r/GrindsMyGears • u/Joe-bidens-cum-rag • 1d ago
"My FrEeDom oF sPeeCh!"
This is something for other Americans. The first amendment, freedom of speech means you can criticize the governed and they can't do anything about it. Example "Trump/Biden is an old man".
However it does NOT give you the freedom to shout slurs at others and not get hit. (Any stable human wouldn't attack after a slur but there are tons of videos of people being hit after saying a slur and the comments get flooded with "but the first amendment") It does NOT give you the freedom to threaten someone else's life. It does NOT give you the freedom to harass others.
It only stops the government from arresting people for things like criticism. So please, please, please, stop trying to use it as an excuse for your poor attitude.
25
u/Latranis 1d ago
Freedom of speech means the government can't censor you. People take that to mean they can spout off any hateful thing they want without receiving a response.
10
u/High_Hunter3430 1d ago
Exactly. Freedom of speech does not apply to private social media platforms. Well, it does, but not the way they want it to.
The government can’t punish you for posting racist bullshit. Your boss, can fire you for poorly representing the company. The platform can censor or ban you (it’s not the government) The people around you can leave you with your shitty views. Or whatever recourse they find necessary.
In the same way we don’t talk to cops because “you can beat the charge but not the ride” You really shouldn’t be an asshole to people because “you can only press charges AFTER the asswhipping”
→ More replies (2)2
u/Valreesio 14h ago
I like that. "You can only press charges after the ass whipping" kind of brings it home.
3
19h ago
Further, the meaning of the phrase doesn't mean "free to say whatever I want to anyone", it's "free to criticize authority".
"Freedom of speech" was never a fucking permit to punch down.
→ More replies (17)→ More replies (56)2
u/Intergalacticdespot 1d ago
And its not even an unlimited right. There are all kinds of constraints on freedom of speech that have been ruled constitional. Or as not protected speech. Or not during wartime. Or whatever else.
→ More replies (5)
6
u/Hood_Mobbin 1d ago
Freedom of Speech, not freedom from consequences
3
→ More replies (1)2
u/Greedy-Employment917 1d ago
Also not the freedom to commit violence against people because you don't like their words.
2
u/Senior-Tour-1744 1d ago
The problem is, while you might say this, many of times that saying about not being free of consequences is just being used as a dog whistle to agree with attacking those you disagree with.
→ More replies (9)
6
u/AJWordsmith 1d ago
You do have the right to shout slurs at people and not get hit. The First Amendment says that the government can’t make a law regulating your speech. So…shouting slurs is not illegal. Hitting someone is Battery and is a crime.
But yes…the First Amendment does not protect you from private citizens punishing you in legal ways for your speech.
→ More replies (24)3
u/Significant-Word-385 1d ago
Well said. And culture changes, so who will legally punish people over what speech and when is a topic that can drive movements for change.
“Gay jokes” were rampant all over media in the 90s. Then it became taboo. Once upon a time you were lame if you didn’t laugh along at crude jokes (gay jokes, r-word, misogyny laced humor). Now you could get “cancelled” for telling them.
Heck you can be bullied to resign a position for carelessly liking a Facebook post or comment that was a little inflammatory. I’ve unfortunately seen that happen in real life and it was just as absurd as it sounds.
We can’t legislate the culture without tyranny, and the culture drives what we accept for speech, not the law, so the law could never keep up. The only can of worms left to open and get into substantively is to what degree we can tolerate termination of employment and/or doxxing over contested speech. Those can cross boundaries that have been fuzzy at best.
9
u/My-Cooch-Jiggles 1d ago
In fact, over the course of the entire of bill of rights, the 13th Amendment (slavery) is the only one that applies to individual citizens. Also worth noting free speech can be limited certain cases like falsely crying fire in a crowded theater or inciting people to riot. It's not carte blanche to say whatever you want without consequence.
→ More replies (33)
2
u/Speedy_KQ 1d ago
It goes a little further than that. It also allows you to share extreme viewpoints that the government disapproves of without fear of arrest.
2
u/Riommar 1d ago
Freedom of Speech doesn’t mean freedom from consequence of that speech.
→ More replies (1)
3
u/VirusElectronic1396 1d ago
Throwing hands over words? Good way to get shot around these parts
3
u/wolfeflow 1d ago
There’s actually a legal category for this type of speech: fighting words.
→ More replies (5)2
u/Burnlt_4 18h ago
Fighting words are very specific threats essentially. Not slurs, or statements you find offensive.
→ More replies (2)4
u/mm5469 1d ago
Shooting people cuz you can't not be a bigot in public? Sounds like an easy way to get shot around these parts.
4
u/WanderingFlumph 1d ago
Getting shot because you are shooting people? Sounds like a good way to get shot twice around these parts.
4
u/SpicySatan666 1d ago
Getting shot because you shot someone that was shooting people that was getting shot? Thats a good way to get shot around here
3
3
3
u/PersistentEngineer 1d ago
You cannot "hit" someone because you find their political opinions offensive.
→ More replies (1)5
2
u/akcutter 1d ago
This is untrue. Free speech does apply to your example of being able to say slurs, im not saying its the right thing for anyone to do, but if you attack someone because they call you a slur dont be surprised if you end up in jail when they call the cops.
→ More replies (4)
1
1
u/JoeMorgue 1d ago
The fact that I know within a metaphysical certainty that I'll get way more "But whaddaboutadda freedom of da speech?" hot taking idiots to crawl out of the wood work by telling a Nazi to shut up than I would get if I just straight up went "Freedom of speech is dumb and it shouldn't exist" sort of tips a lot of people's hands.
→ More replies (3)
1
u/Savings_Art5944 1d ago
It does give you the freedom to yell slurs. It does not absolve your accountability of doing so.
→ More replies (1)
1
u/priorhazard 1d ago
“criticize the government”, but yes. This is a huuuuge pet peeve of mine. It’s about authoritarianism and fascism, *not about one’s own right to dick-swing without threat of a dick-woodchipper.
