Fake it till you make it – a take on fake users

[Mr Lucky]

For the third time you added incitement to make "hate speech" illegal. These are two distinctive matters.

I have no argument with that.

Group A hates Group B and vice-versa.

Group A is protesting the actions of Group B calling them bad words—not incitement.

Group B attacks Group A because they got their feelings hurt. By their own volition, they chose to attack based on naughty words alone. That is assault. Group B is carted off and Group A can continue to spew their "hate", unless it becomes a matter of public safety, and then the crowd is dispersed. But at no time did Group A do anything illegal as they were just exercising their 1st Ammendment rights.

Correct. Group A did nothing illegal (under US laws) but could be illegal in other countries depending on the words and whether it was used against group B as an ethnic, disabled etc. group.

In the US hate speech is not illegal and is protected (as is any speech) by the first amendment unless it calls for (incites) violence against someone else or some other group. Then it isn't protected and really doesn't matter whether you call it hate speech or just bad words. I really don't think it could be excluded from the 1st amendment just because someone retaliated against you for calling them a bad word. It would be provocation and I imagine it might be cited by the defendant but may or may not be a success defence either for acquittal or reduction of sentence.

t's quite entertaining to see a protected class try to make "cisgender White male" a slur, and use it to counter protest, because by their own definition, it's hate speech. If you break it down: cis (gender identity) White (race) male (sexual identity).

I don't know what you mean by this. cisgender White male is not a slur AFAIK, nor is is hate speech AFAIK. However a slur can be subjective. On a related topic some people may think the word woke is a slur, to other people it may mean being aware, kind and courteous to certain groups of people.

 

[frm]

It would be provocation and I imagine it might be cited by the defendant but may or may not be a success defence either for acquittal or reduction of sentence.

Provocation could be used as a defense, but I would find it highly unlikely that it could work if the main objective of Group B was to show up and counter-protest. They could have stayed home. This would be more of a defense in a bar fight or something, but I couldn't see it work for a counter-protest because you are going there with the objective to exercise your free speech and you got angry that Group A was just meaner than you.

Provocation is often a mitigating factor in sentencing. It rarely serves as a legal defense, meaning it does not stop the defendant from being guilty of the crime. It may however, lead to a lesser punishment.

You would have to dig deeper into this and specific groups, but it is intended to be a slur, except real men aren't weak or threatened by this. Though, they are, however, being discriminated based on it in the US right now for the sake of diversity. So, that'll be interesting to see how equal opportunity laws work themselves out for it, but that's beyond the scope of this argument.

I don't know what you mean by this. cisgender White male is not a slur AFAIK, nor is is hate speech AFAIK. However a slur can be subjective. On a related topic some people may think the word woke is a slur, to other people it may mean being aware, kind and courteous to certain groups of people.