Falsely shouting 'Fire!' in a crowded theatre

[Exi5tentialist]

I think it's ok. People would just sit around looking bemused anyway. And you're not supposed to panic when there's a fire alarm.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Reported.

[amused]

[HomerJay]

I think it's ok. People would just sit around looking bemused anyway. And you're not supposed to panic when there's a fire alarm.

Racist

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-11814894

[Exi5tentialist]

Nice reposte by CH there, but the video doesn't include the bit where he says why he doesn't like the Schenck v. United States judgment exactly.

[mistermack]

Bearing in mind the price of theatre tickets, it should be legal to kick the fucker's ass.

One person's freedom of speech can spoil things for others. You have to limit it when it's wrecking someone else's peace and quiet.

[Audley Strange]

I think it's ok. People would just sit around looking bemused anyway. And you're not supposed to panic when there's a fire alarm.

More than likely you are correct, but you may have noticed there is a difference between actual human behaviour and the terribly inaccurate ideological canards that people use to make their point.

[Exi5tentialist]

Bearing in mind the price of theatre tickets, it should be legal to kick the fucker's ass.

One person's freedom of speech can spoil things for others. You have to limit it when it's wrecking someone else's peace and quiet.

I hadn't thought it would happen during the performance. I was thinking more just before the start, rather than interrupting someone who has already started.

[mistermack]

Bearing in mind the price of theatre tickets, it should be legal to kick the fucker's ass.

One person's freedom of speech can spoil things for others. You have to limit it when it's wrecking someone else's peace and quiet.

I hadn't thought it would happen during the performance. I was thinking more just before the start, rather than interrupting someone who has already started.

You're too nice for this world.

[amused]

Nice reposte by CH there, but the video doesn't include the bit where he says why he doesn't like the Schenck v. United States judgment exactly.

I think his argument against it is based on the concept of the illegality (now) of prior restraint. But I suspect that I'm not understanding what you are saying.