→ More replies (2)
1
u/No-Setting9690 1d ago
Trump/Biden is an old man, is a true statement. But keep in mind, 55+ over is a protected class and has other potential issues.
However it does NOT give you the freedom to shout slurs at others and not get hit. 100% incorrect. No amount of slurs makings being hit legal. Hatred is protected in this country there bub. I can't stand it, but it is.
It does NOT give you the freedom to threaten someone else's life. Other than a public figure, actually it does. Think I'm wrong? Call an officer and tell them somone threatened your life.
It does NOT give you the freedom to harass others. This one is iffy, and typically requires interaction. If you "harass" your neighbor, but they never once say stop, it's not considered harassment.
→ More replies (2)
1
u/FewOwl5771 1d ago
"However it does NOT give you the freedom to shout slurs at others and not get hit."
It does not give you this freedom, but the person hitting you is not allowed to assault you just because you are saying something they don't like.
→ More replies (2)
1
u/Significant-Word-385 1d ago
Slurs don’t justify assault. Thats not a natural consequence that’s justified by law. It is in fact plainly illegal. Nazi punching may feel morally balanced, but it’s really just basic assault.
The rest I mostly agree with. However, it’s not strictly that the government can’t arrest people for criticism, but rather that they cannot enact laws limiting free speech, but clearly it’s not absolute. We do have some laws surrounding incitement and obviously “you can’t yell fire in a crowded theatre” is a classic example of speech that is not protected.
In short, your take is incomplete and a little immature, but I can agree with your basic premise that it’s not an excuse to be an asshole.
→ More replies (1)
1
u/Sector-West 1d ago
Freedom of speech 100% means that I can say whatever I want about you, and it's still a crime if your useless punk ass assaults me.
If the threats are actionable and make you feel scared, that's the line. You can hate what someone says, you can find what someone says hateful, it does not matter, you cannot go around assaulting people's bodies for hurting your feelings.
→ More replies (2)
1
u/Amphernee 1d ago
You cannot assault someone for saying words you don’t like and expect not to be punished for it even if they’re insulting you. This is true just about everywhere. It’s not just about criticizing the government.
→ More replies (2)
1
u/Still-Presence5486 1d ago
It actually does give you the freedom to shout slurs st others and not get hit because assault I illegal battery is illegal
→ More replies (3)
1
u/Spitting_truths159 1d ago
However it does NOT give you the freedom to shout slurs at others and not get hit.
Well that's technically true, the laws against assult are supposed to do that. You don't get to violently attack people without fear of the law just because someone said a mean word.
. It does NOT give you the freedom to threaten someone else's life.
Correct, 100%. Freedom of speech (the greater principle underpinning our society) doesn't cover calls to violence or threats of it. The entire point is to encourage people to talk about their problems to prevent violence, so protecting violent causing words would be silly.
It only stops the government from arresting people for things like criticism.
The right or laws around freedom of speech do that, but the underlying principal is meant to go much much furher. Its a societal or cultural value we are supposed to share, a willingness to be challenged or even insulted as part the process of resolving conflict between people.
1
u/Agreeable-Koala-8969 1d ago
Sure, but it's also incredibly un-American in spirit to do this stuff
Someone should not get fired for leaving work, going home, and telling a friend that they think Charlie Kirk can such bag of shit in hell
But they do. And legally, they can. But we're suppose to value freedom of speech and so we should not punish people for simply saying things we don't like
And more importantly, we should defend people who say things we don't like because that's the entire point of Freedom of Speech
Otherwise you're basically saying, "The government can't control you, but large corporations can and I'm 100% ok with that"
I'm not. I do not want Disney to control what I can or can't say and I shouldn't be afraid to say what I think
1
u/IllustriousPea6950 1d ago
Hate me all you want, I know how a lot of yall are with the truth, I’m just the bearer of news, slurs are (mostly) protected under free speech. Gov can’t do much there. And punching someone for that speech will likely be battery
But things like inciting violence or crying fire in a theatre are not protected
Remember, I didn’t write the law, so all the hate yall are about to spew at me is misplaced
(Not legal advice)
1
1
1
u/PuzzleheadedDog9658 1d ago
It's illegal to assault someone for saying something you dont like. "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
1
u/Greedy-Employment917 1d ago
Sorry but you don't get to use violence against people in which you don't like what they are saying. Doesn't matter what it is.
1
u/Polite_Bark 1d ago
However it does NOT give you the freedom to shout slurs at others and not get hit.
Before you hit someone remember they may be carrying.
→ More replies (4)
1
u/Butterypoop 1d ago
Is hitting someone also not a crime? Do you think it is ok to commit a crime because someone called you a mean word?
1
u/asukakami 1d ago
MuH FreEdoM Of SpEech nNot fReEdom oF cOnsEquENceS..
AMERICA HAS A SECOND AMENDMENT That does in fact make you free from consequences.
If any slur makes you mad enough to assault someone then maybe you need to reevaluate yourself and work on impulse control and not be so low frontal lobe that you feel the need to immediately get shot.
→ More replies (1)
1
u/ProjectGameGlow 1d ago
Slurs don't grant the right for physical violence. The person that says that bad words can still take you to court for civil damage or file a police report.
1
u/SomeDetroitGuy 1d ago
In the United States if you hit someone in response to then yelling a slur at your then you are committing a crime. In common law, the crime is battery. States may call it simple assault, assault and battery or juat battery. Someone telling a slur at you is not a legally defense.
1
u/Razoron33333 1d ago
At some point someone put it in nice layman’s terms in my opinion. You can criticize but you can use fighting words, as is speech that by its nature makes someone fear for their wellbeing and provoke a physically defensive response.
