> No, there YOU go doing it again. That comment was in a long thread of context, and you willfully ignored that. The comment was also non-actionable and was clearly political hyperbole.
Not really, no. SOPA actually exists, and you joked about hanging its supporters. The only context that would have made it remotely appropriate is neutral one, in which it was clear to any observers that encouraging the hanging of SOPA supporters (even 'jokingly') was not your position.
> It's little thing called "the first amendment". Perhaps you've heard of it? Read it closely. It makes no reference to "...unless there were lynchings in the last century".
Then let me rephrase: There's no room to joke about lynching elected representatives (or anyone) in civilized mature discourse.
There is also a long history of case law that restricts "fighting words", despite the first amendment.
My only take-away from your repeated reference to assassination/lynching is that you're someone who is likely to incite if not participate in violence, and beyond that, you personally decrease the overall quality of rational discourse in US politics.
You may not be enough of a nutcase to try to assassinate a politician -- I'm honestly not sure, given your remarks here, and your ownership of the tools to do so -- but your seeming need to joke about assassination contributes to a culture of political violence that may very well incite someone to do what you won't.
Not really, no. SOPA actually exists, and you joked about hanging its supporters. The only context that would have made it remotely appropriate is neutral one, in which it was clear to any observers that encouraging the hanging of SOPA supporters (even 'jokingly') was not your position.
> It's little thing called "the first amendment". Perhaps you've heard of it? Read it closely. It makes no reference to "...unless there were lynchings in the last century".
Then let me rephrase: There's no room to joke about lynching elected representatives (or anyone) in civilized mature discourse.
There is also a long history of case law that restricts "fighting words", despite the first amendment.
My only take-away from your repeated reference to assassination/lynching is that you're someone who is likely to incite if not participate in violence, and beyond that, you personally decrease the overall quality of rational discourse in US politics.
You may not be enough of a nutcase to try to assassinate a politician -- I'm honestly not sure, given your remarks here, and your ownership of the tools to do so -- but your seeming need to joke about assassination contributes to a culture of political violence that may very well incite someone to do what you won't.