- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: The Alex Jones Verdict Is Wrong and Dangerous
Posted on 8/7/22 at 2:33 pm to LeClerc
Posted on 8/7/22 at 2:33 pm to LeClerc
quote:
There was never any doubt as to the fact that there was a massacre at Sandyhook Elementary. None!
So then how is there any reputational damage at all to what Jones said? If Jones is a raving lunatic as you proclaim, anything he says, by its very nature, cannot harm someone's reputation. This verdict is simply a verdict for intentional infliction of emotional distress cloaked as a defamation verdict, because the Supreme Court's holding in Snyder vs. Phelps effectively banned the latter in cases of political speech.
1
Posted on 8/7/22 at 2:33 pm to BBONDS25
Why are we talking about him? The OP was about the dickhead Alex Jones.
Posted on 8/7/22 at 2:36 pm to SCLibertarian
The problem is that people believed all that crazy shite he spewed and acted on it. So I’m sorry, there was harm done. Political speech? Surely you jest.
This post was edited on 8/7/22 at 2:37 pm
Posted on 8/7/22 at 2:36 pm to eddieray
The establishment will put down an voice that challenges the(their) message. This is just the lawfare angle of attack.
The fact that they are using Alex Jones as a punching bag is only to send a message to everyone else.
The fact that they are using Alex Jones as a punching bag is only to send a message to everyone else.
Posted on 8/7/22 at 2:38 pm to Revelator
Try posting this pro free speech take on the OT.
I tried it there last week with this topic and some soy replied by telling me free speech “doesn't mean free of consequences. He's getting exactly what he deserves.” This was obviously not an attempt to distinguish between a guilty verdict and a default judgement, which would have been the right response.
Last time I looked, the OTers downvoted my pro free speech remarks by a ratio of 5 to 1. They are really taking “Germans” to the next level. Surprised I didn’t get a virtual gas chamber.
I tried it there last week with this topic and some soy replied by telling me free speech “doesn't mean free of consequences. He's getting exactly what he deserves.” This was obviously not an attempt to distinguish between a guilty verdict and a default judgement, which would have been the right response.
Last time I looked, the OTers downvoted my pro free speech remarks by a ratio of 5 to 1. They are really taking “Germans” to the next level. Surprised I didn’t get a virtual gas chamber.
Posted on 8/7/22 at 2:39 pm to ScottFowler
quote:
The fact that they are using Alex Jones as a punching bag is only to send a message to everyone else.
It’s a message to any media types that aren’t liberal against airing anything that can be labeled as a conspiracy.
This post was edited on 8/7/22 at 2:42 pm
Posted on 8/7/22 at 2:39 pm to Tiger n Austin
Didn’t that sandman kid get a bunch of money for the same thing
Posted on 8/7/22 at 2:41 pm to LeClerc
quote:
Why are we talking about him? The OP was about the dickhead Alex Jones.
The OP was about judgments against the media for defamation. I know it’s uncomfortable for you to talk about the media’s continual fake news campaigns against Trump, but all I’m asking is if you think there should be some recourse when media members are intentionally misleading and it causes damages?
I know you don’t care about Trump because in his case the ends justify the means to you, so pretend it’s anyone else. Should there be recourse for intentionally spewing fake news?
This post was edited on 8/7/22 at 2:43 pm
Posted on 8/7/22 at 2:43 pm to MeatPants
quote:
Didn’t that sandman kid get a bunch of money for the same thing
I thought he recently lost cases?
Plus Alex Jones is more akin to Howard Sterns than he is to MSM
This post was edited on 8/7/22 at 2:45 pm
Posted on 8/7/22 at 2:53 pm to LeClerc
quote:
So I’m sorry there was harm done.
Harassment has little to do with reputational damage. That kind of damage is financial in nature, specifically the loss of a job and future employment. Being upset or hurt by someone's speech or actions is not reputational damage. The harassment aspect factors in an IIED claim, which again was effectively prohibited by the Supreme Court over a decade ago.
Posted on 8/7/22 at 2:57 pm to LeClerc
quote:
He’s a politician, comes with the territory.
And Jones is a political commentator.
Whatever your opinion of Jones — and I have never been a fan — mass shootings like Sandy Hook are ipso facto going to be politicized in a society in which the Federal Government regulates the flush-rate of our commodes.
This verdict is as much about shutting down dissent as much as awarding “damages” to the families of Sandy Hook.
Posted on 8/7/22 at 3:00 pm to Toomer Deplorable
quote:
This verdict is as much about shutting down dissent as much as awarding “damages” to the families of Sandy Hook.
Absolutely. It’s the same reason why Jan. 6th protestors are still locked up and Antifa and BLM thugs have no repercussion for crimes
This post was edited on 8/7/22 at 3:01 pm
Posted on 8/7/22 at 3:34 pm to MeatPants
quote:
Didn’t that sandman kid get a bunch of money for the same thing
Alex Jones is a professional conspiracy theorist who was simply doing conspiracy things. If something bad happens and he DOESN’T claim “false flag”(this will never happen), we would need to get him a wellness check.
Suing Alex Jones for what he did would be like suing David Duke or BLM for their racist speech.
Or it would be like suing Britney Griner or Michelle Obama for hating America.
It would be like suing the left for promoting communism.
Sandman didn’t say shite. He got paid because because journalists were lying about him and his kind, tolerant smile to an angry protester.
Posted on 8/7/22 at 3:38 pm to Revelator
This is not even close to being correct.
Posted on 8/7/22 at 3:42 pm to JPLSU11
Almost everything in that post was wrong.
Posted on 8/7/22 at 3:42 pm to Revelator
quote:
It’s the same reason why Jan. 6th protestors are still locked up and Antifa and BLM thugs have no repercussion for crimes
It’s almost like one breached the Capitol and the other looted Jim’s Liquor Store
Posted on 8/7/22 at 3:42 pm to JPLSU11
quote:
This is not even close to being correc
Please elaborate
Posted on 8/7/22 at 3:42 pm to chalmetteowl
quote:
It’s almost like one breached the Capitol and the other looted Jim’s Liquor Store
They also burned down police stations, a courthouse and destroyed monuments
This post was edited on 8/7/22 at 3:46 pm
Posted on 8/7/22 at 3:44 pm to Revelator
quote:
They also burned down police stations and a courthouse
And took a portion of a city, said it was no longer part of the US and named a leader who raped and murdered for weeks.
Posted on 8/7/22 at 3:51 pm to BBONDS25
Yeah. Anyone who defends any of that antifa blm crap doesn’t know what they are talking about
Those riots did more to destroy the country than the Viking guy or the maga grandma walking around the Capitol
Those riots did more to destroy the country than the Viking guy or the maga grandma walking around the Capitol
Page 3 of 9
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News