View Single Post
Old 10-11-2012, 10:50   #295
Lifetime Membership
Unfair Facist
Dragoon44's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 24,120
Originally Posted by Gallium View Post
That is not what he said/implied. From what I gather, he refers to the punishments available to remedy those who have been slandered/etc, not the (any) restrictions which may be in place to prevent the slanderous act in the 1st place.

Because really, there are very few mechanisms in place to "prevent" abuse of free speech, when compared to the proliferation of the means of free speech.

- not arguing anything else.

Those "remedies" are laws which define and restrict the limits of "freedom of speech" and "freedom of the Press".

That is clearly outside of an absolutist interpretation of the 1st amendment. To maintain that the first amendment is not absolute but the second is reveals an inconsistent interpretation methodology which is clearly based on self interest rather than sound interpretation principles or the historical record.
“Right is still right, even if nobody is doing it. And wrong is still wrong, even if everybody is doing it.”—Texas Ranger saying.
Dragoon44 is offline   Reply With Quote