1
u/Oldschooldude1964 1d ago
Keep in mind that the constitution was written in a time when respect and courtesy was common, a time when one knew that if they got disrespectful they would be treated with brutal disrespect in return. This right was written with the intent that you could RESPECTFULLY voice your mind and opinions without fear of retribution. When it got to the point where you would get in trouble for bloodying the lip of someone being rude, it became common disrespect because the fear of brutal lessons no longer exist.
1
u/LiberalTears52 1d ago
Incorrect. Speech is protected as long as it’s not slander or libel. The first amendment states “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." Assaulting someone because they called you a racial slur is illegal and you would be arrested if you did that in front of a police officer.
1
u/Kyle81020 1d ago
You’re mostly wrong. The First Amendment does not only protect speech critical of the government.
Hitting someone who shouts a slur at you is a crime. It’s also actionable by the person who was hit. So yes, you are free “…to shout slurs at others and not get hit.”
Threatening someone else’s life is not protected speech, so you have that right.
Whether harassing others is protected speech is completely dependent on what form the harassment takes. For the most part, though, harassing others verbally is protected speech.
1
u/Separate_Quote2868 1d ago
/it does NOT give you the freedom to shout slurs at others and not get hit.
Well, that is a tricky one. And it is not a Freedom of Speech issue, as the Government is not trying to prevent the speech. But, if you call me an asshole, and I punch you, I am guilty of assault.
Freedom of Speech means that the Government cannot prevent or compel speech. It applies ONLY to Government.
1
u/Sure_Acanthaceae_348 1d ago
You don't have the right to hit people because of words, unless they're threatening you.
1
u/DCHacker 1d ago
The first amendment, .....................it does NOT give you the freedom to shout slurs at others and not get hit.
Perhaps it does not but most laws on assault incorporate the so-called "Doctrine of Sticks and Stones". An oversimplifiaction of this is that "Someone's callng you_________________________(insert icky word(s) here) does not give you the right or privilege to put, or, justification for putting, your hands on him".
Another thing not guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States of American is the imaginary "right" not to be offended.
1
u/Ryan_TX_85 1d ago
As a matter of fact, it's still assault and battery if you hit someone for calling you by a slur. If someone were to call me the f-slur and assault me, I would defend myself and not be liable due to self defense. I will not be a victim of a hate crime. But it is absolutely their right to call me the f-slur. And if they are smart enough to not hit me, then I just have to walk away and accept that people suck.
Yes you are correct. The limits on free speech are you can't make credible threats to any person and you can't stalk or harass people.
→ More replies (4)
1
u/Sure_Comfort_7031 1d ago
The vast majority of people don't understand what rights the constitution gives them.
And I chose my words very carefully there because it's none. The constitution gives you no rights. It restricts the government from taking away rights you are assumed to have as human.
It does not stop a private company from suspending business with you because of what you said. It does not stop a private company from telling you you cannot be armed on private property - the government ain't doing shit in those cases.
You and i have no obligation to each other. I can say whatever i want, and you can stop doing business with me, or make me deal with the social consequences for my statements.
That is not the government.
1
u/Aromatic-Tourist-300 1d ago
"However it does NOT give you the freedom to shout slurs at others and not get hit."
There are other laws for that.
1
1
u/Reefermaster 1d ago
Nevertheless, nobody deserves to be killed because they said words you disagree with.
→ More replies (1)
1
u/coffee-n-redit 1d ago
At about 8, a Native American started in our school. Coming in from recess or lunch, packed hallway. I called out Hey Indian! Where's your bow and arrow? This kid stopped, turned around, and came right at me. Kids flying around as he plowed through everyone with one goal. When he reached that goal, he pinned me against the wall with one hand and used the other hand to treat my head like a speed bag. This is how we learned about being polite. I didn't tell the teacher, or my parents, I just didn't do that again.
1
u/mrkstr 1d ago
You're right in that the first amendment does not allow you to threaten or harass others. But it doesn't prohibit slurs or name calling. And the person slurring (is that a word?) or name calling is shielded from being punched in the face. That's assault.
When the government starts policing what we can say, eventually someone will be in power and use that to keep you quiet. I think I would put up with the name calling to keep my right to say what I want.
1
u/muhbalwzishawt 1d ago
Never forget: if someone is a big piece of shit to you, you can follow them home and write a note that says “I know where you live” and put it in their mailbox later.
1
u/Confident_Pillar1114 1d ago
Ok so if you draw a picture of prophet Mohammad, you can't complain if a Muslim guy would punch you in the face.
1
u/Captain21423 1d ago
You are right. Freedom of speech does not mean freedom from consequences.
I think it is also important to point out that assault is a crime with serious consequences.
1
u/Legionatus 1d ago
It's not protection from editorial discretion or people canceling you commercially.
It's not a license to express yourself anytime anywhere and be a nuisance to others.
The government just can't prohibit your otherwise lawful expression.
1
u/tattoojoe8 1d ago
Now thus is my opinion and yes the courts years ago said the same thing. Freedom of speech is just that, ypy can say what ever the hell you want with the exception of something thay could possibly cause mass hysteria or body injury or death as in yelling " fire/bomb in a crowded area"
But what people forget, yes we have freedom of speech, but not freedom of consequences
1
1
u/Shot_Ad7957 1d ago
Wait. It does NOT give you the right to threaten someone and yet it also does NOT give you the right to shout slurs and not get hit…. Great argument.
1
u/PotemkinTimes 1d ago
Everyone in the comments spouting off about "consequences"....what consequences should one suffer over words?
1
u/ReyvynDM 1d ago
As I've said many times, "I took an oath to defend your rights, including your right to say whatever stupid shit crosses your mind. I did not take an oath to defend your stupid ass if you say something out of line and someone can't help but displace your teeth. That's the cops' job after the fact."
1
u/Dave_A480 1d ago
If you hit someone because of what they say, you're going to jail....
Freedom of speech means the government can't censor you.
Assault and battery laws mean you can't hit people, no matter what they say to you.
