Reply #3: moral of the story

[northernlights]

Actions have consequences. Including exercising free speech, when exercised to a religious nutcase.

Nobody was harmed by my incident, yet I was detained by police.

Just like religious nutcase Jones' exercise of his "free speech" provoked other religious nutcases to murder. Yet Jones' hasn't yet been detained by police for questioning.

Why is Jones not held liable for the result of his free speech, which he was *warned* would provoke nuts to murder. He cannot claim he didn't know what he was doing.

Yet I was held liable for *my* exercise of free speech, trying to rid myself of a nuisance whom I had no way of knowing was a religious nutcase.

Oh, I forgot. Jones is a *Christian.* So he has not only freedom of speech, but freedom from liability for the obvious, forewarned consequences of his free speech.

Sorry, doesn't work for me. What's sauce for the goose should be sauce for the gander. If I'm held liable for consequences that result from my exercising my free speech, then so should Jones be held liable.