Support NeoGAF

[jroc74]

Or.......

We could classify White Supremacists, Nazi's and the KKK as terrorist organizations (that they are) and treat them the same fucking way we would treat ISIS if someone invited them to speak at a college.

But that's crazy talk. White supremacy will always defend its own no matter what.

No, that's reserved for BLM.

 

[VenomousCoffee]

If we had them now, Republicans would make it illegal to say anything bad about cops, but say that calling for homosexuals to be burned is "protected religious freedom" or some shit

This is correct.

 

[ClosingADoor]

It's like you didn't read the thread. UF can't just "cancel" this.

I read it, and I find it bullshit that they are not allowed to cancel it. I get the free speech argument, but the university should then not be on the hook for the cost, or at least have a limit on that.

 

[TS-08]

Thats a pretty good letter.

There has to be something about the security situation. I am all for Freedom of Speech. Absolutely...Very few if any exceptions (including hate speech, but not including true threats), but it is a different matter entirely when an individual speaking and exercising that right makes the public (student fees and tax payer dollars) to provide the security. Especially to a tune of 500K.

If this dude wants to hop up on the corner of Main and First in downtown Gainsville, then knock yourself out...hell, someone may do it for you, but to labor a public university to protect your ass to the tune of half a million dollars while doing it quite frankly is not a free speech issue. This far exceeds anything reasonable.


It doesn't. Its abhorrent, but abhorrent speech is protected.

In reading an article linked to the one in the OP, Spencer/the group organizing this has paid the cost of security for the venue itself. I’m guessing the amount cited in this article is what the school/city/state are wanting to provide to deal with any protests that go on outside the venue. So I can see how a court would rule he wouldn’t be responsible for that (if such a challenge were brought), as I doubt that level of security was decided upon purely at the behest of Spencer or the organizers. If you make the organizers pay that amount, you effectively create a way to do indirectly what you can’t do directly - prevent the speech from going forward by placing on the speaker a burden you know likely can’t be met. You also run the risk of a creating a heckler’s veto situation, where you allow the reaction to speech that is otherwise admittedly constitutional define its right of protection under the First Amendment.

 

[VenomousCoffee]

I read it, and I find it bullshit that they are not allowed to cancel it. I get the free speech argument, but the university should then not be on the hook for the cost, or at least have a limit on that.

Then you need to read the UF statement, which addresses this directly. Courts have ruled that forcing speakers to pay for their own security has a chilling effect on protected speech.

 

[ClosingADoor]

Then you need to read the UF statement, which addresses this directly. Courts have ruled that forcing speakers to pay for their own security has a chilling effect on protected speech.

Yes, and my opinion is that that is bullshit and should not be the case. A cap on these costs is very reasonable I think. You shouldn't read my posts as blaming the university here.

 

[Acorn]

For people wanting to know more about this event see here:

https://freespeech.ufl.edu/qa-for-1019-event/

This is the personal message UF's president sent all employees:


Also, just got this email. Looks like this state of emergency was called in by the county sheriff in order to help facilitate coordination.





Safe to say I'm taking the day off this Thursday.

Kudos to the President, that was a damn good letter. They seem to be dealing with this as best as you can hope.

 

[VenomousCoffee]

Yes, and my opinion is that that is bullshit and should not be the case. You shouldn't read my posts as blaming the university, since I don't say anything like that.

So you would be okay with a system where you could shut down any speech by a marginalized/poor/excluded group by threatening a bigger protest than they could afford.

 

[lightus]

Yes, and my opinion is that that is bullshit and should not be the case. A cap on these costs is very reasonable I think. You shouldn't read my posts as blaming the university here.

Are you saying that any event with a security cost over that cap should be cancelled? Or are you saying there should be a limit to how much a University can spend in security fees?

I'm not trying to make any points, I just wanna make sure I read your post correctly.

 

[Dreams-Visions]

GL GatorGAF

 

[smokeandmirrors]

bringing in more police to help defend the nazis.

as per usual

 

[Late Flag]

If we had them now, Republicans would make it illegal to say anything bad about cops, but say that calling for homosexuals to be burned is "protected religious freedom" or some shit

You're not thinking big enough. If we had hate speech laws, Republicans would use them to go after Muslims. Trump is already doing everything he can to target Muslims now, so it's not like this is some huge stretch or hypothetical.

You also run the risk of a creating a heckler's veto situation, where you allow the reaction to speech that is otherwise admittedly constitutional define its right of protection under the First Amendment.

Exactly. If violence is allowed to shut down speech, you're creating an incentive for more violence. That's terrible public policy.

 

[GoldenEye 007]

I read it, and I find it bullshit that they are not allowed to cancel it. I get the free speech argument, but the university should then not be on the hook for the cost, or at least have a limit on that.

