Social White students arrested after shouting the N word in Uconn

[Jesus H. Sherdog]

Not only is this probably disturbing the peace and harassment, but calling people racist names can also be construed as “fighting words.” None of which are constitutionally protected, for good reason.

 

[Lord Coke]

It's a 1949 law banning ridicule based on a variety of characteristics such as religion, race, nationality.

I think they're going to have a hard time winning this since the article says that the two students were playing a game where they intentionally shouted racial epithets or other vulgar terms at people. If they intentionally switched to racial epithets specifically because they saw people of racial backgrounds then they're using the game to ridicule people based on race and it's a pretty clear violation of the black letter law.

I don't think a free speech defense wins anything here considering that hate crime modifiers are allowed and this is far less restrictive than those. I haven't been wrong on this yet but we'll see.

EDIT: Connecticut has convicted at least 1 person per year under this law going to back to 2000, including someone who made anti-white insults.

I am not on board with shouting at a private citizen to the point it would case a reasonable person issues. That has to be some noise or harassment ordinance at issue. If you are outside my house shouting so I can't go to sleep (the last part I don't know if that is the case here) then you are causing injury to me. This incident was at someone's house where they were trying to sleep or study. I have some issues with targeting the speech because it is insulting a creed, race or religion but that said ALL harassing speech like this against a private citizen directly adjacent to where they live should be allowed to be restricted.

I can see this being constitutional under a time place and manner restriction.

That said if this were at a town hall or public park then I am board with shouting the N word or cracker or whatever else all you want.

 

[Rational Poster]

I guess if the shoes fits, I ought to wear it.

Kind of grinds my gears a bit that I got carded for something aimed at you as a joke for something you weren't even aware of and didn't even report yourself, I could see if you were offended personally but it was clearly a joke in the context of the thread.

 

[Jorge Luis Borges]

Yup.

This thread is the perfect example of a few posters so eager to rush in and condemn 'bad liberals' that they do not take the time to properly assess the issue or understand it.

i don't know if a single poster in this thread would argue for true unlimited free speech where even the oft trotted example of 'yelling fire in a crowded theatre' was protected, and once you accept that limitation the issue becomes about where the line is drawn, and not free speech or not.

Free speech is not really a thing and that is not a partisan position.

So your argument is that because freedom of speech is not absolute, there is no such thing as real freedom of speech? That's an ignorant and impractical position to take. Every political freedom has real world limitations, but those limits are usually drawn quite narrowly.

Prior restraint is considered in almost every case too stringent a prohibition on speech. Seems like that's what we have on our hands here. Jailing people for ridicule is an abrogation of First Amendment rights.

Two white guys shouting down an apartment complex filled with blacks using the n word....but there was no fight? I think theres more to this story. Maybe they just got robbed by black people...who knows.

Instead of recording and calling the cops the blacks should've taught them a lesson.

Sounds like a bunch of cowards shitting in apartment complex.

whiskey tango foxtrot?

 

[TheLastSpartan]

I think theres more to this story. Maybe they just got robbed by black people...who knows.

 

[TJ Swagger]

I don't agree with the speech, but those students should still have free speech rights even if it's to call someone a bad name.

 

[EL CORINTHIAN]

Kind of grinds my gears a bit that I got carded for something aimed at you as a joke for something you weren't even aware of and didn't even report yourself, I could see if you were offended personally but it was clearly a joke in the context of the thread.

You should've been arrested for that.

 

[Rational Poster]

You should've been arrested for that.

Not quite the same thing but I can understand why your simple mind would conflate the two.

 

[Jesus H. Sherdog]

If they were charged with either of those things then we wouldn't be discussing it. According to the OP, they were charged with ridicule on account of creed, religion, color, denomination, nationality or race. Since that's a daily occurrence, and covered under free speech, I feel like there needs to be more to the law.

Fighting words are not covered under free speech, which includes inflammatory racist statements.

You’d be cool with people posted up outside your place screaming “haole!” aggressively at you? Lol I think you’d grab a gun

 

[Cubo de Sangre]

Fighting words are not covered under free speech, which includes inflammatory racist statements.

That should be the charge then, if that's what this is.

 

[Cubo de Sangre]

You’d be cool with people posted up outside your place screaming “haole!” aggressively at you? Lol I think you’d grab a gun

I'd call you pigs.

 

[Jesus H. Sherdog]

That should be the charge then, if that's what this is.

I’m sure it is. The name of the statute will vary according to location (for example we don’t have any “battery” statute here in Hawaii, it’s just levels of “assault” statutes). But whatever it’s called I’m sure the description of fighting words are included in the description of said statute. “Fighting words” is the term the Supreme Court used way back when.

 

[Jesus H. Sherdog]

I'd call you pigs.

Lmao ok I did actually laugh out loud at this one

 

[Cubo de Sangre]

I’m sure it is.

The charge is "ridicule".

 

[AlexDB9]

Different culture, hard to judge.

Hehe well just from general life experience Latinos and blacks have been the most racist people ive ever come across. Maybe white people just keep it to themselves or out of the company of close friends. Everyone’s a little racist though, that’s just life. When someone tells me they are “im not racist at all...never have never will be.” That’s when my alarm goes off

 

[Slick_36]

I’m sure it is. The name of the statute will vary according to location (for example we don’t have any “battery” statute here in Hawaii, it’s just levels of “assault” statutes). But whatever it’s called I’m sure the description of fighting words are included in the description of said statute. “Fighting words” is the term the Supreme Court used way back when.

Connecticut seems that be pretty lenient when it comes to free speech and fighting words. I don't think they will get charged for that specifically since they were just trolling without intent to physically hurt anyone.

 

[Jorge Luis Borges]

The charge is "ridicule".

Ridicule in the 3rd Degree with intent to poke fun

 

[Jesus H. Sherdog]

Connecticut seems that be pretty lenient when it comes to free speech and fighting words. I don't think they will get charged for that specifically since they were just trolling without intent to physically hurt anyone.

Could be. I don’t know anything about Connecticut to be fair. But isn’t the point of trolling it get a reaction? On the internet it’s one thing but trolling people in person can wind up with you getting your jaw punched loose. Which is the point of “fighting words.”

 

[Falsedawn]

They are unconstitutional if challenged.

We locked someone up for assault and also charged them with disorderly conduct for using profanity. That charge was thrown out because it was found unconstitutional back in the early 2000s. Same thing would/should apply to other 'offensive language' unless there is another charge that goes with it. So I'd guess the mere utterance of an 'offensive word' is not enough to satisfy any court.

See post 6.

Be more upset about it.

 

[Slick_36]

Could be. I don’t know anything about Connecticut to be fair. But isn’t the point of trolling it get a reaction? On the internet it’s one thing but trolling people in person can wind up with you getting your jaw punched loose. Which is the point of “fighting words.”

A guy recently was cleared of disorderly conduct there after threatening two water company employees by saying he was going to get a gun and kill them. They said he didn't have immediate access to a gun and as city employees they should be trained to deal with angry people. But it may be different since these were people in their homes.