Thread: Is free speech grounds for a search?

Originally Posted by Evil_inKarlate

I'm allowed to say I don't like Obama. That's freedom of speech.

I doctored up your post a little bit because I think you're throwing way too much in to the "freedom of speech" pot.

You're allowed to say (just about) anything you want and the government isn't allowed to make laws prohibiting or curtailing your right to say what you want.

THAT is freedom of speech.

He's not allowed to throw me in jail if I do. But to take things to an extreme, is he allowed to have my taxes audited, thereby wasting a lot of my time and perhaps putting my job in jeopardy? Is he allowed to have the IRS play super-hard-ball in the process, freezing my finances, perhaps dragging my name through the mud, and thus jeopardizing my marriage? Can he have the company I work for audited as well, perhaps with subtle hints that things would go easier if I were unemployed? Can he apply political pressure on local officials via approval/rejection of various grants etc so that my property taxes are maximized, I'm more likely to face prosecution for minor infractions rather than the more customary fines, etc? Can he influence various levels of government to reduce my kids' college financial aid? And/or to look the other way in the event there are any legal infractions made against me or mine?

Doing any or all of these things is certainly representative of misconduct at a minimum and probably goes so far as to violate one or more laws.

But in no case do any of these actions constitute passing a law that makes it illegal for you to say what you want, which is what the 1st Amendment protectes you against.

How is having my life ruined for speaking out any better than being jailed for speaking out?

I'm not arguing that it's better or worse. I'm simply saying that it's different.

President Obama could hire some union thug to murder you for speaking out against him too. Is that a violation of your freedom of speech? It would shut you up a lot quicker and a lot more permenantly than having the IRS audit you.

Or is it something different? Like maybe conspiracy to murder?

You see what I mean?

Just because several things (passing a law, illegally manipulating the government, hiring a hitman) might all have the same effect (shutting you up) they're not all violations of the same law.

They're all illegal and they're all bullshit in an ostensibly free society, but they're not "the same thing".

Originally Posted by John Drake

Anybody can be investigated for anything by anyone, as long as no use is made of the information. Indeed, in the US I can make use of the info, even harmful use and it doesn't even have to be true, just so long as it can't be proven I MEANT to do you harm with it

By the logic you're expressing I can't report news or history or anything at all, it might "intimidate" the subject.

Would that investigation include taking photographs? Like say you took photographs of a policeman on duty?

There are a lot of points and comments to respond to so let me simply say this, my question was very specific...

If an American citizen is targeted for an investigation solely on the basis of that individual's public statements (none of which could be reasonably construed as to be at all threatening), then were the civil rights of that individual compromised?

If I had wanted to say that United States foreign policy has been responsible for more deaths worldwide than all other governments combined... then I would have said that...

In fact, I just want to talk about what constitutes free speech? And when is that line crossed? I don't mean what specific combination of letters, I mean, a call to violence? Support for violence? Looking like they might be violent? What about being highly critical of the United States government?

But now I'd like to take it a step further and ask, if an American citizen is accused of a crime, what rights do they still have? What if an American citizen is guilty of a crime? What if a drug dealer gets out of jail and decides that he will never touch any drugs ever again? Does that individual have the same rights as other Americans? Can that individual be given a loan? Can that individual apply to any job they want? Can that individual apply for financial assistance to go to school? Before you wonder about that last one the answer is no, if you were convicted of a crime that is a legal reason for someone to deny you a loan.

And before anyone else jumps down my throat with accusations, assumptions, or whatever, I'd just like to say that we all probably agree more than we disagree here... I just think everyone, from tv actors to politicians, everyone would be better with a little more freedom of speech.

Someone made the intelligent point that with my logic people couldn't report the news, which isn't really true...

You can say anything you god damned like, but yes, if someone interprets it to be threatening then they have the right to go to the police and say there is threatening speech out there. If the cop decides to make a case out of it then I guess there was a case there. A similar analogy would be given that fouls are illegal in most sports, nobody would be able to play any sports because so many things could be interpreted as a foul. But actually people do play sports, and the referees usually do a great job.