Ah, fair enough. Yeah, it's such a bullshit situation.

 

[lightus]

bringing in more police to help defend the nazis.

as per usual

... and the tens of thousands of employees, students and civilians at the event and in the city.

I get the point you're trying to make but really it just comes across poorly.

A lot more than just the nazi's are benefiting from the increased security and drive-by posts like the one you just made only make it harder to fight against these Nazis.

 

[ClosingADoor]

So you would be okay with a system where you could shut down any speech by a marginalized/poor/excluded group by threatening a bigger protest than they could afford.

Are you saying that any event with a security cost over that cap should be cancelled? Or are you saying there should be a limit to how much a University can spend in security fees?

I'm not trying to make any points, I just wanna make sure I read your post correctly.

First of all, you guys need to get some hate speech laws. Don't know if this specific event would fall under that, but there should be some limit on these speeches.

Next to that, if I understand the statement right, this cost would be covered by the university? If so, yes I think that should not be done, since those have a budget and things like this should not come out of that since that money can be put to better use.

The whole university speech thing is bizarre to me anyway. Hold your protest somewhere else and coordinate with the local government about it. I don't see why a university should have anything to do with it.

 

[KibblesBits]

Cops going to go HAM

I see what you did there.

 

[Palette Swap]

If you are like me, I expect you are surprised and even shocked to learn that UF is required by law to allow Mr. Spencer to speak his racist views on our campus, and that we are not allowed by law to bill him for the full costs of keeping our campus safe, which exceed more than a half million dollars.

I’m genuinely surprised there can’t be any kind of public safety provisions to free speech, in the sense that at some point, guaranteeing a safe environment can be just too costly.

(Meanwhile the executive repeatedly and very explicitly calls for the dismissal and black listing of private citizens because he doesn’t like their views, and this goes unchallenged)

 

[Carl-Sagan]

I read it, and I find it bullshit that they are not allowed to cancel it. I get the free speech argument, but the university should then not be on the hook for the cost, or at least have a limit on that.

It isn't that simple. The University of Florida is a public. It isn't easy for them to deny Richard Spencer. You could be in Ku Klux Klan robes and probably still be able to have a speech. Since this is protected under the first amendment. UF had denied him originally on the grounds that there was student endangerment due to the possible riots. Spencer sued the university and the courts deemed it not a threat to shut down the event. Unfortunately, legal battles like this, are probably unwinnable. It would just delay the event even further. Also, him paying for the event and the security would be essentially silencing his views. Since he could argue that he may not be able to pay X number of dollars. The University of Florida really has no way of getting around this since it would be a heckler's veto.

Richard Spencer hasn't voiced intent to harm people at this event. The Supreme Court allows this sort of speech unless some prerequisites are made. Basically, if he has said something that is probable to cause violence at a timely manner, they could argue it in court system to cancel his speech. An example I'm thinking of is if he (Spencer) said "Hey, lets shoot all these non-whites!" this wouldn't be protected under the first amendment. If he wants to just say hateful things about non-whites and advocate all of his stupid views or theories.

It just happens that the first amendment protects worthless, stupid, and racially motivated ideas. That's what we have to pay for this. Something something collateral damage.

Lets not target or demonstrate hate towards the university. They couldn't do anything about this. They spent about a million dollars consulting various lawyers to get this imbecile out of the grounds. An estimated $500,000 in security fees and not only that: there's a bunch of controversy at the university. Notably transits.

 

[DietRob]

I don't trust Rick Scott. Betting he uses this as an opportunity to arrest protesters to the speech and spin it as 'antifa thugs'

 

[Shadow Puppetry]

Unbelievable. $500k going up in flames.

Goddamn America is broken in so many different way.

 

[Late Flag]

I’m genuinely surprised there can’t be any kind of public safety provisions to free speech, in the sense that at some point, guaranteeing a safe environment can be just too costly.

Suppose somebody built a mosque in a backwater, bigoted community. Every night people come by to vandalize the mosque. Members of the congregation are beaten when they go to and from worship. The Imam receives death threats and is regularly attacked when he shows his face in public. The mosque appeals to the local police department for protection, but the police chief says "Sorry, but guaranteeing a safe environment for you guys is just too costly."

Do you still think a "public safety" exception to the first amendment is a good idea? Because I can pretty much guarantee that what I just described would absolutely be happening if we went that route.

 

[ClosingADoor]

...

Lets not target or demonstrate hate towards the university. They couldn't do anything about this. They spent about a million dollars consulting various lawyers to get this imbecile out of the grounds. An estimated $500,000 in security fees and not only that: there's a bunch of controversy at the university. Notably transits.

Don't get me wrong, I don't hate the university for this. I hate the (abuse of) the laws and circumstances that forces them to waste money on this.

