Disturbing the Peace Is Not Free Speech

     The first amendment gives us the right to free speech, but free speech does not allow the right to incite harms to others, make or distribute obscene materials, or make hateful public speeches. On August 11th and 12th many white supremacists thought that they were expressing their right to free speech. This came to be known as Unite the Right rally.  These white supremacists violated the first amendment by marching down Charlottesville yelling racial slurs, disturbing the peace, and causing violence and turmoil on the UVA campus.

     The law was broke when the white  supremacists started surrounding a group of college students and both groups started throwing chemical irritants at each other. The build up to this scene was when the Unite the Right supporters marched down the UVA campus with lit torches, irritants, and sticks. They marched all the way down to the Thomas Jefferson statue where they met a group of around 30 UVA students of different races protesting their march. The students locked arms around the statue when their met the white supremacists. The white supremacists were causing a disturbance by chanting racial slurs, and making monkey noises toward the students of color. This is not free speech because this action was discriminating against people, caused a massive disturbance and caused violence by throwing things to a group of people and then the other group naturally retaliating.

     The next day another rally was held, and even more protesters on both sides showed up. Police came to the scene and a white supremacists militia arrived. The supporters of the unite the rally were armed with pistols, long gun, stick, shield, and other irritants. Some protesters were also armed with shields and sticks. Violence was heavy that day with many fights happening, and other altercations. A 20 year old Unite the Right supported drove a car through a crowd killing one person and injuring others. The white supremacist broke the law by starting altercations by yelling and saying racist things, starting fights, and bringing and showing their weapons.

     Things have died down since then but a white nationalist Jason Kessler has requested a permit to hold another unite the right rally. Kessler organized the Unite the Right march last year. His permit has been declined because of the violence caused by his "free speech protest" last year.  Kessler has decided to sue the city because he believes it the city's fault for not properly separating both groups. This is a simpleminded argument because people who are educated know the difference between express your speech and causing trouble.
   

Comments

  1. Julie Quinn TACMarch 23, 2018 at 1:34 PM

    So from what I can gather in this post, the law was broken by the yelling of racial slurs during the rally participants, by the throwing of irritants (what, exactly, was it?) on both sides, by the violence that broke out, and by James Fields, who was the driver of the car that killed Heather Heyer.

    My question is: is it as easy as saying expressing speech *isn't* always causing trouble? How does one express speech that others find upsetting, disturbing, or offensive without causing trouble? Where's the line? Perhaps a definition of what "express your speech's" appropriate limits are? And how they could have been handled on topics related to the issues surrounding this event.

    ReplyDelete
  2. pervaizmMarch 25, 2018 at 8:58 PM

    Really interesting. I like the way you structured your post because it all makes sense and flows really nicely. Also, I think we both kind of were on the same topic about free speech and nationalism after reading your post.

    ReplyDelete
  3. UnknownApril 25, 2018 at 6:45 PM

    This post is great, well structured, and also displayed many facts. But for the first paragraph I would have hyperlinked the first amendment section to another word, perhaps free speech? Also you mention irritants, but what are they? A brief description of the term irritants in my opinion was needed or I am not knowledgeable enough to know the term. But overall I do support you on the fact that they indeed break laws with this protest, many were put at risk and it was a complete hazard to anyone in the vicinity. This post, again, was great with interesting facts, and appropriate phrasing/word choice, good job.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Wrongful Convictions

Over the years, the United States justice system has incarcerated millions of people. But most importantly, some of these people have been victims of wrongful conviction because of one reason or the other. Hundreds of people who are wrongfully convicted end up spending many years behind bars for crimes they never committed. Exonerations based on DNA analysis have provided proof that wrongful convictions are real . Wrongful convictions result from systemic flaws in the criminal justice system some of which can be addressed. Wrongful convictions can be blamed on various factors, including. Eyewitness Misidentification.             This is the most significant contributor to wrongful convictions in the country. The human brain can fail to recollect the events as they happened. The eyewitness memory could also be riddled with errors, lapses and misjudgments especially if the event was traumatic. Inaccurate identification of su...
Read more

What is Bullying

Bullying entails aggressive and unwanted behaviors among school children which involve a perceived or real power imbalance. In many situations, the behavior can be repetitive or has the potential to be repeated for a prolonged period.   The stude nts involved, that is, the bullies and bullied may have severe prolonged problems.   In this case, this post will advance the concept of bullying in schools, particularly the effects it advances to the victims. Potential suicide: it is one of the worst things which the victims can do in response to bullying. It happens in many situations primarily because of depression and despondency . Moreover, the feelings of helplessness make a bullied person view suicide as the only potent option remaining. Suicide can take several days, months or even years and the affected learner decides extreme social ridicule and embarrassment ( Ttofi et al., 201 Physical injury: bullying on both males and females often lead to physical inju...
Read more

Is the death penalty an effective deterrent

The Death penalty is defined as the punishment of execution, administered to someone legally convicted of a capital crime.A capital crime is a crime that is punishable by death. Capital crimes are mostly associated with first-degree Murder. There’s no doubt that that the death penalty is a punishment but can also be seen as a deterrent. If Its seen as a deterrent then why are crimes that warrant the penalty still being committed. Deterrents are meant to discourage someone from doing something and if that’s not the case with the death penalty then maybe other methods of punishment need to be explored. The death penalty has always been a relevant topic throughout U.S history . In the nineteenth century abolitionist movements were spreading throughout the states in the northeast and as a result, states reduced the number of capital crimes and built more penitentiaries. Another result was that Pennsylvania moved executions from the public eye and did it in private at correctional ...
Read more