Hate speech and Ann Coulter

[EstimatedProphet]

I'm on a legal bent tonight...:)
This occurred to me the other day: free speech/free press has boundaries, and one of those boundaries is attempts to incite riots or civil unrest-can't yell fire in a crowded theater, etc.
Doesn't the sort of tripe Ann Coulter publish cross that line, really? Don't statements like her famous speech about Lindh-“We need to execute people like John Walker in order to physically intimidate liberals by making them realize that they could be killed too.”-constitute hate speech, and possibly an incitement to illegal actions?
Before this does go in a direction I don't intend for it:
1) I don't want to make Coulter a martyr. God forbid!
2) I also don't want to weaken freedom of speech. If pursuing Coulter over this would do either of those things, then I wouldn't want it. But I have to admit it seems to me that I couldn't say the things Coulter says (not that I want to) and and not be hauled into the police station...

[burythehatchet]

1. It is an incitement to kill

...but not liberals

[EstimatedProphet]

2. Another point to consider along these lines

Coulter has said things that could be construed as specific incitements:
“My only regret with Timothy McVeigh is he did not go to the New York Times Building,” New York Observer, August 21, 2002
Also there was the quote about whether impeachment or assination was better for Clinton, although I don't have the quote handy.
I'm not claiming any specific actions should be taken about these statements, mind you. But if they aren't considered incitement to violence, why aren't they? Why does Coulter get to publish this stuff, but other people don't? Where's the line drawn, exactly?

[madmax]

3. Hi EP

I've been trying to figure out what the heck is on the top of the WH.

Welcome to DU :hi:

[EstimatedProphet]

4. It's the Eye of Sauron

Lord of the Rings. Symbol of the Dark Lord and all that is evil in Middle Earth
I'm a geek.

[madmax]

6. I can't tell you what it looked like to me.

Just a dirty old lady, I guess. :evilgrin: Couldn't connect what I thought it was with 2 shark fins headed in opposite directions.

Geeks are cool ;)

[lovedems]

5. I am not a lawyer, but common sense tells me

that unless an act is committed that was specifically mentioned by the hag, it is free speech. However, let's say she thought the NYT's building needed to be blown up and wrote that or told someone that, and they blew up the NYT's then maybe, just maybe, she could be found guilty of something. It seems like I have heard cases like that before.

[mkultra]

7. nah

Although shes a freakin fruit cake. shes not breaking crossing anyone legal lines. She is a hypocrite though on that same issue.

[jonoboy]

8. why isn't she questioned by the FBI ?? imagine if you or I said...

the things she says about Republicans

[EstimatedProphet]

9. that's exactly what I was wondering

The obvious answer is that (of course) she's pro-Bush and therefore not subject to FBI questioning. But, we all know that if we said the sort of things about Bush that she said about Clinton we'd be dragged in for questioning in a slim minute.
The point I am trying to get at with this post is that there is a legal line between protected speech and incitement to riot. If she doesn't cross it with the things she says, where is the line then?

[DavidMS]

10. If she libels/slanders citizen of the UK,

it is actionable in their courts. They have a very strict libel law. Of cource it would be splashed all over the tabloid press and used by the neo-con swine to mock the english, but at least the penalities would be stiff (as they were origionaly designed to prevent dueling by offering a legal method of harshly punishing slander and libel).

[oscarmitre]

11. Coulter is careful not to display an intention

that any of the things she "wishes" for should occur. It's a sort of conditional statement. There is an old English case in criminal law that illustrates this. One man told another that "if it were not Assize time, I would run you through the body" - roughly translated the statement was "I won't stab you with my sword because the judge is in town and I could hang." Coulter seems to be using the same sort of reference. Unless she says "go and do this" it isn't incitment.

[Djinn]

12. one of the good things you guys have

is the enshrined right to free speech, in Australia it's a bit more iffy - personally if Coulter stepped out in front of my car you wouldn't see any skidmarks but that's all the more reason why I think she should be free to say what she likes.

It's easy to defend the right to speech of people you agree with - the test is being able to defend free speech when it's uttered by repulsive, sociopathic liars - arresting people for saying "so and so should be killed" is the thin edge of the wedge, although it'd be a nice test to see if a leftie could get away with calling for a freepy execution to frighten the rest of the right wing hordes.

[Soulman]

13. Well...in that case

What if I was to agree with her? would I be shunned or would you still choose to talk to me?



It is not how well we can mimic or opposition that makes us great...it is how far we strive to undo the wrongs they have done.

No one can fight unconditional love and the fortitude to peacefully stand up for what you believe in.

Or political system on both sides is a far cry from ever being able to do that