On 6/13/2022 5:41 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
> On Jun 13, 2022 at 2:27:40 PM PDT, ""Adam H. Kerman"" <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
>
>> BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
>>> In article <t86ogi$163b$2@gioia.aioe.org>,
>>> David Johnston <davidjohnston29@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2022-06-13 1:17 a.m., BTR1701 wrote:
>>>> > In article <t86m76$d86$1@gioia.aioe.org>,
>>>> > David Johnston <davidjohnston29@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >> On 2022-06-11 11:15 a.m., BTR1701 wrote:
>>>> >>> In article <t824hl$g6f$1@pcls7.std.com>,
>>>> >>> MDuPree@theworld.com.snip.to.reply (Micky DuPree) wrote:
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>>> "Ramos's social media acquaintances said he openly abused and
>>>> >>>> killed animals such as cats and would livestream the abuse on
>>>> >>>> Yubo.[114] Other social media acquaintances said that he would
>>>> >>>> also livestream himself on Yubo threatening to kidnap and rape
>>>> >>>> girls who used the app, as well as threatening to commit a
>>>> >>>> school shooting.[112] Ramos's account was reported to Yubo, but
>>>> >>>> no action was taken.[112][115]"
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>> Even if "he didn't mean it," threats to commit felonies shouldn't be
>>>> >>>> treated as protected free speech.
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> So if the Court overturns Roe and some states make abortion a felony,
>>>> >>> it would be cool if those states also prosecuted any woman who even
>>>> >>> talked about going elsewhere to have an abortion on Facebook?
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> After all, threats to commit felonies /= protected speech, right,
>>>> >>> DuPree?
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Except that if they talk about going some place where it's legal, then
>>>> >> that wouldn't be a threat to commit a felony.
>>>> >
>>>> > It would be if the state makes 'conspiracy to commit an abortion' a
>>>> > crime.
>>>>
>>>> Conspiracy to commit something that isn't a crime, isn't a crime.
>>
>>> But it could be a crime in Texas to aid or abet someone securing an
>>> abortion outside the state. And if a woman talked about doing so, then
>>> under DuPree's interesting legal theory that "threats to commit felonies
>>> are not protected speech", one could be prosecuted just for talking
>>> about it.
>>
>> How about a threat against a person as the law understands it? If state
>> law in outlawing abortion also defines the foetus as a person, then a
>> pregnant woman who discusses in writing wanting to abort has made a
>> threat in writing against a person.
>
> Nice one! You get an A on your CrimLaw exam.

Likewise if the state declares lettuce a person and you make a salad...