Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: epicure who wrote (116673)	7/27/2009 11:14:25 AM
From: Bread Upon The Water	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 542889

I don't see the two situations as analogous. In the "vote" example public order is not potentially threatened. There is much room to debate about what is "legal" speech, but I'm fairly certain in the example I cited with the words I used that this fails to obtain that status--but it could depend on the circumstances (the setting, the overall factual context, the legitimacy of the PO's presence). To the best of my understanding the law or the constitution doesn't give one carte blanche in this regard. It is my personal view that much of the "abuse" rendered by police would not have occurred in a "respectful" atmosphere. I can't prove that--there are rogue cops as well as rogue verbal abusers. But I think thats the ideal and role model to strive for as a society.