News, Mother Arrested for Using F-Word In Grocery Store Receives Apology

[lkb0714]

Originally Posted by Hopes

I'll bite as a devil's advocate for the fun of it.

From your link:




The woman who called police stated that hearing the mother swearing at her family gave her flashbacks about her abusive childhood. The words didn't simply invoke anger or outrage. The words actually inflicted harm via trauma of having flashbacks. It doesn't matter that the words weren't directed towards her. What matters if the reaction the words caused for people who heard them. That brings us to the reasonable person test. Would a reasonable person be harmed by these words? Probably not people wo weren't victims of child abuse, but most likely for people who were victims of child abuse. Are survivors of child abuse disqualified as being considered reasonable people? Probably, but it's a question worth considering.

That is ridiculous. Her right to avoid having some memory does not preclude freedom of expression.

In that were true she could just claim it was the tone and no one would be able to express anger in public ever.

[lkb0714]

Originally Posted by blktoptrvl

Sorry, the SCOTUS may be the ultimate authority... But it is far from "settled law." That is why the courts keep interpreting it in various ways. Or didn't they teach you that in pseudo-law school.

And finally, I never showed how uttering "stop squishing the f-ing bread" is remotely "fighting words" because I don't believe it is. Never did. Just posted an article to indicate that it is not settled law. You made the assumption and jumped to conclusions. Guess they didn't teach you not to do that in pseudo-law school either.

If they aren't fighting words than the first amendment applies without question.