18 USCS § 2102 : To Incite a Riot

[cthulu2016]

According to 18 USCS § 2102 "to incite a riot", or "to organize, promote, encourage, participate in, or carry on a riot", includes, but is not limited to, urging or instigating other persons to riot, but shall not be deemed to mean the mere oral or written (1) advocacy of ideas or (2) expression of belief, not involving advocacy of any act or acts of violence or assertion of the rightness of, or the right to commit, any such act or acts.”

http://definitions.uslegal.com/i/incite-a-riot/

There is nothing in US law that holds any expression to be incitement to riot unless the person doing the expression is involved with promoting the actual riot. Being an asshole is not incitement to riot. Saying something that might cause somebody else to object violently to what you said is not inciting a riot.

Inciting a riot means saying, "Hey, let's have a riot."

We have been through this...

A Michigan man was sentenced to sentenced to Death in the USA for publishing a pamphlet that was found in the pocket of one of the people called rioters involved in what is called the Haymarket Bombing, in Illinois.

Famous incident in progressive history. One of the great miscarriages of justice that led to real change, like changing the laws so that Free Speech does not carry any legal obligation to "think of the consequences" in terms of what some other person might be inspired to do.

I don't want Paul Krugman thrown in prison for writing a chapter in The Occupy Handbook if someone at a Occupy rally subsequently pegs a policeman in the head with a rock.

[Logical]

1. +1000

[JaneyVee]

2. Ironically,

Many are protesting in the Middle East for the same rights & freedom we have to even make such BS films that sparked these attacks in the first place.

[Zalatix]

5. And make no mistake it was a BS piece of shit film.

But a Government that would censor it is more terrifying than those rioters in the Middle East.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

3. Thanks for posting this

The calls on DU to silence unpopular speech is disconcerting at times.

[Warren DeMontague]

8. No Shit.

Some people just don't understand the 1st Amendment. Sad.

[rhett o rick]

4. r&k

[rustydog]

6. Unless I am horribly mistaken, Hasn't these protests and attacks taken place in Egypt and Libya?

US code, The Constitution, Federal Laws, whatever you want to quote have abosultely no grounds here with citizens of Egypt and Libya, NOrth-African countries far removed from American law!

[Warren DeMontague]

7. Some people get all gooey over the fantasy that they'll be able to censor shit they don't like.

Fact is, speech that pisses people off or might piss people off or even that might piss a lot of people off A LOT is NOT prohibited by the 1st Amendment.

[cthulu2016]

10. What makes the fantasy so perverse here is that

it is often put forward in the advance of minority views.

One would think the Bush presidency never happened. It seems assumed that the fanciful and unconstitutional reinvention of laws will redound to our benefit!

[cthulu2016]

9. .

[Nevernose]

11. The first guy who said

"I hate this movie! Let's burn down an embassy somewhere!" Was inciting a riot.

The guy who said "I'm a total asshole! Let's make an offensive movie!" Was NOT inciting a riot. Maybe you should look up what "extortion" means.

[Bragi]

12. Well said!

[onenote]

13. +a really big number

Well done. I've worn myself out trying to convince some DUers that they don't understand the law of incitement. The sad thing is that in some cases, when I've convinced them, the response is that the law ought to be changed, not that its a good thing that the law is narrow and designed to avoid trampling on the First Amendment.

[cthulu2016]

15. To hold the author responsible for the actions of

the most irresponsible potential reader would land whoever wrote the Bible in jail for a long, long time.

[Go Vols]

14. +1