Reddit mentions of The First Amendment (Concepts & Insights)

>Oh really? The 1st amendment is pretty clear.
Ah, another person who's not read much about the actual meaning or intent of the First Amendment, nor the history of the Supreme Court's first amendment decisions. There are many forms of speech that are not protected speech under the first amendment. I suggest any number of good books on the subject. State laws on threats and intimidation have been upheld by the SCOTA - several of those books will explain this to you.

> I was giving an example of why threats are meaningless without the action behind them.

Mmm.. I completely understood what you meant. I simply think you're being far too superficial and sophist. I pointed out the difference in the terms of your (rather bad) analogy. Threats are, obviously, not meaningless. Threats are an expression of intent. We frequently make decisions in our lives based on the statements of intent from others. Some people make meaningless threats, others do not. What's more, you don't even think they are meaningless. In this same thread, you say "If someone makes a threat against my life, I will always take it seriously. I'll make sure I have the means to defend myself and when the time comes I'll be able to. To not do so is foolish and naive." Cognitive dissonance much?