If you falsely yell "FIRE" in a crowded theater, you can be prosecuted.

[Stinky The Clown]

It seems to me pretty much the same thing if you incite by overly hot rhetoric a person to threaten (or worse) the president of the United States.

This is not entertainment.

BeckLimboInhannitySavage ...... you listening?

[lapfog_1]

1. More directly...

US Code
TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 41 > § 871

§ 871. Threats against President and successors to the Presidency

(a) Whoever knowingly and willfully deposits for conveyance in the mail or for a delivery from any post office or by any letter carrier any letter, paper, writing, print, missive, or document containing any threat to take the life of, to kidnap, or to inflict bodily harm upon the President of the United States, the President-elect, the Vice President or other officer next in the order of succession to the office of President of the United States, or the Vice President-elect, or knowingly and willfully otherwise makes any such threat against the President, President-elect, Vice President or other officer next in the order of succession to the office of President, or Vice President-elect, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.

(b) The terms “President-elect” and “Vice President-elect” as used in this section shall mean such persons as are the apparent successful candidates for the offices of President and Vice President, respectively, as ascertained from the results of the general elections held to determine the electors of President and Vice President in accordance with title 3, United States Code, sections 1 and 2. The phrase “other officer next in the order of succession to the office of President” as used in this section shall mean the person next in the order of succession to act as President in accordance with title 3, United States Code, sections 19 and 20.

(edit to add)

Threatening the President

On Wednesday, Feb. 7, 2001, a 47-year old Evansville, Indiana man identified as Robert Pickett, while waving a loaded handgun near a White House gate and was shot in the knee by a Secret Service Agent. While Pickett's intent is still unknown, Secret Service Agents had to interpret his actions as a threat to President Bush and acted accordingly.

Secret Service Agents are allowed wide latitude when deciding whether or not a given act represents a threat against the President of the United States. Here's why.

A Threat From the Pulpit

(From the Washington Times, 12/27/96, page A5.)
"God will hold you to account, Mr. President."
"--Rev. Rob Shenck, to President Clinton during a Christmas Eve church service at the Washington National Cathedral, referring to the president's veto of a ban on partial-birth abortion. After the service, Rev. Shenck was detained by Secret Service agents who accused him of threatening the President's life. No charges were filed."

A Food Fair Remark

(Excerpt from an AP wire story dated October 30, 1996)
"CHICAGO (AP) -- ... (two people) were arrested July 2 at the Taste of Chicago fair after President Clinton approached them and ... responded with a rude remark.

She said the remark was, ' "You suck and those boys died,'' ' in reference to the June 25 attack of a U.S. installation in Saudi Arabia that left 19 American airmen dead. Secret Service agents initially said they heard something else that could have been taken as a threat against the president. Police said the (couple) were arrested for persisting to shout profanities while being questioned."

(All charges were later dropped.)

What Constitutes a "Threat?"

According to this law -- 18 USC Sec. 871 -- which reads, in part:

"...Whoever knowingly and willfully deposits for conveyance in the mail or for a delivery from any post office or by any letter carrier any letter, paper, writing, print, missive, or document containing any threat to take the life of, to kidnap, or to inflict bodily harm upon the President of the United States, the President-elect, the Vice President or other officer next in the order of succession to the office of President of the United States, or the Vice President-elect, or knowingly and willfully otherwise makes any such threat against the President, President-elect, Vice President or other officer next in the order of succession to the office of President, or Vice President-elect, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both."

That covers a lot of deeds and statements. It gives the Secret Service a lot of latitude when conducting an investigation. There is a very good reason for this. Few jobs are more dangerous than President of the United States.

http://usgovinfo.about.com/library/weekly/aa040398.htm

[pnorman]

5. Thanks for the above, I'll save it.

I'm a little uneasy with that: "Shouting Fire in a....". It's the analogy that SC Justice Holmes used, to send antiwar protesters to jail in 1917. (A few years later, he essentially reversed himself). All too often, it's only a matter of someone shouting: "The Emperor Has No Clothes! "

pnorman

[stellanoir]

2. This thread just made the imaginary Ipod in my cranium shuffle to this . . .

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=irC9WUp94EM

:hi:

[Stinky The Clown]

3. The man is a genius who truly gets it.

[stellanoir]

6. Who. . .? Williams or Elmer Fudd. . . ???

No seriously.

I've not seen any of William's recent work but in some of his earlier stand up routines, he was the embodiment of spontaneity and true comedic genius for sure.

[zonkers]

4. Likewise, if an Administration yells "terrorism" when there is none...

[paulsby]

7. this stupid misunderstood meme AGAIN. 1st amendment matters!

this idea "falsely yelling fire" was used to justify the prosecution of a WAR PROTESTOR.

think about that, next time you are protesting the war in afghanistan or iraq.

second of all, the case was OVERTURNED by brandenberg. the limits are now the brandenberg limits of free speech NOT the "fire" case, which was schenck.

instead of wanking about what the law SEEMS to be to you, how about reading brandenberg, as well as case law on "true threats". of course if you do, you will realize you are wrong, and we can't have that. god forbid we have rule of law. your feelings and how things SEEM to you is much more important than rule of law.

third, it is NOT the same thing. i have yet to see one post here with a quote from beck, limbaugh, malloy, etc. that is not CLEARLY protected free speech.

here's a fucking hint. the 1st amendment matters, and free speech matters. if you don't like it, screw you. the antidote to bad speech is free speech,it is not some statist ninny calling for prosecution.

i love your legal standard "overly hot rhetoric". "your honor, the defendant is clearly guilty of using overly hot rhetoric and thus should be imprisoned for daring to use such "overly hot rhetoric"

[Stinky The Clown]

8. Hahahaha

Hahahahahahahaha

AAAAAHHHHHahahahahaha