The Words We Say

I agree that there are a lot of things that it shouldn't be socially acceptable to say. Obama frequently says things that cause me great anger and fear. I have no doubt that Palin does likewise to you. That said, I do not support this:

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/136895-dem-planning-bill-that-would-outlaw-threatening-lawmakers

"Rep. Robert Brady (D-Pa.) reportedly plans to introduce legislation that would make it a federal crime to use language or symbols that could be perceived as threatening or inciting violence against a federal official or member of Congress."


Primarily because such things are *so* open to abuse. Who establishes what constitutes a "threat"? What penalties are to be exacted? Will the standards be neutrally applied? Even if you would happily hand this power over to Obama, The next president will almost certainly be tot he right of bush. Will you still want that law?

Are you aware of the frequency with which your own crowd will be stifled?

I didn't support legislation when a movie was made that showed and endorsed the assasination of W.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ojWOWyHWj6M

I don't support such things now. What I *do* support is not voting for people who cross the line. But that doesn't seem to be working. We live in interesting times.

Actually, we used to have one. There was involuntary commitment to mental institutions for those that were seriously mentally ill.

The supreme court ruled that unconstitutional.

O'Connor v. Donaldson, 422 U.S. 563 (1975) States could not involuntarily commit citizens to a psychiatric institution if they were not a danger to themselves or others and were capable of living by themselves, or with the aid of responsible family or friends.

There was also the "Community Mental Health Centers Act." of 1963, which ordered the closing of the large institutionalized mental institutions, and the construction of smaller, community based homes. But it didn't *fund* the building of the community based homes. Which in turn, led to the spike in mentally ill homeless that took place in the 80s.


There were some good reasons for the changes. The institutions were suboptimal and expensive. Some people were committed that shouldn't have been.

No, it doesn't. I wouldn't class mcveigh as "crazy, or in laden, or a whole slew of others. In this particular case... Have you looked at his youtube videos? Listened tot he interviews with his peer group? This lad is not operating ont he same plane with the rest of us.

This attack was political, but it was not democrat versus republican, it was green jovians versus purple saturnians. Seriously seriously disconnected from the world around him. Much more akin to killing John Lennon because "catcher in the rye told me to" than to any of the coherent earth based rationalles that have cropped up in the past for such events.


I would also disagree that it is "a prevailing trait". I know rather few people that have even been in a fight, and shootings over disagreements are really quite rare. Furthermore, if you want to see verbal violence, go visit paris or Kiev. Americans are really quite civil on the world scale.

Unfortunately, it's still violence, and once a boundary gets violated it's easy to grow the conflict.