Persuasive Speech On Public Safety

This year’s election alone has brought about many emotions and deep rooted feelings that have not come out in years. Hate speech and actions carried out because of hate speech has cause a deep division in American culture. Groups like “Black Lives Matter”, “All Lives Matter”, and “Alt-Right” are all under fire for things that have been said or done in the names of these groups. There has been terrorist attacks in the names of religious groups whom believe that a newspaper or group has insulted their religion, beliefs, and gods. Not to mention our own President Elect of the United States, Donald Trump, has been accused of fueling much of the hate speech we see today. This begs the question, should freedom of speech have any restrictions or be limited in any way, or is that unconstitutional? To look at this we must first identify what “Freedom of Speech” is as defined in the constitution and how it relates to current issues in the world and in America, then I will talk about some situations where regulation is already put in place in America, lastly we will look at some situations where I believe freedom of speech could use some clarification or restriction.

“Congress shall make no law…abridging the freedom of speech.” (Jacobus 93). Just like the Freedom of Religion there are limitations placed on the Freedom of Speech so that other people’s rights aren’t compromised. For example, people are not allowed to present true threats, or “fighting words” to another person. This restriction was put into play in the court case of Chaplinsky vs. New Hampshire. The Court ruled that “fighting words, by their very utterance inflict injury or tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace and may be punished consistent with the First Amendment.” (Ruane 3-4). In this case if someone was to use “fighting words” which is their perceived freedom of speech, it would not only violate the law, it could violate someone’s freedom of pursue life, liberty, and happiness. With this, we can see that freedom is not always as it

Throughout history, the United States Constitution has been put to the test over the issue of free speech. The First Amendment states, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." Even though free speech is one of the core American values proudly embedded in each citizen, some poopAmericans find themselves torn between whether or not to limit the freedom of speech on behalf of hate speech. Most law-abiding citizens disagree with hate speech, but must realize even speech that promotes hate, racism, and even crime

As of today, the supreme court has interpreted the first amendment to say “The First Amendment provides no protection for obscenity, child pornography, or speech that constitutes what has become widely known as “fighting words.” The First Amendment provides less than full protection to commercial speech, defamation (libel and slander), speech that may be harmful to children, speech broadcast on radio and television (as opposed to speech transmitted via cable or the Internet), and public employees’ speech.”(Ruane, Kathleen Ann) with this loose definition in mind many people have begun to think whether freedom of speech should be further limited to several cases seen in recent years such as what happened in Charlottesville, Virginia.

The first amendment, the right of freedom of speech is one of the most important classic fantasy to almost anyone living in the United States, building the foundation of our nation. This right gives us plenty of different opportunities to express our opinions and political viewpoints on any issues in America. But it comes with a price, people have been protesting multiple different events trying to prevent people from expressing opposing opinions or political viewpoints on that has issues in America. For the minority of people, expressing a different opinion should be protected no matter how controversial or insensitive it may be.

How much we value the right of free speech is put to its severest test when the speaker is someone we disagree with most. Speech that deeply offends our morality or is hostile to our way of life warrants the same constitutional protection as other speech because the right of free speech is indivisible. However, in recent years, the right to free speech is one of legal and moral ambiguity-What separates offensive free speech from dangerous or threatening (and presumably illegal) hate speech? Under the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, every American citizen should be entitled to the right of free expression, thought, and speech. While free speech, including racial, sexist, or otherwise prejudiced remarks, must protected no matter

The freedom of speech has never been free to everyone. Many Americans grow up with this saying and feel it to be true. Suzanne Nossel wrote her article “How we communicate is changing. So should the way we think about free speech”, published in August of 2017 in The Washington Post, and she argues that “students who seek to shut down speech that offends - through calls to disinvite speakers, punish offensive remarks or shout down opponents - have been dismissed as coddled, unenlightened, entitled, anti-intellectual, dogmatic and infantile.” (Nossel, 2017, p. 1). Nossel builds her credibility with facts and reputable sources, citing convincing facts and statistics, and successfully employing emotional appeals.

With all the freedom that we have, we must remember that Freedom of Speech is not absolute. The United States Supreme Court ruled that the United States government has the right to limit speech. The question then becomes, “Where do we cross the line with free speech?” What type of speech is “impermissible”? According to government of the United States, offensive speech such as libel, obscenity, and fighting words that may incite violence should be limited or banned.

