Having courts overturn previous established restrictions on the first amendment by adding stochastic statements as a clear infraction the same way yelling Fire in a theater does.
Stop using ‘a reasonable man’ as a tool of politic when its one of the worst bullshit scapegoats ever for lawmakers who don’t want to define shit or step on people’s toes by directly calling out what’s unreasonable, insane, fascist, or plain stupid.
So how do we tackle using speech that is technically ambiguous, but clearly meant to incite violence or stochastic terrorism?
Probably by demonstrating a pattern of behavior in a court of law.
Having courts overturn previous established restrictions on the first amendment by adding stochastic statements as a clear infraction the same way yelling Fire in a theater does.
Stop using ‘a reasonable man’ as a tool of politic when its one of the worst bullshit scapegoats ever for lawmakers who don’t want to define shit or step on people’s toes by directly calling out what’s unreasonable, insane, fascist, or plain stupid.