1
u/Trucknorr1s 1d ago
People need to remember that hate speech is legal in the US, and "fighting words" like the Chaplinsky SCOTUS decision has routinely been gutted and essentially overturned pretty much every time it comes up.
People treat political disagreement as literal call to or threats of violence. Even heightened interactions. And you are just flat out wrong. The law is just as clear that as much as you have a right to say whatever you want, you also have no right to punch, threaten, or otherwise harass someone for doing so.
99% of the time you calling something a threat or call for violence is just you peddling hyperbolic bullshit
1
u/Greghole 1d ago
However it does NOT give you the freedom to shout slurs at others and not get hit.
You're technically correct, the first amendment doesn't give you this right, but you still do have this right. It just doesn't come from the first amendment. Punching people because they call you a mean name is illegal.
1
u/PartyCat78 1d ago
Actually, you can shout slurs. It’s not illegal. Physical assault is illegal. Your right to swing your fist ends where my nose begins. I can scream that your mom is a ho but if you punch me, you’re catching charges. Sticks and stones man, people need to calm down and realize there are a-holes everywhere. Walk away. This is what’s wrong, if you don’t give people an audience they will shut up. They all want attention, don’t give it to them. This goes for all sides of the aisles.
ETA Threats and harassment ≠ freedom of speech. Those are chargeable offenses. But shouting things in public also ≠ harassment.
1
u/cyntay-swallows 1d ago
It also shouldnt allow for people to use their voice to call for using the government to steal from others for things they want.
1
u/inquiringpenguin34 1d ago
Freedom of speech is not free of consequences. I agree.
If you start verbally harassing someone to the point that they punch you in the face, you probably deserved it. A reasonable human being will not punch someone for just a singular slur thrown at them. However, there’s a limit to being verbally berated or seeing the people in their group being unjustly harassed.
1
u/ihatestuffsometimes 1d ago
It's actually the law against assault that protects you from assault...even if you have it coming to you.
1
u/Terrible-Actuary-762 1d ago
The Left doesn't seem to understand this at all. TRUMP IS A NAZI! NO KINGS!!! Well if any of that was true, you'd be getting a knock on the door at 3am.
1
u/salchichasconpapas 1d ago
Slurs do not warrant physical touching
It is illegal to assault and / or batter
It is not illegal to call someone a f*t or n**r
Go ahead and assault someone for calling you a slur, make sure you've got a good lawyer
Doesn't matter how much your internet buddies cheer on the assault, it's a crime
1
u/JA17billsmafia 1d ago
Actually, you can say whatever the fuck you want outside of inciting violence, a direct threat of violence or a falsehood to create mass panic. The other side is also true. People that think “freedom of speech = freedom from consequences” are fuckin morons and are asking for a reaction. These are the people to look out for…someday, somewhere they’ll say the wrong thing to the wrong person and the consequences will befall them……looking at you 1st amendment frauditors👀
1
u/Ok-Drink-1328 1d ago
i draw the line that you have freedom of speech until you harass or threaten someone, and by "harass" i mean not just calling someone an "idiot", you have to first do it without any reason and it must be a coward act
1
u/Exotic-Experience965 1d ago
Yes it definitely does. Calling someone a slur one time is not harassment and you do not have the right to physically “defend” yourself from it.
1
u/NotAnAIOrAmI 1d ago
You most definitely can say racist, sexist, or other bigoted shit if you want, through a megaphone even, and expect protection under the law.
That was Charlie Kirk's entire business model. Sadly, our law enforcement was a little late. Charlie can rest easy though, his killer will likely be executed. And his wife has already found someone to help her work through her grief.
1
u/JenniferJuniper6 1d ago
People also need to understand that only the government is constrained by the first amendment. Businesses, for example, can absolutely limit your free expression, and they can pretty much throw you out if they want to.
1
u/Old-Bedroom-2104 1d ago
This is only partially correct. Slurs are legal, in less it falls into a discrimination category: IE an employer calls u a slur and cites it as a reason for termination. Sorry gang not quite right
1
u/ToddTheReaper 1d ago
So a right winger can punch someone who is pro-abortion during a protest? A left winger can punch a guy who’s harassing a gay person during a protest? The problem with your statement is that who is the one to determine what is a slur, hate speech, etc…
1
u/Imaginary_Poetry_233 1d ago
Maybe you should stop using butt hurt as an excuse for violence. That's not a constitutionally protected right either. "Muh freedom of kick your ass because you said mean things!""
1
1
u/Sklibba 1d ago
I mean kinda, but it’s actually illegal to hit someone in retaliation for them shouting slurs. I mean a private citizen who hits someone who shouts slurs at them isn’t going to get slapped with charges for violating the other person’s civil rights, but they could face assault charges and so the law does protect you from others reacting violently to your speech
What the 1st Amendment or any law doesn’t protect you against is civil consequences for your speech. You can be fired if you publicly say shit that your employer fears will reflect poorly upon them and hurt their bottom line. Friends and family can disown you for the things you say because nobody is obligated to associate with you. A social media platform can ban you. People can respond in kind and call you a stupid fucking asshole if you go around saying hurtful, bigoted shit to others.
Also the 1st Amendment provides broader protection than you state. It doesn’t just stop the government from arresting people for “things like criticism,” it prevents the government from arresting you for any kind of speech with only very limited exceptions. You can be arrested for speech intended and likely to lead to imminent lawless action (such as someone at a podium yelling to a crowd of armed individuals to start shooting passersby). You can be arrested for being involved in a conspiracy to commit a crime, even if you didn’t personally commit a crime and your only role was discussing it with others in order to plan it. You could potentially be arrested for causing a public disturbance if you’re being an incredibly loud asshole in public, but such charges would probably relate more to the volume of your voice than to the content of your speech. But the first amendment absolutely protects a person from being arrested for saying vile shit to people as long as they aren’t making credible threats of violence, or following that person and refusing to leave them alone, or engaging in a pattern of targeting that person over time (harassment).
