Politic assignment
Misheel
Classmatespost.docx1ST Person post:
1.) While I condemn hate speech on every level and the act of spreading racist speech, I do believe that hate speech needs to be protected under the 1st Amendment, because I do not agree with censoring a person’s speech. Hate speech can still be considered free speech which must be protected. During the Civil rights movement, some people accused them of spreading hated and considered it to be hate speech. However, hate speech from white supremacist groups is problematic and should not be protected because it incites violence and is an actual threat to those targeted by that very speech. Below is a link to a good piece from NPR, which featured Nadine Strossen who wrote the book “Hate, why we should resist it with free speech, not censorship.”
2.) I find it difficult to accept the fact that our founding fathers allowed this amendment to be so vague. It’s extremely disappointing and is the very reason why it is up for debate. It is true that we no longer have a militia, and therefore that part of the 2nd Amendment can greatly alter one’s interpretation of what the amendment means. Historically, the intent of the 2nd Amendment was to create compromise and make sure the federal army would not be turned against citizens and allows citizens to establish a collective militia avoid the use of the national military at home. This also strengthened a citizen’s domain over property, which sadly included slaves, and was used to keep slaves from fleeing or organizing a rebellion. I’m quite torn on the debate because on one hand I think it is acceptable to bear arms in the efforts to protect your family and property. However, there should be strict laws and regulations creating limitations around eligibility and the actual type of gun. If you are not in the military there is no need for you to have anything outside of a rifle or small handgun.
Sanders, Sam. Free Speech vs. Hate Speech. It’s Been a Minute with Sam Sanders NPR, 5 June. 2018, https://www.npr.org/2018/06/01/616085863/free-speech-vs-hate-speech
· Freedom of speech refers legal speech as symbol, verbal, or written. Speech can deliberate violence or threat. When one’s way of speech leads to violence, it is considered unlawful. In the case of Brandenburg vs. Ohio, the KKK’s speech implies violence, so it should not be protected by free speech. From the video on Canvas, the description “fighting words” would cause a sense of instant danger (Wilson 2019). Such threatening statements should not be protected when people are triggered by danger. Even though a sense of threat might be a prank; Lives may be at risk. Hate speech can cause anger, and it is protected speech. This means that speech protects individuals from the government which distinguishes the results of punishments (Wilson 2019). I believe that the hate speech by white supremacists should only be protected when it does not incite violence or danger, otherwise it should not be protected.
· Protection of our bodies and lives are essential every day. Anything may happen, yet the risks are likely to occur in the hands of an irresponsible person. The debate of the 2nd Amendment is one that absorbs the nation-as a whole-to argue about. The tragedies occur instantaneously at schools and at random events. The militia image is being painted upon modern society, where massacres involve many innocent lives. I agree that everyone should have a right to protection with strict gun rights. The right to bear arms should be protected under the 2nd I believe that there should be stringent background checks, and applicable fees to renew gun licenses and required trainings. I think the 2nd Amendment means the right to bear arm for protection. This protection forces its way to modern society, where certain criminals are not allowed to ever own any sort of gun. Although its historical reasons exist today, I think the right to bear arms serves great protection during imminent danger or fear for oneself life.
Wilson, Felipe. “Freedom of Speech.” Political Science 1. YouTube. 27, February 2019.Freedom of Speech (Links to an external site.)
