File: softcore.swf-(7.64 MB, 480x320, Loop)
[_] Anonymous 10/04/14(Sat)23:00 No.2552459
>> [_] Anonymous 10/04/14(Sat)23:01 No.2552462
10/10
>> [_] Anonymous 10/04/14(Sat)23:13 No.2552475
that's an illegal arrest.
>> [_] Anonymous 10/04/14(Sat)23:16 No.2552476
>>2552475
its fergerson all over again
>> [_] Anonymous 10/04/14(Sat)23:23 No.2552484
From "Univesal Remote"
>> [_] Anonymous 10/04/14(Sat)23:26 No.2552485
>>2552475
Public indecency. Should have ordered him to stop first, though.
In my glorious country you can be arrested for up to 24 hours for no reason.
>> [_] Anonymous 10/04/14(Sat)23:27 No.2552486
>>2552476
top kek
>> [_] Anonymous 10/04/14(Sat)23:34 No.2552487
>>2552485
Freedom of Speech, motherfucker.
>> [_] Anonymous 10/04/14(Sat)23:58 No.2552507
>>2552487
The first amendment does not protect obscenity.
>> [_] Anonymous 10/05/14(Sun)00:02 No.2552511
we're gonna need sauce guys
>> [_] Anonymous 10/05/14(Sun)00:19 No.2552523
>>2552507
Then explain the westboro baptist church you fucking retard.
Cops have been wanting to arrest them but they cant do anything to them
>> [_] Anonymous 10/05/14(Sun)00:20 No.2552524
Needs more dead babies.
>> [_] Anonymous 10/05/14(Sun)00:31 No.2552528
>>2552523
What? I'm discussing obscenity.
WBC are a bunch of idiots, sure, but they're not doing anything in a manner that violates the
Miller test.
Here's a link to get you started, sorry I couldn't find one under simple english:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_free_speech_exceptions#Obscenity
>> [_] Anonymous 10/05/14(Sun)00:32 No.2552530
>>2552528
They are screaming the word fags and fuck. Thats obscenity
>> [_] Anonymous 10/05/14(Sun)00:36 No.2552533
>>2552530
But the third aspect of the Miller test keeps their actions from being obscene:
"Whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific
value."
They are wrong, and very rude about it, but they are voicing opinions on matters of high social
and political importance.
>> [_] Anonymous 10/05/14(Sun)00:42 No.2552537
>>2552459
freedom of speech is dead.
>> [_] Anonymous 10/05/14(Sun)00:43 No.2552538
>>2552533
You could argue anything has a sociopolitical relevance these days. This guy for example could
say he's just breaking down dialect barriers and standing against pervasive censorship issues
that exist in many political, industrial, and academic structures.
>> [_] Anonymous 10/05/14(Sun)00:43 No.2552539
>>2552511
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qNYNMC68kq4&index=1&list=FL9ZgDy3ucRTgRzk4BNwaGuQ
>> [_] Anonymous 10/05/14(Sun)00:53 No.2552546
>>2552538
The video, as a whole, is a parody which as you say embodies such an argument.
The action being depicted though, singing profanity in public without the appropriate context of
social debate, would be obscenity. Adding on excuses later would probably be insufficient defense.
>> [_] Anonymous 10/05/14(Sun)01:02 No.2552551
>>2552539
sir, i love you
>> [_] Anonymous 10/05/14(Sun)01:12 No.2552557
>>2552507
You are correct, but they have to prove that your speech is intended as obscenity, parody and
statements of belief are still protected. You can thank Larry Flynt for that. This is clearly
parody.
>> [_] Anonymous 10/05/14(Sun)01:28 No.2552568
>>2552538
Exactly. You either make it intent based and therefore almost impossible to prove, or action
based and shut down anything with potential merit. Who knew policing expression could be so
complicated?
>> [_] Anonymous 10/05/14(Sun)02:39 No.2552616
>>2552546
Thanks for reminding me that I need to finish watching the zimmerman trail