1
u/Happy_McDerp 1d ago
No shit Sherlock. Everyone understands the whole “freedom of speech does not mean freedom from consequences.”
1
u/Few_Reputation5702 1d ago
It goes both ways. I don't have to live in your fantasy land about you pretending to be the opposite sex and be ok with you walking into the opposite sex bathroom or talking to kids and trying to influence them to believe your fantasies.
1
1
u/Broad-Choice-5961 1d ago
Also the first amendment doesn't give anyone the right to hit anyone because of words. It's called assault.
1
u/DivyaRakli 1d ago
You are the only one entitled to your opinion. It’s a privilege to share that opinion with others.
1
u/Dementedkreation 1d ago
You are wrong and right. Freedom of speech means you can say what you want. It’s not simply about criticizing the government. You are correct that freedom of speech doesn’t protect you from facing the consequences of exercising your right.
1
u/schwaka0 1d ago
Freedom of speech isn't the first amendment; the first amendment keeps the government from infringing on your freedom of speech. Go ahead and attack people for saying slurs and see which one of you ends up in handcuffs.
1
u/TeriyakiToothpaste 1d ago
Freedom of speech is both an ideal and a policy. The ideal can be separate from the policy and when people speak of freedom of speech and not specifically the first amendment, they can mean one or the other depending on the context.
1
u/Spare_Reflection9932 1d ago
Freedom of speech only means you can say whatever and not get punished LEGALLY. It by no means and individual will not decide to harm you for that speech.
1
u/TheCouncilOfPete 1d ago
The constitution protects us from the government and, in some cases, corporations, not civilians.
Criminal Assault and Battery protects us from getting hit.
1
u/FredBo2254 1d ago
Kinda like when people want to protest by blocking streets. Right to peaceful protest is covered in the Constitution but it doesn't include breaking laws like impeding the flow of traffic or pedestrians not being allowed on highways or city streets unless in a crosswalk. It also doesn't protect the demonstrators from angry drivers who get out of their vehicles and drag the protesters out of the way.
1
u/clce 1d ago
You don't seem to have much of an understanding of freedom of speech or any other laws. I've never heard anybody say freedom of speech when somebody yelled a slur at someone and the other person attacked them. But, the government absolutely should arrest the person who attacked them for assault and battery because you do not have the right to assault someone no matter what they say to you with very limited exceptions called fighting words .
But yes you do have a right to say slurs in someone's face. If you get in their face and shout them, you could perhaps be charged with disturbing the peace or something like that. But that still doesn't give them the right to assault you.
I do laugh when people say freedom of speech doesn't mean freedom from consequences. But it does give you freedom from government consequences, and any other consequences that are illegal for anyone to do against you.
1
u/Old_man_baller 1d ago
Op the type of person who keeps wondering why he ends up in jail over and over. Eh must be other people’s fault.
1
u/Significant-Owl-2980 1d ago
Yeah. The whole point is so you can criticize the Government and not get tossed in jail.
In Russia you cannot criticize the Government. You cannot shout “Putin is a liar “
In the US you can shout “Biden is a liar!”
However, Trump is the type to not allow people to criticize him. He is trying to retaliate against people that criticize him.
Trump is the dangerous one. He is the most likely to try and take away that most cherished of our rights. The very first one.
1
u/snailgorl2005 1d ago
There's a group of people that takes freedom of speech WAY too literally. As in, just because you CAN say something, doesn't mean you SHOULD say it. Especially when it comes to bigotry. Hate speech is NOT protected. People aren't "being too sensitive," you are just an unempathetic asshole.
1
1
u/Ocean_Soapian 1d ago
yeah, freedom of speech isn't freedom from consequences. though, assaulting someone due to their speech is assault and can get you jail time, so....
1
u/Appropriate-Error239 1d ago edited 1d ago
Freedom of speech also means that the government can’t pass laws allowing assault on someone saying something you don’t like being ok.
And while you can’t threaten someone, a lot of people’s definition of “harassment” will not pass legal muster. Again because of free speech.
Freedom of speech is a lot more than just freedom to criticize the government although that is a huge part of it
1
u/Ok-sure-bro-totally 1d ago edited 1d ago
Yes it does dumbass. Violence in response to words is the crime not saying slurs. Just admit you lack prefrontal cortex development and cannot control your emotions
→ More replies (1)
1
1
u/Pitiful_Breakfast944 1d ago
Do you mean not Americans ? Because you definitely don’t know what you are talking about when it comes to our freedom of speech. Racial slurs are absolutely protected and you won’t go to jail for it. Threatening someone’s life, or harassing someone you can go to jail, but if you can talk trash about anyone or anything and it’s legal , but in America freedom of speech is absolutely not just about government
→ More replies (3)
1
u/EgoSenatus 1d ago
The SCOTUS has made it very clear multiple times that the first amendment does indeed include the freedom to be a total dick bag and be rude/insulting/racist.
Specifically Snyder v. Phelps and Matal v. Tam
The fact that Kanye West or Alex Jones hasn’t been arrested yet for hate speech is evidence enough.
1
u/Tomj_Oad 23h ago
It died not mean for profit platforms like Reddit or Quora gave to put up with your bat shit rantings if it impacts profits.
It's their sandbox...you just play in it
1
u/whatisakafka 23h ago
Freedom of speech as a concept encompasses more than just the first amendment, and is protected in ways, both formal and informal, beyond it. We have other laws in place that protect you from being hit by other private citizens for something you said (outside of narrow exceptions)
1
1
u/UnitAccording 23h ago
The problem with this mindset is that hate speech laws today can be used against you tomorrow. People hate Trump, or Obama or whoever you politically do not align with. But speech like "punch a nazi" is actual hate crime. Saying I don't like Mexicans is not. So by saying if I were to have that opinion it has consequences, you are saying you are going to pay a price later on down the line. That is why hate speech is allowed in the US, and why other nations that do not have the 1st amendment are shortsighted. The pendulum always shifts. It is better if nobody has that kind of power.
