speech + action

[mmotyka at lsil.com]

Tim,

It's not easy to find great links but I still say that speech + action
is something that a prosecutor can use to the disadvantage of the
accused even if the speech is legal and the action appears to be
ineffectual or undirected. Look at how AP was used. 18 U.S.C. 23 1 seems
to link speech directly with the action of paramilitary training, even
if there is no specific target. The speech portion of the offense
enables a heavy response to the otherwise unpunishable action. Whether
or not anyone has been convicted under this statute there it sits, ready
to pounce.

Admittedly these are weak cites but I do think the (
legal_but_unpopular_speech + unpunishable_action = crime ) idea is
embodied in laws. I think eventually it'll somehow get extended to
address the cyberterrordangerouslyeducatedchaosprogrammerdeaththreat
that faces each and every freedom-loving, net-browsing Amurrican today! 

Maybe the pro bono brigade of the unorganized, non-organizational,
casually associational, non-paramilitary, non-coding, non-militia,
profusely verbal cypherpunks flying circus will chime in with some fun
stuff.

Mike


http://www.sfgate.com/okc/winokur/0423.html

http://www.vpc.org/studies/awapara.htm

In 1986, the ADL formulated model state legislation that would ban
paramilitary training "aimed at provoking civil disorder."[104] In
drafting the model bill, the ADL specifically stated that the statute
must not violate First Amendment   freedoms of speech and association.
Another objective was to draft the statute narrowly so that it would not
prohibit legitimate lawful activities such as target shooting and other
sporting events. This was important, the ADL stated, for "minimizing
opposition to the bill by powerful special interest groups." [105] Laws
based on the statute have passed in Arkansas, California, Colorado,
Connecticut, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Illinois, Michigan, Missouri,
Nebraska, New Jersey, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode
Island, Virginia, and West Virginia.[106]

http://www.channel4000.com/news/dimension/dimension-960425-133523.html

http://www.hatemonitor.org/Research_articles/levin10.html - please read
the last paragraph - keeping records of public speech becomes part of
the procsecutor's toolbox - the speech seems to be a necessary component
of the prosecution.

"The current federal paramilitary training statute, 18 U.S.C. 23 1,
punishes only those who instruct others in fomenting violent civil
disorder. Clearly, the statute should punish trainees as well. Similar
statutes have been enacted in at least 24 states. "

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cacodes/pen/11460.html - Read this one and
think about how speech could be used to facilitate indictment.

http://www.adl.org/mwd/faq5.htm look at the end.