Elizabeth Barrette (ysabetwordsmith) wrote,
Elizabeth Barrette
ysabetwordsmith
  • Mood: busy

The Words We Say

I've been saying things much like this about the recent shooting, just shorter.
Tags: networking, politics, safety
Subscribe

  • Post a new comment

    Error

    switch
    default userpic

    Your IP address will be recorded 

    When you submit the form an invisible reCAPTCHA check will be performed.
    You must follow the Privacy Policy and Google Terms of use.
    Help
  • 83 comments
...go 3 levels up... Expand
ford_prefect42

ford_prefect42

January 10 2011, 19:27:18 UTC 10 years ago

Okay. Well, he got alcohol poisoning a few years back and was described by his classmates as a pothead, so the central point of the article, that substance abuse is a better indicator works too. Point is, there is no reason to think that "rhetoric" played any part at all.
ford_prefect42

ford_prefect42

January 10 2011, 19:29:34 UTC 10 years ago

And even if it did, there is no way at this time to know *whose* rhetoric. The rhetoric of the left has not been any more restrained than that of the right.

And even if it *did* play a part, it's free speech! One of the very most important constitutional freedoms.
ysabetwordsmith

Yes...

ysabetwordsmith

January 10 2011, 20:09:13 UTC 10 years ago

Free speech is a right. That doesn't make it okay to say things that cause harm. Legal, sometimes, although we do have limitations for such things as libel/slander, fraud, and hate speech. People frequently speak without thinking, without taking responsibility for what they say and the effect it has. Words have power; carelessness with them can be quite costly.
ford_prefect42

Re: Yes...

ford_prefect42

January 11 2011, 00:26:35 UTC 10 years ago

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.