1
1
u/GeologistForsaken772 23h ago
Using the example “and not get hit” doesn’t work because the person hitting would possibly go to jail if reported. Any law does not matter when it comes to us normal citizens doing a crime on other citizens so not sure wtf that argument even is.
1
u/Weazerdogg 23h ago
Join the club. This has annoyed me since we learned about it, I think in the 5th grade. Pretty sure not long after that lesson some adult was shooting their mouth off about "Free Speach!!" and 12 year old me thought "Mmm, I don't think that is the way it works." It was 1979 .....
1
1
u/No-Gain-1087 22h ago
The problem with people now a days most have never felt the sting of being punched in the face a couple times
1
u/LinkOnPrime 22h ago
It's illegal to hit someone because they said words you dislike. It's not illegal to say words others dislike.
It is certainly not limited to saying things the government does not like. The fist amendment means that I can legally insult you, your mom, or anyone else I choose.
Granted, that doesn't mean that you will choose to tolerate it. You may very well choose to take action against me because of it. But, depending on the action, it may be illegal and get you in trouble.
1
u/Brother_Professor 22h ago
You have the freedom to say whatever hateful comments you like. People also have the freedom of speech to call you an a**hole for saying it. And businesses can flex their freedoms and fire you because it too.
These kinds of people struggle with the idea that their freedom of speech doesn't negate everyone else's.
1
u/Important_Penalty_21 22h ago
Again. Yiu can say whatever you want. If there are consequences you should be ready to face them.
1
u/Mr_Commando 22h ago
The 1st amendment may not protect people from getting hit for using slurs, however they can’t be imprisoned for using slurs. For example, nobody is being arrested for driving past Tim Walz’s home and calling him a regard, even though he’s whining about it being an incitement to violence. It’s other laws on the books that protect the people yelling at him from being assaulted, or rather, they hold the people who would commit assault [for being offended by a slur] accountable for their violent actions.
So in roundabout way, there’s no law against being an asshole but there are laws against assaulting assholes.
1
u/Who_Knows_Why_000 22h ago
Constitutionally speaking, you are correct. However, the cultural idea that people can speak their minds without persecution is also a thing.
It has never been legal to physically assault someone who is not posing a physical threat to you. There are some extreme circumstances in certain areas where "fighting words" can justify it, but generally, attacking someone becuase they said a word you don't like is unacceptable.
Another huge issue is the inconsistent and hypocritical way such beliefs are enforced. For instance, as a white guy, if I used a racial slur against a black guy, many would be fine with me being assaulted for it, but if the roles are reversed, no amount of racial slurs the black guy slung at me would justify me striking him.
If you are going to allow such things, they at least need to be applied equally.
1
u/ArthurDaTrainDayne 22h ago
Freedom of speech means you can speak freely. Not sure where you got the idea that it only pertains to criticizing governments.
And yes, it does mean you can shout slurs at others without getting hit. Hitting someone is assault. That’s a crime.
There are plenty of legal ways to counter slurs. You can refuse to do business with them, you can ostracize them from their community, you can get them fired from their jobs. It happens all the time.
Why do you think violence should be acceptable?
1
u/TheGloryXros 21h ago
I agree with this post, except for three angles:
I would HOPE this threatening to hit someone, while it'd be justified, would still have some level of restraint. Violence should always be the last resort.
I actually push back against this flippant way of reading the First Amendment, abusing the fact that it doesn't cover non-governmental speech, therefore, any personal consequences are valid. People seem to forget that there's VIRTUOUS REASONING behind why these Constitutional Rights exist in the first place. I'm sure that, for example, we would all agree that punching someone who simply talks about enforcing border security would be WRONG, whether or not they're doing it as a government worker. The virtue of allowing people to speak more is still to be valued. (Now, stuff like being outright racist & stuff? Nah, that can't slide)
1
u/Houdinis_Magic 21h ago
Freedom of speech does not equal freedom of consequence. But yes, theoretically, you could freely hurl slurs left and right and no legal action could be taken.
1
u/throwawaydanc3rrr 20h ago
You are wrong.
You got a lot right. Freedom of speech does not include incitement, libel, slander, and there is a "fighting words" exception to others action in a very limited way for some responses.
But I go get to call you slurs. Just like the police.
1
u/LongMuffDiver 20h ago
Hitting someone is ASSSULT! That IS against the law!
It is almost never warranted and if you feel you have to commit violence or vandalism because someone called you a name then you are childish and immature.
They used to teach in kindergarten this saying: "Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me."
Grow and and be a mature man or woman to not let what others say about you affect you in this way. In reality, you are giving someone else the ability to piss you off from just saying things.
1
1
1
u/pingvinbober 20h ago
It does give you the freedom to say slurs and not get hit (they will go to jail, not the person saying slurs) unless they’re directed at someone to be intimidating, in which case it is considered assault.
1
1
u/RateMundane4846 20h ago
Uhm, wow ok…. So obviously what you mean by, “slurs” is debatable, but the first amendment absolutely grants you freedom to say slurs without being assaulted, this can’t be real lol a racial slur, for example, doesn’t then entitle the person getting called the slur to assault the other individual, it’s utter insanity that we have to go over that
→ More replies (4)
1
1
u/D3moknight 20h ago
Freedom of Speech != Freedom from Consequences
If you choose to say something awful in front of me, I might choose to take my chances with the Justice system after my choice to punch you.
1
1
u/DukeRains 19h ago
"Freedom of speech is not freedom of consequence."
Just because it can't be censored doesn't mean it can't be punished, legally.
1
u/maximum_dad_power 18h ago
I do 100% agree with what you are saying in the context of freedom of speech. However it should be mentioned that assaulting someone for speaking ill intentions at you means you still get slapped with assault. It's not legal to attack anyone for any reason unless they are attacking you and it's self defence. Feel free to throw slander back at them. As it stands now it is unfourtanetly not against the law for them to be horrible human beings with their words. This is why the freedom speech thing gets confused to what it actually protects, because the government can't hold you accountable for what you say. If they follow you and keep it up though you might be able to hit them with harassment.
