Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

(951 posts)

14. No. It doesn't remotely approach a credible threat.

Fri Jan 18, 2013, 10:45 AM

Jan 2013

Any legal case based on the ad should be giggled out of court on First Amendment grounds.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

17 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

seriously, couldn't the NRA ad be considered a threat against the president's daughters? [View all] diabeticman Jan 2013 OP

Yes. It is. Zoeisright Jan 2013 #1

I wish they would. This CERTAINLY qualifies! calimary Jan 2013 #2

It does not reach the threshold of credible threat ProgressiveProfessor Jan 2013 #4

There are legal standards and they matter, at least to some of us ProgressiveProfessor Jan 2013 #6

And You're The Final Word On Proper Legal Standards Around Here? Paladin Jan 2013 #8

Never claimed to be ProgressiveProfessor Jan 2013 #11

Of course not (nt) Nye Bevan Jan 2013 #7

Otra vez? Puzzledtraveller Jan 2013 #9

I don't see how quinnox Jan 2013 #10

You damn tootin it is madokie Jan 2013 #12

No. Not at all. loose wheel Jan 2013 #13

No. It doesn't remotely approach a credible threat. dairydog91 Jan 2013 #14

Except it's A-OK to "foster hatred" through speech. dairydog91 Jan 2013 #17

Well since we're being serious...no. B2G Jan 2013 #16