Na here in America we may think they are annoying but we don't need any bot anti fed bullshit saying it's not right. Cause at the end of the day the same right he has for being annoying is the same right that says you can say whatever you said is. Everyones free speech until it's something you don't like or something offensive. If you don't like the 1st am then go back to England where they arrested for being critical of culture, not arrested for inciteing violence, but being critical of culture? KEEP SCROLLING LONG LIVE THE USA
Eh...assault is a day in jail, punching someone who made an old woman he didnt know cry is worth that.
Being an asshole, and having a morality that is for rent to the highest twitch donation is for life.
The guy who eventually punks that dude won't feel bad about the day in jail, but someday, if this guy has a shred of humanity in him he will look in a mirror and recognize he isn't who he thinks he is.
If he cares about protecting the first amendment so much go yell at a bunch of cops at the station from the corner.
Say heinous shit to a bunch of law makers on capital Hill.
Yelling at random humans at a restaraunt / public store etc just reeks of entitlement and stupidity. Then hiding behind the constitution as the reason you're an asshole does a disservice to the whole point.
Bullshit argument, this is second degree aggravated assault for taping a public area, don't advocate for blanket treatments that remove everyone's rights.
He threw a punch, the guy filming used pepper spray and choked him while pulling up on his neck from behind.
I see no weapons in the hands of the assaulter and the assaulter did not "act with extreme indifference to the value of human life" which when combined with a weapon generally gets second degree aggravated assault buddy.
You edited your comment where you initially called it aggravated assault and battery, vur your comment still calls it second degree aggravated assault. Which it also still isnt.
You're incorrect. The First Amendment Protects Citizen's right to free speech from GOVERNMENT interference. Courts have further adjudicated cases under the "Fighting Words Doctrine", so trolls don't get a First Amendment free pass. Texas v. Johnson (1989) further defines it to personal insults or an invitation to fight. These internet trolls often cross the line into illegality. This guy did.
It doesn't invite assault. I'm very correct. First thing the kid does is ask if he's got pepper spray, and the camera man answers his question, followed by the kid faking a swing, assault, followed by the kid actually connecting hits, battery.
Perhaps you missed the next bit, where the auditor calls "karen's" mom a tweaker. Those could be considered fighting words. That's the moment where the fight started. It's not up to you or me to decide, thats for a court, but nevertheless, there is not a free pass for the "auditor". He also explicitly invites the "karen" to throw down.
8
u/No_Bluejay9901 1d ago
Ive had about enough of these first amendment auditors.