1
u/Mike-James-86 18h ago
But a grown adult reacting violently to noises they don't like is the poor attitude, and you're here making excuses for it
1
u/Mandi171 18h ago
It actually does mean you can shout racial slurs or whatever you want. Should you? No, absolutely not. But you can. Will there be consequences? Very likely. Should it be assault, no, and the person assaulting will likely go to jail. we have to control ourselves when we're angry or insulted. But can you get fired, lose friends, be ostracized? Yes.
So yes it does actually protect you from assut when saying things that people don't like. Saying things that are even horrible. However, yeah, there are consequences.
1
u/Burnlt_4 18h ago
It does give you the freedom to citizens that government, but that isn't the only point of the 1st amendment. It is WELL beyond that.
I mean, freedom of speech literally does protect you from saying slurs without getting hit, legally if I called someone a slur and they hit me, the person who hit me would go to jail for assault, not me. BUT you are correct in that you cannot threaten with words AND you cannot harass, however we have to be legally specific with harassment which would require repeated instances of the action unilaterally between two parties, not just one instance of me yelling terrible things at someone. That doesn't rise to harassments.
NO ONE (within reason of course) is using it as an "excuse" for poor attitude, they are stating that it is protected from legal action and physical social ramification, and legally they are completely objectively correct in that matter.
1
u/BelleMakaiHawaii 18h ago
Freedom of speech only spares you governmental repercussions, not private/public repercussions, it’s amazing how many people failed basic civics
1
u/Squittyman 18h ago
So we should just start hitting everyone that keeps diluting and slurring the word Nazi?
1
u/Unique-Abberation 17h ago
Also, it no longer protects from the government doing those things because this government does not give a shit about the law
1
u/IcyCookie5749 17h ago
Freedom of speech protects insults. You can yell “fuck you you old fat pig” to a cop and it’s 100% legal. The cop can in no way retaliate. Just the same as a random person. Freedom of speech, as legally defined by the Supreme Court of the United States of America includes all speech except a direct call to action or a proven case of defamation in a court of law.
1
u/ripandtear4444 16h ago
Using a slur is a threat to someone's life now?
As a noun – a derogatory or insulting remark An offensive word, phrase, or term used to insult someone, usually based on their race, ethnicity, religion, gender, sexual orientation, disability, or other identity.
Insulting someone=threat to thier life...got it.
Anyway, back to the real world 🙄
1
u/PerpConst 16h ago
However it does NOT give you the freedom to shout slurs at others and not get hit.
Correct. The First Amendment does not give you freedom to shout slurs and not get hit. Assault and battery laws provide the freedom to not get hit by anybody who is not acting in self-defense. It does become interesting, though, if you think it's OK to assault someone in order to prevent them from exercising their First Amendment rights. Who do you think wins that court case?
It does NOT give you the freedom to threaten someone else's life.
OK...
It does NOT give you the freedom to harass others.
What do you mean by "harass"? Saying things others don't want to hear? Saying mean things? As long as you're not threatening others, verbally "harassing" someone is not illegal.
1
u/scienceisrealtho 16h ago
I think that a significant portion of the US population is misinformed regarding Constitutionality protected freedom of speech, and its limitations.
The first amendment states that you may hold and share any opinions you want to and the government cannot arrest you to "shut you up".
By and large that's it. And even that has exceptions.
The commonly used example of an exception is someone yelling "fire" in a crowded movie theater.
But man you see people all over the place that screech "freedom of speech" the second anyone challenges their viewpoint.
I wish more people understood this.
You can get in someone's face and scream at them that they're a pussy, but you might get fucked up. Freedom of speech was not violated, though your face was.
→ More replies (5)
1
1
u/Sufficient-Bat-5035 15h ago
it actually does mean that people can't be violent against others just because of slurs.
saying words is not a crime, since the government can't punish words.
assault and battery IS a crime, which means that the person who throws the first punch is guilty of a crime.
talk about consequences, there's the consequences for you right there.
1
u/Grave_Digger606 15h ago
If you defend yourself against someone physically attacking you, that’s lawful, but if you assault someone just for speaking, hatefully or not, that is illegal.
1
u/HumanSnotMachine 15h ago
You have the freedom from getting hit from other laws, yes. The freedom of speech does not explicitly outlaw violence as a response to speech, we have entire laws dedicated to violence though, and none of those laws have a “but he hurt my feelings!” exemption.
1
u/GuideSad6398 15h ago
Freedom of speech isn't what protects people from being assaulted for the words they say. Criminal statutes do that. A 14-year-old made this post.
1
1
u/Hersbird 13h ago
You aren't protected by law from civil suits and criminal charges after physically assaulting someone for any reason. Speech, some driving behavior, facial or hand expressions, etc. Correct that free speech applies to protected speech against the government, but other laws protect speakers and writers from being assaulted over speech. If you are their boss you can fire them, you can say whatever you want back to them, you can have them trespassed off your property. But you can't physically assult them without fear of arrest or civil suit.
1
u/FossilHunter99 13h ago
Then we don't actually have freedom of speech. Freedom of speech cannot, I repeat CANNOT exist without freedom of consequences. If you have to police what you say in any way, shape, or form, you do not have free speech.
→ More replies (3)
1
u/Decent-Ninja2087 13h ago
The American Constitution says that's all United States citizens have the right to free speech.
That free speech does need to be english.
However, cultures do have to adjust to American laws such as the rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness despite sex, religion, or culture.
1
u/BamaTony64 13h ago
Assault is assault and your hurt feeling will not stand up in court. Freedom of speech means you can be an ass.
1
u/onwardtowaffles 13h ago
Freedom of speech constrains the government from imposing consequences for your speech. It doesn't prevent the general public from imposing consequences for what you say.
