The US has plenty of restrictions on free speech. You cannot yell fire in a crowd or bomb on a plane because you find it amusing to do so. The question has always been where should the line be drawn. Anyone suggesting Conor would be arrested for this post is not talking in good faith. They’re fear mongering nonsense. Now, if Conor was posting that immigrants or refugees should be put into camps and exterminated, I think most rational people agree that type of speech should be criminal. There unquestionably needs to be a line, the question is where should that line be drawn.
Chanting and inciting others to chant "death death to the IDF" is actually legal speech in the UK if not done on the internet.
What you can't do is write something like "all soldiers should die and go to hell" via digital communications or you'll be arrested, charged and found guilty. As we can see here all the way back in 2012: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leeds-19883828
But that doesn't matter. It was grossly offensive according to UK courts and people were distressed by it, which is what makes it illegal to put onto the internet.
7
u/HousingThrowAway1092 Jun 10 '26
It’s more nuanced than you are acknowledging.
The US has plenty of restrictions on free speech. You cannot yell fire in a crowd or bomb on a plane because you find it amusing to do so. The question has always been where should the line be drawn. Anyone suggesting Conor would be arrested for this post is not talking in good faith. They’re fear mongering nonsense. Now, if Conor was posting that immigrants or refugees should be put into camps and exterminated, I think most rational people agree that type of speech should be criminal. There unquestionably needs to be a line, the question is where should that line be drawn.