Talk:Fighting words
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
To-do list for Fighting words: | edit · history · watch · refresh |
|---|---|---|
|
||
[edit] Relevance outside U.S.A.?
Does the concept of "fighting words" have any legal significance outside of the U.S.A.? In Canada or the U.K., for example? --Ds13 20:44, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
- I've added some referenced content of relevance for Canada. --Ds13 18:32, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
Where is this from?
In Street v. New York (1969), the court overturned a statute prohibiting flag-burning and verbally abusing the flag, holding that mere offensiveness does not qualify as "fighting words" and that the threat of actual violence must be present.
I cannot find that text in the opinion of the court: http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0394_0576_ZO.html
[edit] Is this link an advertisement?
It doesn't seem to have anything to do with the article's content. If so we should remove it. MikeWren 16:16, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
Your Team Sucks. - Sports Fighting Words T-Shirts and Apparel
- Yeah, it's just opportunistic barely-relevant advertising. Removed! 121.44.72.217 10:12, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Canada reference
Would the Criminal Code reference for provocation, when dealing with assaults and the like, be relevant here? To my non-lawyer ears, the concept of someone being able to use a verbal attack as an excuse for an assault is a de facto limitation of their freedom of speech... Quadra 01:03, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