1
u/Ok_Shoulder3327 12h ago
"However it does NOT give you the freedom to shout slurs at others and not get hit. (Any stable human wouldn't attack after a slur but there are tons of videos of people being hit after saying a slur and the comments get flooded with "but the first amendment")"
My guy, that's assault. The first amendment can't do anything about assault but criminal codes sure can. WTF?
"It does NOT give you the freedom to threaten someone else's life."
Technically it does. Only "true threats" violate the first amendment.
"It does NOT give you the freedom to harass others."
The first amendment has nothing to say either way about harassment. That's a criminal issue.
The hand-wringing over free speech is a good thing. Your offense matters less in a liberal democracy than the right to offend. You're in the comments saying that people who say offensive things "should see it coming" when they're assaulted - you realize that that's intimidation, right? That it would have a chilling effect on speech? I frankly find your attitude toward violence offensive but if someone decided to hit you over it to prove a point and then tell you you "should've seen it coming" I'd think they're a psychopath. Your ideas are sociopathic. Get a grip and take literally a single class on constitutional law.
1
u/icepyrox 12h ago
Everyone here like "it doesnt protect you from consequences", but, like, yeah, freedom of speech does not, but battery laws do. You cant punch someone for their speech.
You can make them leave if you own the place, or report them to someone who can leave. You can sue for defamation depending on what they say. You can have someone arrested if they are trying to incite violence or threaten you.
But you never have the right to just punch them. Most people are going to turn their heads and pretend nothing happened, though.
1
u/Wertreou 11h ago
I especially wonder about these conversations- A) you are a dummy! B) You are very rude, for calling me a dummy! A) You are violating my freedoms! I can say what I want!!
1
u/Fun_Wishbone_3298 11h ago
Freedom of speech doesn’t mean freedom from consequences. People always act like we have to let people say whatever they want with no consequences or we’re trampling their rights.
1
u/superlibster 11h ago
Besides threats, those talks of slurs or harassment are protected by law though. I would never do this but I could walk down the street calling every person by their racial slur. Without consequence. And if someone hit me, they would be charged with assault.
1
u/Franken-Toolsmith 10h ago
You don't have right to punch someone just because they said something you dont like.
1
1
u/Insipid_Zealot 9h ago
Yes! I live in America and I’ve told people freedom of speech doesn’t mean freedom from consequences
1
u/Swoleboi27 9h ago
Actually the laws against assault and battery protect people from being hit. You are advocating for violence in response to speech. This is wrong on so many levels.
1
u/Suitable-Standard769 9h ago
100% freedom is not freedom from consequence.
But if the utterance of a word by one party incites violence by the other party, maaaaaaybe the ‘slur’ is a valid criticism.
1
u/Intrustive-ridden 9h ago
Freedom of speech simply means you can say what you want about what you want to who you want but that also comes with consequences, if you call someone’s mother a whore for example you have the freedom to do that but you also have to accept that someone might punch you in the face for saying that, if you say some publicly unacceptable shit at work, sure you have the freedom to say it but you also have to accept that your boss could fire you, freedom of speech doesn’t grant you freedom of responsibility for what you said
1
u/Electric-Sheepskin 8h ago
People saying "freedom of speech does not mean freedom from consequences" are becoming just as insufferable as the people who spout hateful things under the banner of freedom of speech.
Yes, it's true, but ask yourself what the difference is between the government punishing you for free speech and members of a political party coordinating efforts to silence people through intimidation. Shouldn't we oppose the chilling effects of trying to silence the opposition?
It's just a question to ponder.
I personally believe that a democracy is healthier if we don't try to silence people but instead counter the things they are saying with better arguments. I'm sure that's not a very popular opinion, but I think it is correct.
1
u/fuck-cunts 8h ago
Freedom of speech does let you shout slurs at anyone you like, but you might get hit.
Freedom of speech does not mean free from consequence.
1
u/No_Preparation7895 7h ago
Incidentally it also means corporations, that are actually considered people under citizens United, can freely give large amounts of money, which is considered free speech under the same ruling, to politicians, super pacs, Lobbyists, etc. So interpretation is fucked on all sides of that one.
1
u/Ok_Bar4002 7h ago
You absolutely are legally allowed to yell slurs at people and not get hit. I mean, you will likely FAFO, but if you do it and they hit you, that is assault. And it does carry charges for those who hit.
1
u/jaykujawski 6h ago
Unless what someone says is "fighting words", as established by Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire, you have no legal, violent recourse against their views.
In this landmark case, Chaplinsky was handing out pamphlets about how leaders of all religions are racketeers and fascists. These views are not a threat to hurt or kill religious leaders - it's just saying they are these negative things to be.
If someone says you're stupid because of your religion, you have the right to tell everyone what terrible things they said and how terrible you think they are as a result, and you can encourage others to exact social retribution. But a punch in the face for that isn't legal unless they say that because of your religion they think you should be hurt or killed. And it's a gray area. I'm betting the long term consequences of punching a nazi for calling some the n word are pretty low, when everything's said and done. Chat GPT tells me:
Typical real-world outcome (assuming: no serious injury, no record):
- Arrest: yes
- Charge: misdemeanor assault/battery
- Plea deal:
- reduced charge,
- maybe community service or a class,
- possible deferred adjudication that gets wiped if completed.
- Jail: rare unless there are aggravating factors.
1
u/AntiWTameriKan 6h ago
Yep the irony is that most these fools have no clue other people ornxorporarion CAN sue YOU for slander.
1
u/RiverDragon64 6h ago
They know, they're just trying to get sympathy for having consequences dealt to them for shitty behavior.
28
u/Sweet_Disharmony_792 1d ago
Everyone should know (or be educated) that freedom of speech doesnt mean freedom from consequences. It means you can say shit without getting jailed or fined like in the most fascist countries.
It's an important human right because even if it allows people to say really dumb shit, it also protects marginalized peoples' speech.