Anyway, I'm sure I could be doing something much more productive with my time, like astronomy, I wonder if astronomers are allowed to make reports without risking investigation... Well, there was that one global warming scientist... Crap, I did it again... Peace out y'all...

Just because I'm still here and I just thought of it, obviously the United States HAS NOT been responsible for more deaths worldwide than all other governments combined, that would be nuts... The U.S. has done immeasurable good in the world through its foreign aid, investments, and yes even our military presence at times... I just wanted to make the point that I have the right to say that...

Additionally, yes, police investigations happen all the time and they are usually quite benign... But my original question is the same...

Also, did anyone else catch the Ref's call during the 2010 World Cup? U.S.A. vs Slovenia, 2010, ref says a foul was committed against Slovenia denying the U.S. a critical goal, but no one seems to know what the heck he is talking about since no fouls were made... Look it up... Now, if I were attending this game, what do you think I would legally be allowed to shout at this guy? Actually screw that... dudes a fucknutter and then some... Yeehaw! Yay Sports!

Originally Posted by .3dontVoteParty

My question tonight is this...

If an American citizen is targeted for a search by the police or FBI simply on the basis of that individual's public statements, does that constitute a violation of that citizens free speech, and a violation of the first amendment?

An example would be if an American citizen went online to a public forum and started criticizing United States policy towards Iran.

At what point does an American citizen cross the line from free speech to possible criminal behavior?

What if no calls to violence are made?

What if there is no support for violence whatsoever?

What if there is no support for any group which supports violence, or even any suggestion of support for committing any crime whatsoever?

If the police or FBI download or install something to your computer that allows them to see what files exist on your hard drive, does that constitute a search?

Even if they go to getawarrant.com: The Leading Warrant Site on the Net or dial 1-800-war-rant first.

Can an individual be targeted for a police or FBI search simply on the basis of that individual's public statements?

Why or why not?

And if so, what kind of speech would the first amendment still protect?

For simple dissension? No search or warrants can be legally issued. That is free speech. Now, if you talk about overthrowing the government or committing or planning other illegal acts, then you should expect a visit from men in black suits with bad attitudes.

Can an individual be targeted based on statements made in public? Fuck yes. It's called self incrimination and you only have a right not to do it if you shut the fuck up. You have the right to remain silent, not the right for your words to not count against you. If you are running your mouth and being a dumbass you will get scrutinized. I don't see anything wrong with that.

Perhaps you could go further into specific examples of searches from internet speech that have actually taken place? Like a practical case to dissect would be tits.

Originally Posted by thanatos144

I guess it all depends on if you wish to be blind to the use of investigations to intimidate others into silence. I would be mighty intimidated if the FBI was searching my life cause I said something about the government. to many seem of the Clinton school of what "is" is.

Why would you be intimidated? You don't have anything to hide do you? I mean, you don't do drugs so there's one thing off the list (i do so an investigation would be shitty for me). You aren't a terrorist either (i mean i'm pretty sure lol). So how would men in suits tossing your shit be anything other than an extreme annoyance to you, mr. law abiding citizen? Annoyance doesn't cause intimidation, threats do. Threats that can be backed up. If you ain't done a thing then wtf are you scared of?

It's like what I get to do when a pig pulls me over these days. I've got a rap sheet as long as your arm so they want to search, every time no matter what. And I let them and laugh my ass off the entire time if I'm not in a hurry. It's good for 15min of amusement if nothing else. If I'm in a hurry I'll be a straight dick (which is my right) but I don't do that often. What's wrong with letting them search? How is that intimidating if you haven't done a thing?

