Clear and Present Danger Determines If Speech Causes Violence

cases pertaining to the freedom of speech in concern with speech with communist ideals supporting the overthrow of the government. In 1925’s Gitlow V NewYork, Gitlow is charged under the criminal anarchy act due to his communist publications, and in 1927’s Whitney V California, Whitney is charged under the criminal syndicalism act for helping establish the communist labor party of America. The Law The First Amendment of The Constitution which supports freedom of speech and the Fifth Amendment of the

debate in the U.S. currently is what actions and speech are protected by the first amendment. Since there is so much that is not directly defined in the Constitution, there is room for interpretation on whether or not certain it is protected by it. One topic in particular is supporting the terrorist group ISIS. ISIS is a group of Muslim extremist based out of Syria. Their goals are to create a radical extremist state, the caliphate, through religious violence (Abu Mohammed). This group has been shown many

“friends”, asking them to join the sisters in two days at 10 p.m. at a McDonalds near the sister’s apartment for a “night of riot, pillage, and fun”. A secondary message was sent out asking the participants to bring items that could be used as weapons or cause property damage. However, one of the “friends” that the message was sent to turned the postings over to the Salt Lake Police Department. SLCPD officers set up an operation at the scheduled place and time the sister’s

The definition of freedom of speech has many elements that are involved in it because people interpret freedom of speech differently and how far a person can go with their free speech. There have been multiple situations where the public must determine if such speeches or actions are protected or not protected by the First Amendment. Flag burning is among the many situations that the public still debates whether it should be protected or should not be protected by the First Amendment. In order to

the nation tremendously. Violence has also been a hot topic these past few years. Gun shootings, homicides, and overall crimes are consistently being committed and shared on the news. The topic of violence and the discussion of media influencing that violence is extremely intriguing. In 2008, John Murray, a psychologist, wrote in his published book, “Fifty years of research on the effect of TV violence on children leads to the inescapable conclusion that viewing media violence is related to increases

looked to have freedom of religion, speech, prejudice, and have the opportunity to grow as individual without government total control. Is it the idea of freedom that was written in the Bill of Rights found in the Constitution of the United States that attracts people to America? In the paper I will give explain and define the parts of the First Amendment and it freedoms that are endow to all of people the United States. The First

1. Discuss and explain three types of unprotected speech. Unprotected discourse implies discourse that is subjected to directions issued by the administration. It implies discourse that is totally precluded subject to legislative directions. Unprotected Speech: can be arranged into vulgarity, words that beg to be defended, deceitful deception, backing of fast approaching rebellious conduct, and slander. Dangers are additionally regarded as unprotected discourse since they constitute terrorizing.

The tests used by the federal government used to determine if certain types of speech can be censored or banned are as follows. The clear and present danger test which is a test where the government can restrict speech if there is evidence that the speech will cause a clear and present dangerous condition to the public(Bardes&Shelley, 2014, p.122). Direct incitement test protects the advocacy of illegal action under the First Amendment unless imminent action is likely to happen. For Instance, it

the Federal Government should restrict hate speech, and the expressions of hateful ideas, in all its forms, in all places, both public and private. However, it is imperative that hate speech be defined first. Contrary to some opinions, it is possible to accurately define hate speech, because hate speech does not actually have many elusive forms. Hate speech includes fighting words as defined in Chaplinsky vs. New Hampshire, and words that incite violence or aggression towards a specific group based

with power over others, there has been censorship. The act of censoring has been present for