question archive In the unit lesson, we discussed that individuals can find instructions for how to build homemade bombs on the internet
In the unit lesson, we discussed that individuals can find instructions for how to build homemade bombs on the internet
Subject:BusinessPrice: Bought3
In the unit lesson, we discussed that individuals can find instructions for how to build homemade bombs on the internet. Do you feel that law enforcement and the U.S. Intelligence Community should do more to ensure that this type of information is not readily available, or do you feel that would be considered a violation of the right to free speech? Why, or why not?
REPLY TO MY CLASSMATE’S POST TELLING WHY YOU AGREE BY PRESENTING QUESTIONS, ALTERNATIVE ANALYSIS, CHALLENGES TO THEIR ASSUMPTIONS AND CLAIMS (WITH RESEARCH), ON HOW HE ARRIVED AT HIS CONCLUSIONS (MINIMUM OF 200 WORDS) MAKE SURE YOU ASK QUESTIONS IN THE DISCUSSION
CLASSMATE'S POST
I do feel that law enforcement and the U. S. Intelligence Community should do more to prevent this type of information and communication from accessed so easily and quickly. However, based on the limitations placed on these agencies regarding our governmental structure and laws, law enforcement has limited power and authority when diving in, deterring, and pursuing prevention and completely stopping this information from being shared and distributed on the worldwide web.
Unfortunately, the legal boundaries surrounding the right to free speech are not only under the First Amendment but can garner greater authority under state constitutional law, state and federal statutory law, and state common law.
Although state constitutional law has proven to be less of an important source of free speech protection than hoped or predicted after the Pruneyard decision, courts in New Jersey, California, and other states have for decades now interpreted state constitutional guarantees of expressive freedom to confer rights that the First Amendment does not confer. More importantly, local, state, and federal legislators have over the course of the past two centuries enacted hundreds, even thousands, of laws that intended to protect the same values and interests that the First Amendment protects. In cases, legislators have also empowered regulatory agencies to do the same. To focus solely on the protection that the First Amendment provides is therefore to misunderstand how freedom of speech understood and legally protected in the United States today.
It is like growing up in a two-parent household whereby, both parents agree on the rules and lay down the law concerning the boundaries under which the child raised. However, one parent may be more elementary within the disciplinary realm and the other parent may be more complex or detailed in how the layers of discipline applied. As a result, when the issue of freedom of speech presented, it appears that law enforcement is governed under more than one agency or entity when addressing specific legal infractions and violations and how the violation can be managed.
