I agree with you Ray!

Only Democrats are allowed to incite violence and here at VOAT.com we believe in free speech just not hate speech.Also here at VOAT we are physicists that believe in Newtons Law just not gravity.The bullshit gauge has just broke,blew-up and no longer functions.

LOL STILL CLUELESS EH? NEVER GONNA HAPPEN IDIOTS! You people never learn. You have lost your ability to think rationally and function in reality. NONE of what you so earnestly believe is real, you are going crazy. you WILL lose your families. You WILL lose your jobs. You ARE losing your minds. YOU CANNOT GRASP WHAT IS SO PATENTLY OBVIOUS TO EVERYONE ELSE. You NUTCASES STILL DON'T GET IT! There won't be ANY mass arrests, no martial law, no tribunals, no Gitmo. You sink deeper into insanity and violent delusion. Q is just some damn kid on the chans! You were fooled! For you SANE people, it's over, move on, admit you were fooled! Do it before you get into real trouble! Q IS A FAKE,NONE OF IT IS REAL!

Don't bother with your "over the target", and STUPID delusional replies, your idiot "insults" and ridiculous threats, no "SCARED" fuckin' idiocy. YOU are the crazy people, the extremists and nutcases, not democrats. Do you not REALIZE that law enforcement is tracking EVERY ONE OF YOU GERIATRIC LOSERS that threaten violence? Have fun in jail you psychos. Save the insults, they don't mean a thing, WHEN do say enough losers. How LONG will you be willingly fooled?

I have an idea...

[Deleted]

Lol.... just in case y’all miss Reddit. If not I’ll kick some ass...

can I suggest to the community when we get a post advocating violence that since we cant remove it that we as group respond with a one word post....that word being scorn. we do this to let anyone checking us out know that as a group we don't advocate violence. I my self post the word scorn when I see something that is overtly offensive in nature and suggest to others do the same... this is a free speech platform o we are going to get troles who are here just to shit post and this seems to me to be a good way to respond keeping with in Voats rules

I agree. We cant aford to loose it now. After all of the years of baiting we endured.

Thank you for your efforts, input and guidance.

I fully agree with you. Free speech comes with a price for those of us who dislike calls for violence or using F**k as an adjective or adverb. Those who do this should be aware that many who would ordinarily read and appreciate personal comments simply stop reading when the discussion gets out of hand.

Thanks for straightening that out srayzie!

😉👌

Thank you, Srayz. xoxo

In general, its a VOAT-wide issue and policy, but there are legal frameworks. Illegal speech (in USA) is not allowed on voat, such a kiddie porn or close to it, coordinating overt criminal acts, etc.

There’s nothing we can do about the comments unless it’s a very direct threat

Its not just how direct a threat is, it has to have all three of these according the the US Supreme Court :

1 > viable to achieve. (not a convoluted means) 2 > specific target of the "great bodily harm or death". (not a large diverse class of targets) 3 > a specific time frame of the proposed event, not unspecified or open ended.

Those utterances are in fact, in public, among more than 2 people, legally prosecutable by some US states, but all those elements need to be present.

It is true that the FBI and other LEA treats vote as a honeypot and "incites violence" here to ensnare people they can "perp walk" and the use long curated accounts.

It is rare if ever that I saw a post with all three elements in years on voat.

Famous SCOTUS Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imminent_lawless_action

Then refined and protected FURTHER by SCOTUS in the 1970s!

SCOTUS Hess v. Indiana, 414 U.S. 105 (1973)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hess_v._Indiana

I will not type an example of a real crime here that cannot be typed in public forums with more than two total parties listening, but they would resemble :

We should shoot "<INSERT SINGLE PERSON NAME HERE>" before "<INSERT A DATE IN THE YEAR OR LESS>"

Legal 100% protected by SCOTUS speech :

1. Lets shove all the kikes into jew ovens!

2. I hope every libtard in the USA gets ass-cancer and if not THEY ALL NEED TO BE KILLED anyway!

3. I think people that don't know US federal laws should be burned alive

ALL of the above is 100% fully protected free speech , the only type of speech there is in the USA. Free Speech. Committing a CRIME, and getting charged or citation for the crime, while uttering "hateful words" can evoke the anti-white-male state statute "hate speech law" sentence enhancers, but there has to be a root crime at the same exact time.

One important distinction, going out of the way to ensure the target of your rage is reading your threats, and is a direct end recipient through your actions : calling them, telling them to their face, writing them, etc.... is not protected by supreme court and is considered DIRECT "CRIMINAL THREATS" Across state lines the federal US statute for long distance direct phone call threat is : U.S. Code › Title 18 › Part I › Chapter 41 › § 875 (c)

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/875

But SCOTUS already outlined that the aggrieved party needs to be in that phone call. Same with online forums; the writer can state he had no proof the target was definitely participating.

I wrote more here : https://voat.co/v/GreatAwakening/2855659/15060671

You're absolutely right. We have to be better than the Dems. They're violent hate mongers, we need to take the high road.

Freedom of speech needs to work both ways. We don't have to like what we read and we are also free to comment and object to anyone advocating violence. Violence doesn't solve anything. Violence actually makes things worse.

You are doing the right thing. Let the masses sort it out. Trust us

free speech isnt about being free to say things people like. good choice.

Lol. I have a YUGE collection

What about members of Congress threatening to kill us... This is a war zone.

Thank you for changing the sub's rules back. That was an upstanding and honorable thing to do.

Cute

Martin Luther King Jr.

Nobel Lecture*, December 11, 1964

"Violence as a way of achieving racial justice is both impractical and immoral. I am not unmindful of the fact that violence often brings about momentary results. Nations have frequently won their independence in battle. But in spite of temporary victories, violence never brings permanent peace. It solves no social problem: it merely creates new and more complicated ones. Violence is impractical because it is a descending spiral ending in destruction for all. It is immoral because it seeks to humiliate the opponent rather than win his understanding: it seeks to annihilate rather than convert. Violence is immoral because it thrives on hatred rather than love. It destroys community and makes brotherhood impossible. It leaves society in monologue rather than dialogue. Violence ends up defeating itself. It creates bitterness in the survivors and brutality in the destroyers."

Some people are so EVIL, even here. They need to get jobs and off drugs and booze. In answer to your question no, Q isn't stupid, and is protected, like President Trump but DEATH THREATS are illegal even if the person is TOO STUPID to be able to do it.

Fuck Q, you go ahead and follow an alphabet moron, and if I ever run into Q, I'll take him out myself