Toggle sidebar

The policy and politics of Trumpism

  • HELLO AGAIN, Guest! We are back, live! We're still doing some troubleshooting and maintenance to fix a few remaining issues but everything looks stable now (except front page which we're working on over next day or two)

    Thanks for your patience and support! MUCH appreciated! --Brett (BamaNation)

    if you see any problems - please post them in the Troubleshooting board!

Status
Not open for further replies.
TIDE-HSV said:
The problem is predictability. Recently, at a peace rally in Huntsville's Big Spring Park, a pro-Trump demonstrator showed up parading back and forth with a sign, pulling a handgun out and brandishing it. He was arrested, but, if he had shot someone instead, should the organizer of the rally be liable?
Click to expand...

If the organizer was advocating use of firearms, or was inciting violence in general, and the handgun just happened to be nutjob's weapon of choice, then yes, the organizer should be liable civilly if not criminally.

If the organizer scheduled a speaker he or she knew or should have known would incite similar stuff, yes again.

If the organizer scheduled a speaker he/she had no reason to believe would incite violence, but the speaker surprises everybody and does so anyway, and the organizer makes no attempt to stop it, yes again.

But I would be shocked if any of that actually happened in the real world.

Absent that sort of six standard deviation, off-the-charts behaviors (IOW 99.9999% of cases), no, the organizer should not be personally civilly or criminally liable for actions by miscreants in the audience.
 
4Q Basket Case said:
If the organizer was advocating use of firearms, or was inciting violence in general, and the handgun just happened to be nutjob's weapon of choice, then yes, the organizer should be liable civilly if not criminally.

If the organizer scheduled a speaker he or she knew or should have known would incite similar stuff, yes again.

If the organizer scheduled a speaker he/she had no reason to believe would incite violence, but the speaker surprises everybody and does so anyway, and the organizer makes no attempt to stop it, yes again.

But I would be shocked if any of that actually happened in the real world.

Absent that sort of six standard deviation, off-the-charts behaviors (IOW 99.9999% of cases), no, the organizer should not be personally civilly or criminally liable for actions by miscreants in the audience.
Click to expand...
You do realize you're placing the burden on the organizer of understanding what's going on in the minds of all attendees predicting what might be likely to be "inciting?" It's a slippery slope which I don't think the SCOTUS will enter...
 
  • Like
Reactions: seebell
TIDE-HSV said:
You do realize you're placing the burden on the organizer of understanding what's going on in the minds of all attendees predicting what might be likely to be "inciting?" It's a slippery slope which I don't think the SCOTUS will enter...
Click to expand...

I didn’t see it that way.

I saw the organizers’ obligations as (1) knowing what they and other speakers would advocate, and (2) if, despite proper due diligence, they are surprised, and a speaker advocates violence, they have to at least try to intervene. I never saw them as being accountable for reading the mind of every attendee.

I guess I’d call it a “reasonable man” test.

For example, I think most reasonable people would agree that saying, “The President and his supporters are subhuman and should be eliminated like the vermin they are,” is inciting violence.

But I don’t think a reasonable person would view saying, “The President is incompetent and should be replaced,” as advocating violence. Never mind the fact that one way the stated goal could be achieved is violence against the President.

A nut job could possibly view it that way, but not a reasonable person.

In the first case, yes, I would hold the organizer liable, subject to caveats already mentioned. In the second case, no...whatever the nutjob does is on him or her.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: Jon, seebell and MattinBama
B1GTide said:
Don't tell him that. Once he knows that he is done, his behavior will deteriorate significantly (yes, it is possible).
Click to expand...

We’ve all heard of the “mile high” club, which prompted me wondering if there is an “Oval Office” club, or if Clinton had that position exclusively. JFK might have been a member, anyway, when you said Trump’s condition could deteriorate I first thought of Caligula and some of the things he did before it was over.
 
  • Like
Reactions: seebell and B1GTide
Chukker Veteran said:
We’ve all heard of the “mile high” club, which prompted me wondering if there is an “Oval Office” club, or if Clinton had that position exclusively. JFK might have been a member, anyway, when you said Trump’s condition could deteriorate I first thought of Caligula and some of the things he did before it was over.
Click to expand...
Trump's Caligula-like antics apparently threw the fear of Melania in him...
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Chukker Veteran
Status
Not open for further replies.

New Posts

Advertisement

Trending content

Latest threads

Top Bottom
Back