When are threats protected speech?

[kallend 2,175]

THIS looks to be an interesting case. SCOTUS next week.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[RonD1120 62]

I have trouble imagining someone stupid enough to publicly share a threat. We know that all electronic communications are monitored and all metropolitan behavior is camera recorded.

Therefore, a reasonable person would know not to make public threats. Furthermore, a reasonable person would know not to take public threats seriously.

However, in my thinking the reasonable person standard has become blurred. I worked in the domestic violence field as a crisis response/intervention counselor. In that field all threats are assumed honest and real.

I agree, this case should prove to be interesting and I will become further confused. Guidance by the Holy Spirit is the only path that makes sense and, be prepared.

Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them.

[champu 1]

I share the author's concern about the "reasonable person" standard, but not just because it can be stretched in corner cases. My concern is because I'm extremely cynical of the average person's ability to reason.

A "reasonable person" is the same fifth-grader that the president's SOTUA is written for.

[kallend 2,175]

champu

I share the author's concern about the "reasonable person" standard, but not just because it can be stretched in corner cases. My concern is because I'm extremely cynical of the average person's ability to reason.

A "reasonable person" is the same fifth-grader that the president's SOTUA is written for.

Did you know that under Medicaid standards, all communications with a covered individual have to use (no more than) 4th grade level language. Medicare allows 6th grade language. Commercial health insurance may use 8th grade language. Note that these standards long predate ACA so the righties can't blame Obama.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[jakee 1,610]

Quote

I have trouble imagining someone stupid enough to publicly share a threat.

Have you met many people?

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[kallend 2,175]

jakee

Quote

I have trouble imagining someone stupid enough to publicly share a threat.

Have you met many people?

I expect they're the same people that post Youtube videos of themselves doing illegal stuff.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[rhaig 0]

kallend

***I share the author's concern about the "reasonable person" standard, but not just because it can be stretched in corner cases. My concern is because I'm extremely cynical of the average person's ability to reason.

A "reasonable person" is the same fifth-grader that the president's SOTUA is written for.

Did you know that under Medicaid standards, all communications with a covered individual have to use (no more than) 4th grade level language. Medicare allows 6th grade language. Commercial health insurance may use 8th grade language. Note that these standards long predate ACA so the righties can't blame Obama.

The reading level the state of the union address has been written to has been decreasing for a very long time. http://flowingdata.com/2013/02/12/state-of-the-union-address-decreasing-reading-level/

I'm not sure what ACA has to do with it unless you're just stirring things up again.

--
Rob

[champu 1]

rhaig

******I share the author's concern about the "reasonable person" standard, but not just because it can be stretched in corner cases. My concern is because I'm extremely cynical of the average person's ability to reason.

A "reasonable person" is the same fifth-grader that the president's SOTUA is written for.

Did you know that under Medicaid standards, all communications with a covered individual have to use (no more than) 4th grade level language. Medicare allows 6th grade language. Commercial health insurance may use 8th grade language. Note that these standards long predate ACA so the righties can't blame Obama.

The reading level the state of the union address has been written to has been decreasing for a very long time. http://flowingdata.com/2013/02/12/state-of-the-union-address-decreasing-reading-level/

I'm not sure what ACA has to do with it unless you're just stirring things up again.

No, he was just expanding on my state of the union example (much as you were by adding your link, thank you) and then trying to preempt silly partisan retorts. It can be difficult to head off the bickering without sounding like you're making a snarky partisan comment yourself.

Which brings us nicely back to the original topic. In addition to poor language and reasoning skills, the "reasonable person" is, more and more, presumed to be absent a sense of humor. Another reason they won't make for a particularly good arbiter of when a threatening statement becomes criminal.

[Andy9o8 3]

Sounds like a lot of really pissed off people.
Me, I try not to make a living out of pissed off people any more. Too much aggravation; and Ya know what? - life's too short.

[kallend 2,175]

champu

*********I share the author's concern about the "reasonable person" standard, but not just because it can be stretched in corner cases. My concern is because I'm extremely cynical of the average person's ability to reason.

A "reasonable person" is the same fifth-grader that the president's SOTUA is written for.

