The fighting words doctrine, as established in legal precedent, permits regulation of speech that directly incites imminent violence or sexual violence toward specific individuals or groups, but does not extend to mere offensive speech; the First Amendment protects the right to express unpopular or offensive ideas, and laws that criminalize speech based on potential offense rather than direct threat of violence are constitutionally problematic.
Inmersión profunda
Prerrequisito
- No hay datos disponibles.
Próximos pasos
- No hay datos disponibles.
Inmersión profunda
Fighting words and the Destruction of the ConstitutionAñadido:
Hey there folks, my name's Ryan and I wanted to make a quick video in response to a question I got from one of my regulars.
Uh, I'm not going to mention them all the time, but uh, he knows who he is.
Thank you, buddy. Uh, good question. Um, he showed me the Georgia uh, statute on fighting words, which is going to be involved in the CHUD case, I believe.
I believe that was in Georgia.
Um, and it basically is this open-ended woke wokey-sounding law that basically says if >> [snorts] >> a group of people could could be offended by a word, then they can attack you.
I find it to be utterly absurd.
Here's what fighting words are.
If I am near someone and I tell them I'm going to have it engage in sexual acts with someone that is there in their group or their family or maybe some children of, you know, away away or you know, if he says something crazy about like hurting someone like that or threatens violence to the same group of people the those are fighting words.
But the way that law is written saying God bless America is a provocation.
Which leaves you subject to having your head kicked in by by a a low IQ uh overly emotional savage.
It's an absolutely crap law the way it was written. And it should apply directly to threats of sexual violence or violence.
That's it.
Doesn't matter how you feel or anyone else feels about a word I say.
That doesn't take away my right to to freedom and safety.
The First Amendment trumps that.
The First Amendment trumps everybody's feelings.
And if it doesn't by law, it should.
And I mean, look, all of our constitutional rights have been taken away. So, I'm not surprised if if it's not held up in court. Uh but that doesn't mean that it's not messed up.
God bless you, buddy.
Videos Relacionados
BREAKING: Judge Kathleen Issues Emergency Arrest Warrant After Trump Defies Order
Frontora
2K views•2026-05-29
8 Hidden Things About Mackenzie Shirilla Netflix's 'The Crash' Didn't Show You
MarvelousVideos
2K views•2026-05-28
MP Garnett Genuis warns Canada’s MAiD system has ‘gone too far’
WesternStandard
187 views•2026-05-28
Trump Impeachment STORM IGNITES as 29 Judges Vote for Conviction!!
DanielBriefDaily
2K views•2026-06-02
THE STREISAND EFFECT AT BARBARA STREISAND’S HOUSE! - First Amendment Audit
KULTNEWS
1K views•2026-05-30
EBK Jaaybo Won’t Be Going To Trial?! | Criminal Lawyer Reacts
floridadefenseteam
404 views•2026-05-29
OFFICE HOURS: The Theft of Black Brilliance... AI and Intellectual Property (w/ Lisa E. Davis)
marclamonthillnetwork
2K views•2026-05-29
सुप्रीम कोर्ट में 5 जजों का शपथग्रहण समारोह #supremecourt #judges #oathceremony #shorts #ytshorts
Bharat24Liv
4K views•2026-06-02











