DI Wiki Epstein Archive ATS Archive PDF Archive North Korean TV
 

Times Have Changed
#51
[Image: offtopic.png]
#52
[Image: offtopic.png]
#53
(01-20-2026, 12:55 PM)quintessentone Wrote: all I was saying is to walk away.



refusing to answer a simple question in the process.....

why is it my responsibility to remove myself from a situation I had no control in putting myself in? But yet you have such a hard time removing yourself from a situation you indeed put yourself into?
#54
(01-20-2026, 12:50 PM)BeTheGoddess Wrote: I cant remember all the details, and Im not going to get my old law books out but I think this is relevant.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuberville_v_Savage



Taken from Moon68 to repost for those that missed it due to another user spamming my thread with her usual BS

 
Quote:The USSC first defined it in 1942 in Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire, words which,"by their very utterance, inflict injury or tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace. It has been well observed that such utterances are no essential part of any exposition of ideas, and are of such slight social value as a step to truth that any benefit that may be derived from them is clearly outweighed by the social interest in order and morality."

This was narrowed down in 1949 in Terminiello v. Chicago when the Court found that words that which produce a clear and present danger is not protected speech though words inviting dispute even cause unrest are protected.

This was clarified further in 1951 in Feiner v. People of the State of New York that inciting a riot creates a clear and present danger and is therefore not protected speech.

Now the biggie. In 1989's Texas v. Johnson, the USSC redefined the scope of "fighting words". The Court stated words that are "a direct personal insult or an invitation to exchange fisticuffs" are not protected. If you walk up to a person of color and start shouting the N-word in their face, expect to get slapped around. If someone says they are going to harm you or your family you absolutely have every right to issue a smackdown.
#55
(01-20-2026, 01:23 PM)PorkChop96 Wrote: refusing to answer a simple question in the process.....

why is it my responsibility to remove myself from a situation I had no control in putting myself in? But yet you have such a hard time removing yourself from a situation you indeed put yourself into?

A few of us did answer your question but you refuse to acknowledge it.

Why do you want to put yourself in a position where you will escalate a situation so much so that you know you will become unhinged so much so that you will physically assault someone?
"The only journey is the one within."
#56
[Image: offtopic.png]
#57
Closing for maintenance.
#58
MOD NOTE

Thread reopened

No more bickering
and talking about each other!

Stay on topic and be civil!

Lose your shit again
and lose your posting rights!



Do not reply to this post.