Reply #33: This is the same argument anti-choice activists put forward

[intheflow]

when their protests/blocks of abortion clinics were termed racketeering--for the same reason, threatening people. Yet the left cheered when that ruling went down. Likewise, freepers think they're exercising free speech when they say they should kill Obama but we don't think its OTT when the secret service pays them a visit. I agree there's a difference between threats and action, but these folks moved from just threats to action. If they threatened to target people at their homes, the fact they broke into their businesses and stole things is an indication that their threats upon peoples' private lives may also be acted upon. I have no desire to see free speech stifled, but threats are threats and should be taken seriously. Just because we agree with a political stance doesn't mean we have to condone a particular bad behavior.