If a blind man and a sighted man are on a street corner, and the sighted man tells the blind man that no cars are coming and it is safe to cross, but actually a car is coming and the blind man gets run over, is that free speech or a crime?
@zleap
The sighted man could be delusional and believe that the car is a fake illusion created by a government conspiracy and that the blind man will be infected by nanobots if he steps back onto the curb. And the blind guy might be too gullible and not understand that the sighted guy is actually just a wacko.
Either way, the blind guy's dead.
@Pat freedom of speech doesn't mean "as long as you are just speaking you are a saint", it means "if you are willing to express yourself publicly you should be allowed to do so". Intent is paramount when it comes to criminal law, if you as little as breath at someone with the specific intention to harm them and it directly or indirectly causes them harm, you are guilty. If we're talking severe harm like getting run over by a car, even without intent you can be charged for negligence.
@namark
See my previous post.
When a huge portion of the population adopts lying as a tactic and uses it to the point that they are delusional and can no longer discern what is real and what is the fantasy world that they've made up in their heads, then intent becomes irrelevant and perhaps even nonexistent as a concept.
These people who believe that #COVID-19 is a hoax and that the vaccine is weapon, they harm everyone, especially those who believe them and step off the curb.
@Pat if they are delusional about a particular thing, than they are not lying about it, if they are lying about it then they are not delusional.
You can keep dreaming of your fascist utopia where you can finally realize judge dread fantasies, meanwhile intent is the most relevant.
@namark
What is my intent in creating this thread?
You will never know.
@Pat yes and I can deal with it, I don't need to know everything and be right about everything all the time. A mofo guiding a blind person straight into a speeding car is obviously doing it with an intent, and yet he still has a right to try and defend himself in court. If it's much more vague and difficult, it will be discussed at length and a decision for the particular case will be made, as right as it can be, as wrong as it has to be.
@Pat The sighted man could be hard of hearing and may not hear the car, the car could be electric and make no sound.
I understand the question but there could be other factors taken in to account.