Did you know that under Medicaid standards, all communications with a covered individual have to use (no more than) 4th grade level language. Medicare allows 6th grade language. Commercial health insurance may use 8th grade language. Note that these standards long predate ACA so the righties can't blame Obama.

The reading level the state of the union address has been written to has been decreasing for a very long time. http://flowingdata.com/2013/02/12/state-of-the-union-address-decreasing-reading-level/

I'm not sure what ACA has to do with it unless you're just stirring things up again.

No, he was just expanding on my state of the union example (much as you were by adding your link, thank you) and then trying to preempt silly partisan retorts. It can be difficult to head off the bickering without sounding like you're making a snarky partisan comment yourself.

Which brings us nicely back to the original topic. In addition to poor language and reasoning skills, the "reasonable person" is, more and more, presumed to be absent a sense of humor. Another reason they won't make for a particularly good arbiter of when a threatening statement becomes criminal.

It's across the board. Congress is dumbing down:
Congress now speaks at almost a full grade level lower than it did just seven years ago, with the most conservative members of Congress speaking on average at the lowest grade level, according to a new Sunlight Foundation analysis of the Congressional Record using Capitol Words.

Of course, what some might interpret as a dumbing down of Congress, others will see as more effective communications. And lawmakers of both parties still speak above the heads of the average American, who reads at between an 8th and 9th grade level.

Today’s Congress speaks at about a 10.6 grade level, down from 11.5 in 2005. By comparison, the U.S. Constitution is written at a 17.8 grade level, the Federalist Papers at a 17.1 grade level, and the Declaration of Independence at a 15.1 grade level. The Gettysburg Address comes in at an 11.2 grade level and Martin Luther King’s “I Have a Dream” speech is at a 9.4 grade level. Most major newspapers are written at between an 11th and 14th grade level.

I still have my college science and math textbooks from 50 years ago. There is no comparison with the the stuff we have to use today.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[sfzombie13 324]

one would assume that a college textbook could at least be written at the level in which it was intended to be used. hell, my 11 year old son speaks, and reads, at least at a 12th grade level, probably higher (the tests topped out, and he scored off the charts). i still get him with the experience thing though. if it weren't for that, i think he may a little smarter than me. experience is the only edge i have on him. i hope he never discovers pot like i did.

_________________________________________
Si hoc legere scis nimium eruditionis habes

[RonD1120 62]

Probably less than 500K total.

Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them.

[Tink1717 2]

It's only a threat if it presents a clear and present danger to the feelings of the political party that the judge belongs to.

Skydivers don't knock on Death's door. They ring the bell and runaway... It really pisses him off.
-The World Famous Tink. (I never heard of you either!!)
AA #2069 ASA#33 POPS#8808 Swooo 1717

[BIGUN 1,503]

Quote

Generally, the essential elements of assault consist of an act intended to cause an apprehension of harmful or offensive contact that causes apprehension of such contact in the victim.

The act required for an assault must be overt. Although words alone are insufficient, they might create an assault when coupled with some action that indicates the ability to carry out the threat. A mere threat to harm is not an assault; however, a threat combined with a raised fist might be sufficient if it causes a reasonable apprehension of harm in the victim.Intent is an essential element of assault. In tort law, it can be specific intent—if the assailant intends to cause the apprehension of harmful or offensive contact in the victim—or general intent—if he or she intends to do the act that causes such apprehension. In addition, the intent element is satisfied if it is substantially certain, to a reasonable person, that the act will cause the result. A defendant who holds a gun to a victim's head possesses the requisite intent, since it is substantially certain that this act will produce an apprehension in the victim. In all cases, intent to kill or harm is irrelevant.

In criminal law, the attempted battery type of assault requires a Specific Intent to commit battery. An intent to frighten will not suffice for this form of assault.

There can be no assault if the act does not produce a true apprehension of harm in the victim. There must be a reasonable fear of injury. The usual test applied is whether the act would induce such apprehension in the mind of a reasonable person. The status of the victim is taken into account. A threat made to a child might be sufficient to constitute an assault, while an identical threat made to an adult might not.

SOURCE: http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Verbal+assault

Nobody has time to listen; because they're desperately chasing the need of being heard.