Suppose somebody built a mosque in a backwater, bigoted community. Every night people come by to vandalize the mosque. Members of the congregation are beaten when they go to and from worship. The Imam receives death threats and is regularly attacked when he shows his face in public. The mosque appeals to the local police department for protection, but the police chief says "Sorry, but guaranteeing a safe environment for you guys is just too costly."

Do you still think a "public safety" exception to the first amendment is a good idea? Because I can pretty much guarantee that what I just described would absolutely be happening if we went that route.

In your example crimes are already being committed. It is not the same.

 

[Fallout-NL]

Yeah, the public ones that have tried to ban him and his group have been sued. And it looks like in one case, Auburn University lost in federal court over the matter. Private schools can do whatever they want. Public ones are bound by our increasingly shitty constitution.

Man, you shouldd't lose a case like that. It's hate speech for crying out loud.

 

[Late Flag]

In your example crimes are already being committed. It is not the same.

Punching Nazis is also a crime. In both cases, it's the violent criminals who are supposedly the reason why we need to curtail the first amendment.

 

[Raven117]

In reading an article linked to the one in the OP, Spencer/the group organizing this has paid the cost of security for the venue itself. I’m guessing the amount cited in this article is what the school/city/state are wanting to provide to deal with any protests that go on outside the venue. So I can see how a court would rule he wouldn’t be responsible for that (if such a challenge were brought), as I doubt that level of security was decided upon purely at the behest of Spencer or the organizers. If you make the organizers pay that amount, you effectively create a way to do indirectly what you can’t do directly - prevent the speech from going forward by placing on the speaker a burden you know likely can’t be met. You also run the risk of a creating a heckler’s veto situation, where you allow the reaction to speech that is otherwise admittedly constitutional define its right of protection under the First Amendment.

Oh I completely understand and get it. You certainly don't want to get into a heckler's veto scenario. Thats a dangerous dangerous road to go down if you start allowing that stuff.

My point is that because he is doing this AT a University and not say the corner of First and Main downtown Gainsville, he is effectively using the universities resources to fund not only his safety, but garner even more attention.

There has to be some case law on this, but Id be curious what the Courts have said about just how much does the public have to ensure some semblance of safety due to an individual's exercising of speech.

 

[VenomousCoffee]

I don't trust Rick Scott. Betting he uses this as an opportunity to arrest protesters to the speech and spin it as 'antifa thugs'

Rick Scott is the worst criminal in our state. And this is Florida we're talking about.

 

[Raven117]

Yeah, the public ones that have tried to ban him and his group have been sued. And it looks like in one case, Auburn University lost in federal court over the matter. Private schools can do whatever they want. Public ones are bound by our increasingly shitty constitution.

Im so sorry you feel that way about your Constitution. I don't know what to say...

 

[NullPointer]

Expensive Speech.

 

[Carl-Sagan]

Man, you shouldd't lose a case like that. It's hate speech for crying out loud.

Offensive speech that he is doing is extremely vague. One person that finds this offensive doesn't mean that another person will find it offensive. 403 U.S. 15 (1971) is basically an example of why this speech is protected under the First Amendment.

 

[Raven117]

In your example crimes are already being committed. It is not the same.

Oh come on. You get what he was saying. Essentially, if you built a public safety exception into the First Amendment, you are giving the playbook to anyone who doesn't like what someone else is saying (or practicing)...to just go cause trouble...Commit crimes...and you will eventually get them silenced because they "cant be protected."

 

[ThLunarian]

The University should schedule multiple competing events in the same general area and drown this guy out, if they can't just shut him down.

 

[Carl-Sagan]

The University should schedule multiple competing events in the same general area and drown this guy out, if they can't just shut him down.

This probably would just lead him to gaining more media attention or him rescheduling. Better approach is just to let him do it and get it over it. Rather unfortunate how much media attention this particular speech has gotten. Doesn't help the situation at all.

 

[Late Flag]

The University should schedule multiple competing events in the same general area and drown this guy out, if they can't just shut him down.

This is exactly what Texas A&M did when Spencer spoke there. The president of the university scheduled his own counter-event. Perfect response IMO.

 

[Angry Grimace]

Just let him say his dumb little speech and then get the fuck out. The effort to suppress it gives it more attention than anything he could actually say.

 

[CheesecakeRecipe]

I had temporary forgotten that your country has descended into hell. You're absolutely right of course.

Yep. We need to banish any backwards conservative views from having any legitimacy as a platform of governance first.

 

[Raven117]

This is exactly what Texas A&M did when Spencer spoke there. The president of the university scheduled his own counter-event. Perfect response IMO.

Whoop.

