OFF: Freeedom of Speech

[Ted Jackson]

>>> nickmedford at HOTMAIL.COM 2/14/2006 11:57 AM >>>

Again, this ilustrates the difficulties of trying to apply these simple
formulae to messy, complex situations, since you are in effect saying that
any number of songs, books, casual remarks etc. could be construed
as "incitement" if someone acts in accordance with them. Ever heard the
Dead Kennedys' "Let's Lynch the Landlord"? (great song, btw). Well, if
you've not heard it, the title probably tells you what you need to know for
the purpose of this discussion. So- if someone did indeed lynch their
landlord, and claimed that song had acted as incitement, then what? Now, as
a self-appointed "reasonable man", I would feel that it was obvious that
the song was, like Trev's, a fantasy. But would twelve other "reasonable
men" make the same call? You seem to be saying that within your framework,
you'd be unable to disagree with them if they found there had been an act
of incitement. For an arch-libertarian this is rather problematic, surely?

The very thing happened to Judas Priest.  Some kid who was a big fan killed
himself and the parents tried to sue because they said the lyrics to a song
advocated suicide...

In this case, it couldn't even be proved that the song said anything about
suicide, but the judge said, essentially, that even if it had, the band
wouldn't be responsible, as the song was a work of fantasy...

It was quite clear that the parents had been manipulated by lawyers
hoping for a big payday...


tj