Thread: An OT question
View Single Post
  #41   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
[email protected] emdeplume@hush.com is offline
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Oct 2010
Posts: 4,021
Default An OT question

On Sun, 20 Mar 2011 15:31:53 -0400, wrote:

On Sun, 20 Mar 2011 10:26:23 -0700,
wrote:

On Sun, 20 Mar 2011 10:50:32 -0400,
wrote:

On Sat, 19 Mar 2011 23:16:28 -0700,
wrote:

On Sun, 20 Mar 2011 01:42:10 -0400,
wrote:

On Sat, 19 Mar 2011 22:06:50 -0700,
wrote:

On Sun, 20 Mar 2011 00:25:41 -0400,
wrote:


As distasteful as it is, those wackos apparently have the right to
protest.


At a certain point the reach the level of "fire in a crowded theater".



The Supreme Court spoke on this subject. They have the right to do it.


As I said, bikers have become sissies. I would expect Rolling Thunder
to explain they also have the right to get their ass kicked if they
don't take their protest down the road.

They don't have such a right. That's a threat.


Duh ... BIKERS. They are supposed to be a little threatening.


LOL Well, some are some aren't I guess.


Less the "Wild One" and more like the "Wild Hogs".

I do wonder how this plays in a "fighting words" state where it is
determined that some speech is egregious enough to justify assault.


It depends a lot on the presiding authority. Different places define
them differently. Basically, it's when they're used to incite violence
or express hatred by the person to whom they're directed, but that's
very broad.