Quote Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh View Post
Freedom of speech does not make you free of the consequences of your speech -- it only prohibits the government from taking action to prevent that speech or taking action against you SOLEY for speaking out. You still bear responsibility for the consequences resulting FROM your speech.
That was not how I read her post but either way my point stands that it can easily result in unnecessary deaths.
I'm aware you cannot prevent all unnecessary deaths but when someone seriously threatens to kill another person I do not agree that the government should stand idly by and wait until the actual killing has been performed before they do something.

Quote Originally Posted by Adrian II View Post
The right to shout "fire" in a crowded theater is the very essence of freedom of speech. If we are not allowed to shout "fire" unless the theater owners (i.e. the authorities) approve of it, we are not free at all.
Arresting someone for simply shouting fire goes beyond seriously threatening a group or individual, don't you think?

Quote Originally Posted by Adrian II View Post
If someone falsely shouts "fire" (that is, if the malicious intent to cause harm is proven) he should be punished for causing panic. But only then. And only for causing panic. If some panicking punters crush their kids in their haste to save numer 1, it's their fault and not the fault of the one who shouted fire. I hate that sort of escapist thinking.
Heh, now you open a completely different can of worms.
I'm inclined to agree that running someone down is only the fault of the one doing it but I'm not sure whether panic per definition cannot mean that people sort of snap out completely and go 100% darwinistic if you know what I mean, like being under an influence that they are not responsible for.