This is basics. You're taught to be nice and not use bad words when you're in kindergarten. I expect adults to know better. You can't hide behind laws for everything...especially something like this.
You expect adults to know better than to say things that are likely to invoke a negative emotion out of others. That is understandable, respectable even. Still, you can't expect this from everyone, and even from a scientific point of view, shouldn't (rather a sociological perspective or a psychological perspective).
You speak of basics. Some of the first laws, again, which were based on morality, were to Love you neighbor. They were to turn the other cheek. They were to forgive the enemy when the only thing the enemy did was hate. I am not sure what message you are trying to uphold. I understand that it is important to protect your family when somebody is disrespectful to them, but resorting to physical violence takes away not only from your argument, but from your integrity. You are equally as foolish for resorting to violence, as is the man a fool man for calling somebody a name simply based on their skin color.
We all know what Jesus said on these issues. We all know what Ghandi said. We all know what Muhammad said. Yet, many wish to compromise and "only be the best that they can be," out of convenience. If somebody is being intolerant toward you, why not show them how to be tolerant?
You go on to state, "two wrongs don't make a right." So how does perpetuating violence justify a third wrong? It doesn't.
I don't think the person in your hypothetical would even get 5 miles of the secret service based upon some of the responses in this thread. Hypothetically, I would expect the secret service to usher the man off of the stage.
Depends on the area I guess... in an area where "stand your ground" is apparent wouldn't it be legal to assault someone just because you 'felt' threatened by the words they said? Correct me if I'm wrong bout that stand your ground stuff.
You need to be able to prove that someone presented lethal force against you. Your word alone is not good enough to make a stand your ground case. Your word, in pair with evidence of you being assaulted, and perhaps a witness, would be different.
what happened to speech that inspires violence is not protected?
Speech that inspires violence (the screaming "fire" in a crowded theater argument) was presented in the Supreme Court case I referred to earlier. Name-calling, including racial remarks, is protected under free speech. I am not saying I support racism or anything. I am saying I support the freedom of expression.
It is all legit, one guy used his freedom of speech, Kanye took an action he felt was justified and the law disagrees with it thus he will have to deal with the repercussion (for every action there is always an equal and opposite reaction). This is really common all over America, but of course because it is a 'celebrity' people begin to debate if people "should run their mouths".
Redskins, Duck Dynasty, etc. etc. I even heard MSNBC accuse some of being racist for calling Obama by his first name, rather than saying "Mr. President." Welcome to politically correct America, where the minority is all but forgotten.
(for every action there is always an equal and opposite reaction).
Edited by -Wade-, January 14, 2014 - 09:09 PM.