On the other hand, where does speech stop and actions start? Where does liberty stop and mob assault start? Are death threats covered by freedom of speech?
Freedom of speech is an important right and necessary part of true liberty, but the people in the situations in question aren't exactly engaging in reasoned debate.
Speaking of which, "only want liberty for themselves and those they approve of"? Really?
It becomes unlawful when there is credible threat explicitly stated, then there are libel and slander laws. Death threats, when credible, are illegal and justifiably so. See my first post.
And yes, really. See the replies to my post. Note, specifically, the comment regarding votes. I stand by my assertion. The evidence supports it.
"...but the people in the situations in question aren't exactly engaging in reasoned debate."
In this case, I agree. But like "obscenity" or "pornography", determining what is reasonable or not is a slippery slope. Promoting concentration camps? Not reasonable. Protesting military action? Probably reasonable. What about protesting military action against a country that runs concentration camps?
(As North Korea does run these types of prison camps, and the chance of military involvement with the DPRK seems higher than ever, this is not a completely academic scenario)
Freedom of speech is an important right and necessary part of true liberty, but the people in the situations in question aren't exactly engaging in reasoned debate.
Speaking of which, "only want liberty for themselves and those they approve of"? Really?