Though Spencer is trying to do it again, A&M cancelled the event...I don't know if they have been sued or not.

 

[Late Flag]

Whoop.

Though Spencer is trying to do it again, A&M cancelled the event...I don't know if they have been sued or not.

A&M used to have a policy that allowed any group (even if they weren't affiliated with the university) to rent space there. They rescinded that policy after Spencer's last visit, so I think they should be in the clear now.

 

[Raven117]

A&M used to have a policy that allowed any group (even if they weren't affiliated with the university) to rent space there. They rescinded that policy after Spencer's last visit, so I think they should be in the clear now.

Yeah, curious if that will work in Court though...

 

[lightus]

You know the crazy thing is, if Spencer talked on his initial date before UF denied him it would have fallen on the day campus opened up after a hurricane Irma and no one would have attended.

Ah well.

 

[TS-08]

Oh I completely understand and get it. You certainly don't want to get into a heckler's veto scenario. Thats a dangerous dangerous road to go down if you start allowing that stuff.

My point is that because he is doing this AT a University and not say the corner of First and Main downtown Gainsville, he is effectively using the universities resources to fund not only his safety, but garner even more attention.

There has to be some case law on this, but Id be curious what the Courts have said about just how much does the public have to ensure some semblance of safety due to an individual's exercising of speech.

But the organizers have paid for the university resources. I believe I read they paid around $10,000 to use the venue (and that includes security). The massive number being cited is additional security the school is seeking in anticipation of protests outside the venue. When you start to argue that the speaker is responsible for this cost, you are running into a heckler’s veto situation. I don’t see how you can get around that unless you just change the First Amendment analysis of universities.

 

[Raven117]

But the organizers have paid for the university resources. I believe I read they paid around $10,000 to use the venue (and that includes security). The massive number being cited is additional security the school is seeking in anticipation of protests outside the venue. When you start to argue that the speaker is responsible for this cost, you are running into a heckler’s veto situation. I don’t see how you can get around that unless you just change the First Amendment analysis of universities.

Im not saying the speaker is responsible for it necessarily. Nor am I arguing that the dude must be banned from campus.

Im merely pointing out the fact that he is getting additional security due to where he is exercising his free speech.

 

[Vilix]

This is exactly what Texas A&M did when Spencer spoke there. The president of the university scheduled his own counter-event. Perfect response IMO.

My alma mater does me proud. 👍

 

[PepsimanVsJoe]

Posted this story on my Facebook account and it turned into a clusterfuck.

Good lord. The shit people spew.

 

[Blizzard]

Posted this story on my Facebook account and it turned into a clusterfuck.

Good lord. The shit people spew.

I used to at least partially believe the Penny Arcade theory about anonymity + internet = horrible person. Sadly we've since learned anonymity isn't necessary.

 

[BudokaiMR2]

Good luck fellow Gators.
Peacefully protest the fuck out of this wanna-be fascist please.

 

[Blizzard]

Good luck fellow Gators.
Peacefully protest the fuck out of this wanna-be fascist please.

That's what they're wanting to happen, to get more publicity, beat up / kill / jail protestors. The university president asked people to actually avoid it, and instead attend the other events they're scheduling later.

 

[PepsimanVsJoe]

I used to at least partially believe the Penny Arcade theory about anonymity + internet = horrible person. Sadly we've since learned anonymity isn't necessary.

Facebook is an automated shithouse. Once a story is posted, thirty or so comments instantly appear, and most of them are linked to accounts that are filled with nothing but memes and propaganda garbage.

Anonymity doesn't matter, because nobody is going to sift through all that shit.

That shouldn't be possible unless you posted the comment with public permissions. I thought you meant your friends immediately commented on it.

Oh sorry. I should have specified.

 

[Blizzard]

Facebook is an automated shithouse. Once a story is posted, thirty or so comments instantly appear, and most of them are linked to accounts that are filled with nothing but memes and propaganda garbage.

Anonymity doesn't matter, because nobody is going to sift through all that shit.

That shouldn't be possible unless you posted the comment with public permissions. I thought you meant your friends immediately commented on it.

 

[TS-08]

Im not saying the speaker is responsible for it necessarily. Nor am I arguing that the dude must be banned from campus.

Im merely pointing out the fact that he is getting additional security due to where he is exercising his free speech.

He would likely be getting a similar level of security if he held the speech in a park, though, in terms of LEOs being present.

 

[BudokaiMR2]

That's what they're wanting to happen, to get more publicity, beat up / kill / jail protestors. The university president asked people to actually avoid it, and instead attend the other events they're scheduling later.

'peacefully' was the key word there, but yeah that seems impossible in America today.

They should invite the goddamn Harlem Globetrotters to play an exhibition match against the basketball team or something.

Nothing better to distract UF people than sports!