>Well, suppose there's a group of people saying that another group of people (which happens to include you) should be killed as soon as possible.
But that is not protected free speech under the first amendment.
But that is not protected free speech under the first amendment.
https://www.freep.com/story/news/local/michigan/wayne/2021/0...
The problem with a very mechanistic/binary approach to legal questions is that it leaves a lot of room for antagonistic or outright threatening behavior that nevertheless remains within the bounds of legality. Experience suggests that's likely better than vague or arbitrary standards, but it's not a simple issue.