I kind of agree but you can't be absolutist either. If a mob boss says "kill this guy" to one of his hitmen, and the guy kills him. Only the hitman goes to jail? The mob boss just used his freedom of speech but didn't act?
So what about the threat of violence then. If the mob boss tells the shop keeper “it’s a nice shop you have there, it would be a shame…” and the shop keeper gives him money. Is that still free speech? The mob boss didn’t act on the threat. What about the fatwa against Salman Rushdie, it is just speech? The muslims who decide to act on it aren’t coerced, remunerated or affiliated to the Iranian regime. So it’s a threat of violence but you can make the case the authors aren’t involved themselves in any crime.
Those are good points! But let's consider them in a practical light.
For the mob boss, he is committing an actual crime of extortion. If a shopkeeper goes to police, the mob defense would not be "we were in our rights to threaten", but "we never said this; no idea what the shopkeeper is saying". A prosecutor would have to prove that it was indeed an extortion, but if he proves this to a jury the specific words said would be irrelevant and a first amendment claim would fail.
The same way if an insider is telling a friend about a stock merger during a quiet period, it is an actual crime. The specific words and methods do not matter.
It is tempting to restrict the speech in an attempt to minimize the evil. But giving state this power sooner or later vests it in some political clique that will use it for political suppression; original noble goals be damned. And this is almost impossible to undo.
1. Free speech generally implies speech in the public discourse, not in private.
2. Giving an order to or threatening someone is not “speech” in the sense that you are disseminating a questionable opinion: it is an action. You are quite literally _doing_ something, not just communicating e.g. don corleone’s offer one can’t refuse.
Well depends, do you want to get the mob boss on ‘hate/prohibited’ speech or for ordering a Hit?
He could just go ‘i really don’t like this guy’ and that would be understood at ‘kill him’ without him saying. Would that be ok or you still would want to prosecute him?
