I suppose it would be, but there's always that little caveat that if it's incites a riot or violence then all bets are off. And it seems like some folks are so easily incited these days that just saying "Thank you M'am" can get you in trouble.The Annoyed Man wrote:Yeah, I'm not disagreeing with you. I just honestly don't know if profanity is considered protected speech or not. It's a fair question, but I'll have to defer to someone who actually knows.ninjabread wrote:That would fit with the Left's ideology. It would be wrong, in their eyes, to prosecute BLM for inciting violence against police. However, it's right up their alley to infringe the RKBA by making some good ol' boy ineligible for an LTC because he used a four letter word for feces.The Annoyed Man wrote:I don't know. The issue is "hate speech", not profanity. It may be that profanity isn't protected speech.ninjabread wrote:Does this mean Texans are no longer at risk of losing their LTC for using salty language in Walmart?
Search found 1 match
Return to “SCOTUS rules "hate speech" constitutionally protected.”
- Fri Aug 18, 2017 1:10 pm
- Forum: Federal
- Topic: SCOTUS rules "hate speech" constitutionally protected.
- Replies: 23
- Views: 9691