Originally Posted by Evil_inKarlate

I'm allowed to say I don't like Obama. He's not allowed to throw me in jail if I do. That's freedom of speech. But to take things to an extreme, is he allowed to have my taxes audited, thereby wasting a lot of my time and perhaps putting my job in jeopardy? Is he allowed to have the IRS play super-hard-ball in the process, freezing my finances, perhaps dragging my name through the mud, and thus jeopardizing my marriage? Can he have the company I work for audited as well, perhaps with subtle hints that things would go easier if I were unemployed? Can he apply political pressure on local officials via approval/rejection of various grants etc so that my property taxes are maximized, I'm more likely to face prosecution for minor infractions rather than the more customary fines, etc? Can he influence various levels of government to reduce my kids' college financial aid? And/or to look the other way in the event there are any legal infractions made against me or mine? How is having my life ruined for speaking out any better than being jailed for speaking out?

I'm not saying all this would happen - It's obviously inappropriate. But is it okay if we just drop one part of that list? Two things? At what point is it 'official prerogative' rather than 'unconstitutional abuse'? Half of those things? 3? How is that 'more legal' or otherwise markedly different than suffering 1, or 2, or 4?

(And although I wouldn't put this past Obama, I'm sure he's not the only high ranking politician, or from the only party, that could conceivably do things along these lines.)

It's all about what you can prove. If you can prove impropriety in court (like someone fucking with you out of spite) then you're fine. But you won't be able to do that now will you? WHy? because cya is the order of the day.

Originally Posted by John Drake

You could do any of those things. You could hire a hit man to just kill the guy, but in neither case had you better be caught, for you will be going to jail for a long time.

the gov has assassins on hand. They don't need hire to anyone.

Originally Posted by .3dontVoteParty

There are a lot of points and comments to respond to so let me simply say this, my question was very specific...

If an American citizen is targeted for an investigation solely on the basis of that individual's public statements (none of which could be reasonably construed as to be at all threatening), then were the civil rights of that individual compromised?

If I had wanted to say that United States foreign policy has been responsible for more deaths worldwide than all other governments combined... then I would have said that...

In fact, I just want to talk about what constitutes free speech? And when is that line crossed? I don't mean what specific combination of letters, I mean, a call to violence? Support for violence? Looking like they might be violent? What about being highly critical of the United States government?

But now I'd like to take it a step further and ask, if an American citizen is accused of a crime, what rights do they still have? What if an American citizen is guilty of a crime? What if a drug dealer gets out of jail and decides that he will never touch any drugs ever again? Does that individual have the same rights as other Americans? Can that individual be given a loan? Can that individual apply to any job they want? Can that individual apply for financial assistance to go to school? Before you wonder about that last one the answer is no, if you were convicted of a crime that is a legal reason for someone to deny you a loan.

And before anyone else jumps down my throat with accusations, assumptions, or whatever, I'd just like to say that we all probably agree more than we disagree here... I just think everyone, from tv actors to politicians, everyone would be better with a little more freedom of speech.

Someone made the intelligent point that with my logic people couldn't report the news, which isn't really true...

You can say anything you god damned like, but yes, if someone interprets it to be threatening then they have the right to go to the police and say there is threatening speech out there. If the cop decides to make a case out of it then I guess there was a case there. A similar analogy would be given that fouls are illegal in most sports, nobody would be able to play any sports because so many things could be interpreted as a foul. But actually people do play sports, and the referees usually do a great job.

Anyway, I'm sure I could be doing something much more productive with my time, like astronomy, I wonder if astronomers are allowed to make reports without risking investigation... Well, there was that one global warming scientist... Crap, I did it again... Peace out y'all...

About the bolded: If a person has committed no crime (no threats or construed threats) and is investigated based on dissent then that is bullshit. No judge worth the name would give a warrant to search a simple dissenter's place. That's so against the law (spirit and letter) that it's not even funny. If this has been going on, please bring it to our attention so we can get pissed off as fuck and gather torches and pitchforks for a mob to rectify the injustice caused by violating the Law of the land.