safety. And maybe it led to death. But that's all you really did. I think I read somewhere that involuntary manslaughter was created in old English common law to deal with people who caused a death by acting recklessly. You know, where I live there are many laws against just that, putting someone in danger by acting recklessly. Now, second degree murder I could see. You are guilty of second degree murder if you shoot a gun into a crowd, because you must have known you'd kill someone. But that's different I think.

Thoughts?

 

Sorry wrong post.