Petition to charge Carly Fiorina with incitement of terrorism

[Tarc]

I realize that it is a largely symbolic gesture, but it would be amazingly nice to see this get enough steam to catch the daily news cycle. Fiorina in particular has rested her campaign on waging a war of terror with Planned Parenthood.

https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/department-justice-shall-seek-arrest-prosecution-carly-fiorina-soliciting-crime-violence

[RGinNJ]

1. Signed

[ruffburr]

2. The Whole Republican Party-

Is responsible they All have been pushing fear and hate as their Platform hate Hispanics, Black people, indigenous Indian, Middle eastern immigrants, Liberals. You Name it they hate it, Sick ,Sick, People these Republicans.

[GGJohn]

3. Sorry, but I don't sign worthless, do nothing petitions.

I save my signatures for a worthwhile cause that might actually get something positive done.

[starroute]

4. And how do you tell the difference?

I've backed off from signing every petition that comes down the pike because they just seem to get more junk email coming through. But these White House ones don't do that and they might possibly catch someone's attention. So how do you know ahead of time which ones are worthwhile and which aren't?

[SickOfTheOnePct]

6. My personal guage is

whether or not the petition is asking for something that is even possible. In this case, the answer would be no, this isn't legally possible.

Free speech and all that stuff.

[Tarc]

7. Free speech does not cover telling someone to commit acts of violence

By driving the "abortion providers are murdering babies and selling their parts" message to their constituents day after day, month after month, they are whipping up a culture of fear and paranoia. Conservative voters are backed into a corner, with they only way suggested they can move forward to save the innocent babies is to stop the murderers themselves.

Both the doer of the deed and the goader to the deed are responsible here.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

8. Fiorna didn't tell anyone to commit acts of violence

That's the standard. You may not like it, but there it is.

Is Fiorina morally responsible for the deaths? Perhaps. Legally responsible? Laughable.

[Tarc]

9. Well, your inability to go after the heart of the problem is duly noted

[SickOfTheOnePct]

11. I believe in the First Amendment

Sorry that you don't.

[Manifestor_of_Light]

14. Incitement to violence is NOT protected speech.

Hate speech is not protected speech either. There are limits to the First Amendment.

[hill2016]

17. incitement to violence

has to be imminent.

[Manifestor_of_Light]

18. Look up hate radio's relationship to stochastic terrorism.

Long-term hate speech on mass media amounts to incitement to violence. It just takes longer than "immediately". And creates plausible deniability for the speaker "Oh just because I called him 'Killer Tiller' all the time doesn't make me responsible for Dr. Tiller's murder" is basically what Bill O'Reilly on Fox Snooze said.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

24. Legally it does not

amount to incitement to violence.

[Nye Bevan]

26. You need to read up on the First Amendment.

It's a lot broader than you think it is.

[GGJohn]

21. WTF!!!

Hate speech is NOT protected speech?
It most certainly is protected speech in the US.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

22. Hate speech most certainly is protected speech

There are no hate speech laws in the United States.

And while incitement to violence is not protected, it has a very specific meaning. Giving speeches about Planned Parenthood being baby killers the sell baby parts does not fall within the definition of incitement to violence.

[Manifestor_of_Light]

27. No, but it's stochastic terrorism.

The odds are good that out of several million people hearing this sort of hate speech, one or two gun nuts will take it into their own hands to "right the wrongs" that they perceive, like legal abortion, and they believe Carly Fiorina's lies.

So it's incitement to violence as a practical matter in the real world, because it will reach SOME angry white guy with a gun.

Stochastic is the statistics part. It's statistically probable that some very small percentage of the listeners will act on the hate speech.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

28. Which still doesn't fall under incitement when it comes to legal charges

Meaning that the petition is a waste of time, since it's asking for something that can't legally be done.

[Manifestor_of_Light]

31. yes the petition is a waste of time

But the shootings are a statistical probability.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

20. You moved the goalpost between the title and the contents.

"Telling someone to commit acts of violence" is one thing. It can be fairly rigorously defined, and is not legal.

"Whipping up a culture of fear and paranoia" is a different thing. It's much more in the eye of the beholder, and it is legal, and it's quite important that it stays that way.

[starroute]

23. I see it as more about public shaming

I realize that incitement isn't a crime in the US unless imminent violence is involved -- and that charges of conspiracy generally require at least some kind of tenuous relationship. But to me, that simply makes the petition mechanism all the more important, since it's obvious nothing can ever be done through the legal system.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

5. Yep

Let's sign a petition to do something that isn't even legally possible.

[LanternWaste]

15. You do however, allege a most creative pretense that you know the difference.

You do however, allege a most creative pretense that you know the difference.

[Nye Bevan]

10. Oh please. What a ridiculous waste of time.

Even if somebody stood in Times Square with a megaphone every day for 10 years ranting about how abortion doctors are murderous baby-killers, and some nut was inspired to shoot a Planned Parenthood doctor as a result, the guy with the megaphone would be guilty of absolutely no crime. And Fiorina didn't even do that, she just commented on some deceptively edited videos.

If you want to do something productive instead, go and make a donation to Planned Parenthood.

https://secure.ppaction.org/site/Donation2?df_id=12913&12913.donation=form1&s_src=PPorgMobile_c3

[Tarc]

12. Your inability to go after the heart of the problem is duly noted

[SickOfTheOnePct]

13. Rather than trying to pontificate

about something of which you obviously know nothing, why don't you educate us and tell us what YOU believe the heart of the problem is?

It seems from perspective that for you, the heart of problem is the First Amendment.

[Tarc]

19. Curing your ignorance is not a concern of mine

Reference the classic "yelling fire in a crowded theater" example of where the line on free speech ends

[SickOfTheOnePct]

25. Falsely yelling "fire" in a theater

causes imminent danger to the occupants of the theater. Nothing at all like giving speeches.

And anyone that is trying to have people sign a petition to have someone charged with something that isn't illegal shouldn't be calling anyone else "ignorant".

[GGJohn]

32. False analogy,

you most certainly can yell fire in a theater if you reasonably believe that there is a fire.

[LanternWaste]

16. The one doesn't deny the other... regardless of whether our biases blind us to that or not.

If you want to do sonething (sic) productive instead, go and make a donation to Planned Parenthood. "

The one doesn't deny the other... regardless of whether our biases blind us to that or not.

[loyalsister]

29. Overkill

I think we should shift away from a crime paradigm toward social and civic responsibility.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

30. Well said, and I agree n/t

[Reter]

33. Never would I ever sign that

Fiorina is entitled to an opinion, even if you disagree with it. She never said to shoot anyone, nor did she come close to implying it. What are we Nazis and commies now arresting people for speech?

[davidpdx]

34. While I am tempted to sign it, I'll take a pass

I sign tons of petitions for different organizations and causes. Unless some connection can be made between Fiorina and the terrorist, there's nothing the authorities can do. I DO believe what she did was morally wrong, but not legally wrong. She is a crackpot for sure. Personally I don't see her lasting beyond the New Hampshire primary. She tends to have a diarrhea of the mouth problem.