re: #225 kirkspencer

On my part, I’m not sure it was protected speech.

It was done with the specific intent of provoking a violent reaction. This shades into the area of incitement, though it’s not clean due to the separation of time and space.

Incitement of riot is not protected speech, with a workable defense being the speaker did not anticipate or intend the violence. Jones, however, did intend the reaction — he’s admitted to such.

Since I haven’t decided if it’s protected, I’m not certain I have reason to defend his right to make such a speech.

Could you imagine a lawyer having to prove that it’s a known fact that some Muslims would react violently this way…