Moderators: carlson1, Charles L. Cotton
What you list is already illegal. It's fraud, theft, embezzlement, and a number of other crimes may fit the facts.Beiruty wrote:Chas,
How about con'ing naive people, investors, etc? People lose their life long earnings because of one's lies. If this is not illegal, where is justice?
FWIW, I agree Charles, though the context causes me some emotional tumoil. However, isn't that very close to what Martha Stewart went to prison for?Charles L. Cotton wrote:Think about what this law does; it makes a false statement not made under oath a criminal offense. That's ridiculous.
I agree! Anyone who would lie about being in the service or receiving a medal is worthy of all the ridicule we can heap on them; but they haven't committed a crime.chartreuse wrote:FWIW, I agree Charles, though the context causes me some emotional tumoil. However, isn't that very close to what Martha Stewart went to prison for?Charles L. Cotton wrote:Think about what this law does; it makes a false statement not made under oath a criminal offense. That's ridiculous.
Lying under oath is still a illegal as intended, which relates to the 5th amendment, does this mean all libel and slander suits are no longer relevant?bnc wrote:I agree with the ruling. Lying about the medal, while pathetic, does not deprive anyone else of their property. The 1st Amendment is needed to protect vile, offensive speech; if what is spoken offends nobody, then it has little need for protection.
That being said, as that loser has his freedom of speech so do we, and we can call him every name in the book.
As those of you know who have served we actually LOSE a lot of rights by defending the rights of the American people.Clearly not the people dying to protect the 1st Amendment
Conning someone for illegitimate and fraudulent financial gain is already against the law - regardless of whether or not you use fake military glory to pull off the con, or use some other lie. Why should lying about having been awarded the Navy Cross be any more or less illegal than lying about your sick mother's cancer or lying about your religious beliefs? If you merely state it as a lie, to puff yourself up or make someone feel sorry for you, it is despicable, but not criminal. But you tell that lie to try and separate someone from their money in a fraudulent enterprise, then it is a crime - regardless of what lie you used.Beiruty wrote:Chas,
How about con'ing naive people, investors, etc? People lose their life long earnings because of one's lies. If this is not illegal, where is justice?
“A panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals sided with him in a 2-1 decision Tuesday, agreeing that the law was a violation of his free-speech rights. The majority said there's no evidence that such lies harm anybody, and there's no compelling reason for the government to ban such lies.”Charles L. Cotton wrote:I hate to agree with the 9th Circuit Court, but I must. The law is absurd and the only reason it has any support is because it deals with the military.
Think about what this law does; it makes a false statement not made under oath a criminal offense. That's ridiculous. As the Court noted:
Chas.9th Circuit Court wrote:“There would be no constitutional bar to criminalizing lying about one’s height, weight, age, or financial status on Match.com or Facebook, or falsely representing to one’s mother that one does not smoke, drink alcoholic beverages, is a virgin, or has not exceeded the speed limit while driving on the freeway,” . . . “The sad fact is, most people lie about some aspects of their lives from time to time.”
Is it not fraud to impersonate a military person? Must that fraud only be defined as wearing a military uniform you have not earned the right to wear?Charles L. Cotton wrote:What you list is already illegal. It's fraud, theft, embezzlement, and a number of other crimes may fit the facts.Beiruty wrote:Chas,
How about con'ing naive people, investors, etc? People lose their life long earnings because of one's lies. If this is not illegal, where is justice?
Chas.
Another waste of money in an already broke state. A lie is a false statement committed by a liar. Lying, just like stupidity, is not against the law. Lying under oath, fraud, embezzelment, theft, etc., are against the law.VoiceofReason wrote:“The U.S. Attorney's Office in Los Angeles said it was deciding whether to appeal Tuesday's ruling.”
Let’s hope they appeal and have a better attorney when they do.
AgainOldgringo wrote:Another waste of money in an already broke state. A lie is a false statement committed by a liar. Lying, just like stupidity, is not against the law. Lying under oath, fraud, embezzelment, theft, etc., are against the law.VoiceofReason wrote:“The U.S. Attorney's Office in Los Angeles said it was deciding whether to appeal Tuesday's ruling.”
Let’s hope they appeal and have a better attorney when they do.
If lying was against the law we wouldn't have towns and cities, we would only have prisons with no one to administer them.
Surely, in an action for defamation, the issue is the harm that the plaintiff might suffer as a result of the words. If the defendant can show that the statement was true, then that's a defence, but the offence is to do with the harm, not the falsehood per se.VoiceofReason wrote:Again
“The dissenting justice insisted that the majority refused to follow clear Supreme Court precedent that false statements of fact are not entitled to First Amendment protection.”
How does this ruling square with slander and libel?
Would statements like "I believe judge X is taking bribes" be considered constitutionally protected free speech?
How about “I slept/am sleeping with that judge’s (or the president’s) daughter”?
