<:poi:484276893160308746>

Why do you disagree? @Paradox

because half the point of speech is to disrupt.

causing people to panic cause they think there is a fire causing harm through trampling or who knows what should be illegal

It is illegal.

i kno

@Coochie coo nej det er jeg ikke

papadox thinks it it should be legal

😂

blaming the actions of others on your actions, isn't something I tend to go along with either.

if you are going to panic over a fire, you should see a fire first, or you are a moron

the intent of yelling fire in a crowded space is to cause harm

is it?

which is why it is illegal

always?

yes

How about Yelling "You're Fired!"?

even when there is a fire?

Americas drug traffic is very nice

fine, ill play that game and rephrase

if there is an actual fire, that is not under "the intent to cause harm"

the intent of yelling fire in a crowded space, when there is no fire, is to cause harm

well, what if there is some other reason other than intending harm?

can u think of one

idk, maybe u got a song stuck in yoru head

maybe you got tourrett's

lmfao

i think I've made my point clear now

that is so ridiculous I will not entertain that

y is that ridiculous?

what's ridiculous is assuming intent

løgner @exaudi632 jesus elsker

Ah, yes, I had a song stuck in my head mr. judge, that is why I yelled fire. Please don't punish me.

heck, maybe you didn't know and your friends dared you to, there's a ton of reasons

I think we took the conversation to it's conclusion

sure, you think that actions in themselves have an assigned intent. I think differently.

Paradox, I can believe it isn't intentional to cause harm if it's a six year old. but an adult is a different story

I'm sure you have already, but have you talked to any VW bus clubs? I use to own a 1967 vw bus and they are very customizable, just a thought @Timcast

even then, why are people solely believing a 6 yo is beyond me

I don't think that actions have defined intent, but they do have defined consequences