It started nine months when a young 16 year old girl found out that she was going to have a baby. She scared about people finding out and about what her parent are going to say about their new grandchild that is on the way and that will be her sooner then she thinks. *** She is now three weeks away from giving birth to the baby she has kept a secret form everyone even her parents. One day at school wearing the largest sweat shirt she asked if she can be excused, because she needs to pee for the million time. Once she gets to the girls restroom she know something is totally wrong and she start having contractions and the baby is coming now in the high school bathroom. A few moments later you here crying from a little baby girl. The 16 year old

The Freedom of speech is very expansive filled with loop holes and with this comes many cases that have change the American history. The rights of free speech, free express for all such as gender, race, national origin, sexual orientation, ethnicity, religion, or disability has help to encourage society development and helps to encourage equality for everyone. It is always bad intention to use the right of to fuel hate, prejudice and other crimes of violence. For example, Brandenburg v. Ohio, a case that challenged the speech of individual speech that was exhibit imminent lawless action or used words to incite or direct an action.

Have you served in a war? Has your father or mother served in a war? How about your grandpa? As we honor those who have served we typically do so by standing for the pledge of allegiance or star spangled banner. We say thank you to our war heroes or we go and visit them and listen to their stories. In this paper I will be discussing why NFL players should not be allowed to kneel for the flag. Although the NFL players have the right to peacefully protest, they should find a different way than kneeling as it shows disrespect towards the flag also active duty military and veterans, it teaches young children this behavior is okay, what they are protesting has nothing to do with the flag and there are many different ways to get their message out.

Marjory Stoneman High School, Florida, Italy High School, Texas, Marshall County High School, Kentucky and more to name. These are the schools where recent shootings have occurred. The New York TImes stated that 66 people were killed and at least 110 injured in 2017- 2018. Even though schools have been taking action and doing helpful procedure’s, it's not enough. Schools should be more involved then they are now, in case of a real shooting were to occur at our school and must take the right steps to safety.

For example, using a leftover coffee can for loose nails or screws, or even washing and reusing a plastic zip-loc bag instead of throwing it in the garbage. Thrift shopping is a way of reusing someone else’s unwanted goods. As I spoke about in an earlier speech about thrifting, I included many locations and ways to thrift, also the benefits to the shopper and the donator. One place in particular was shopping at the local boys and girls club. I personally shop there, keeping my eyes open for a good deal. For example, the pair of jeans that I am wearing today was purchased from this store just a few months ago. I paid only $8.00 for this pair of Lucky Jeans and according to buckle.com, a retailer for lucky jeans the retail price is $99.00 that is a savings to me of $91.00.I am not the type to worry about name brands, but quality usually does cost more. If I can get a quality pair of jeans at a fraction on the price, I am glad to shop at the thrift store. I am thankful to the person that made the donation of the lucky jeans and they can benefit from that donation. According to the IRS webpage, IRS. Gov it explains that an individual can donate items like clothing, household furniture and furnishings, a car or boat, even taxidermy. The donations are appraised, by the donator, and recorded. At the time of filing taxes if the donation equals at least $500 for the year, the donator may take advantage of the

Freedom of speech should have some limitations. The American people should have the right to say whatever they want, but to an extent. Whether it is on signs or verbally some things should not be expressed. The United States is well known for being “the home of the free,” but some people take their freedom a bit too far. People can burn flags, protest at military funerals, even use the “n” word and watching pornography in libraries.

Freedom of speech is limited in almost every area of a person's life. For instance, a tennis player will be fined heavily during a tennis tournament if he expresses himself with foul language on the tennis court. This obviously curtails the right of the tennis player to express himself freely, but it protects the decency of the spectators because certain forms of language are not proper for some situations. If a person goes to the movies and begins to carry on a conversation it is most probable that security will ask him to leave the theater. By restricting his freedom of speech, the movie theater has protected the right of the person who went to enjoy a movie. The American courts have stated that the freedom of speech would not protect a man from falsely yelling "fire" in a theater and so creating a clear and present danger (Stone, Seidman). Therefore, the freedom of speech cannot be abused.