Child stomped to death as onlookers draw their... cell phones

[CA_Libertarian]

imported post

Citizen wrote:

CA_Libertarian,

Advocating insurrection or revolution isn't just taboo, its illegal. Its called sedition.

Please refrain from advocating illegal acts on OCDO. John and Mike, co-founders, have made it clear they are working on peaceful change and want the forum to be used only for peaceful change.

My understanding is that advocating it is not illegal - it is 1A protected free speech. Saying I think it's a good idea and actually planning it or doing it is another thing altogether. I'm a peace-loving person. However, when someone else is using force to control you I think responding with force in kind is just.

However, out of respect for the ownership of the forum I will refrain from voicing my opinion on taboo topics - except open carry.

 

[Citizen]

imported post

CA_Libertarian wrote:

Citizen wrote:

CA_Libertarian,

Advocating insurrection or revolution isn't just taboo, its illegal. Its called sedition.

Please refrain from advocating illegal acts on OCDO. John and Mike, co-founders, have made it clear they are working on peaceful change and want the forum to be used only for peaceful change.

My understanding is that advocating it is not illegal - it is 1A protected free speech. Saying I think it's a good idea and actually planning it or doing it is another thing altogether. I'm a peace-loving person. However, when someone else is using force to control you I think responding with force in kind is just.

However, out of respect for the ownership of the forum I will refrain from voicing my opinion on taboo topics - except open carry.

Here is some law on the subject.

http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/usc_sup_01_18_10_I_20_115.html

Section 2383:

Whoever incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States or the laws thereof, or gives aid or comfort thereto, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.

 

[like_the_roman]

imported post

In Yates v. United States, the Supreme Court decided that advocating the overthrow of the government in the abstract was not sedition and thus protected by the First Amendment. For speech to be counted as sedition, the speech must give specific instruction as to how the government was to be overthrown.

Edit: marshaul beat me to it.

 

[marshaul]

imported post

Thanks for the recognition.