$20 Fine For Swearing in Massachusetts

[Siight]

There's this town in the US, that made it illegal for teenagers to dance...or play music loud. Just crazy.

[herpecin]

did they expressly define what words are "profane"?

if they did then people will just come up with new words that mean the same thing.

if not it wont hold up in court for shit, all you have to do is get a few people to say "that doesnt offend me" and bam that word isnt profane.

[Maelle]

Apparently it's no longer your right as an American to scream out swearwords with impunity in kiddies playgrounds in one town in the USA.

I can totally see why some of you are outraged and comparing this to mass censorship...

....

I lied.

[deadlydee]

if not it wont hold up in court for shit, all you have to do is get a few people to say "that doesnt offend me" and bam that word isnt profane.

"that doesn't offend me" is irrelevant. This is not how the judicial system works.

[Xeonxi]

I'd love to be at a rally where this idea is being thrown around. I'd grab a mic and say, "It's time to crack down! I mean, shit, fuckers need to watch their goddamn mouths before the little brats get their mind around how easily these words flow."

[Darsithis]

It's not really surprising. The same principle applies right now in private venues. For instance, insults and swearing (in an insulting manner) is punishable with infractions & bans here. In public, in Mass, it's a $20 fine. Who knows elsewhere?

if not it wont hold up in court for shit, all you have to do is get a few people to say "that doesnt offend me" and bam that word isnt profane.

It doesn't work that way...

[Rexter2k5]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lqvLTJfYnik

I see your fine of 20 dollars, and raise you one George Carlin skit.

[Maglen]

Clearly a violation of freedom of speech that absolutely will NOT hold up in court.

As Justice John Marshall Harlan wrote in 1971 in Cohen v. California, “one man’s vulgarity is another’s lyric.” In that decision, the Court ruled that an individual had a First Amendment right to wear a jacket bearing the words “F*ck the Draft.”

The Court’s 5-4 ruling in Cohen v. California cleared a wider field for freedom of speech in several ways. It limited the fighting-words doctrine, rejected application of the obscenity doctrine to profanity, emphasized that offensive speech deserves protection and warned against the prospect that the government could ban words to discriminate against unpopular views.

Officials charged Paul Robert Cohen in April 1968 with violating a California law that prohibited disturbing the peace by “offensive conduct.” Cohen’s “offensive conduct” was wearing a jacket in a Los Angeles County Courthouse bearing the words “F*ck the Draft.” Officials noted that women and children were in a corridor Cohen came through wearing his jacket.

As shown, offenseive speech is protected and using disturbing the peace due to offensive speech doesn't fly.

http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/...otected-speech

[Lassira]

Swearing is probably the most interesting thing I can find about languages.
Why is there a certain set of words just put aside considered "bad words" that shouldn't be used, but it's okay if you substitute another word(such as "ffff" or "frick") because... it's not that word. Even though you mean exactly the same exact thing and it conveys the same message.

Blows my mind.

[Chireru93]

To me, this is taking it way too far. If you cuss in public, people think negatively of you. But to me, why is that? What is so different and magical about "cuss-words"? I really don't get it. Those words have "distateful" meanings sure, whatever, but so many other words do too that people never think twice about. Instead of going downtown and saying "oh I'd fuck her! ohh yeah!" I'd just say "I'd bang her all night!" or something like that, or instead of "You asshole" I'd say "You jerk", but what is the difference? In reality, there is none. We're just brought up to believe there is, but all in all they're just WORDS.

In short, they're cracking down on people cussing in public instead of people who are actually causing problems. Also, I'd like to see someone with vocal-tourettes in their downtown area (yes I know not everyone who has tourettes cusses, I have tourettes and I don't, but some do). "Sir you've racked up a $500 fine now" "But officer, I'm medically unwell in that regard" "Don't care, it's the law".

[Santti]

That's just stupid. Hearing constant swearing from some person can be annoying, but it's still just that: annoying. It's not hurting anyone, they are just words to spice up the meaning behind other words. People really should grow thicker skins.

[Shoukyaku]

Then pack your fucking shit and move to china commie. God damn, I cant believe someone actually said this bullshit.

Infracted: Please, refrain from personally insulting other posters.

Haha speak of the devil, in comes the moderators whom dont have a real job in to ban someone for speaking their mind. Must be rough having to resort to the internet to have domain over someone in a fantasy pixel land because in real life they are fry cooks and no one likes/respects them.


If you have a problem with a mod or something they have done PM Sunshine about it.

[Kasierith]

It's not really surprising. The same principle applies right now in private venues. For instance, insults and swearing (in an insulting manner) is punishable with infractions & bans here. In public, in Mass, it's a $20 fine. Who knows elsewhere?

Private organizations and such have the right to maintain their own affairs... freedom of speech does not apply to them. Freedom of speech is government only, which includes local government, so that's why this issue is so distinct.

Haha speak of the devil, in comes the moderators whom dont have a real job in to ban someone for speaking their mind. Must be rough having to resort to the internet to have domain over someone in a fantasy pixel land because in real life they are fry cooks and no one likes/respects them.

Judging from the maturity of.. pretty much all the mods on the site compared to what you've just shown, I'm fairly certain they're doing better off than you are. Besides that, if you don't like the mods here, there are probably tons of forums out there without internal regulation

[Maelle]

Haha speak of the devil, in comes the moderators whom dont have a real job in to ban someone for speaking their mind. Must be rough having to resort to the internet to have domain over someone in a fantasy pixel land because in real life they are fry cooks and no one likes/respects them.

This guy got a 20 dollar fine for swearing today in a park.

[Seramore]

Good thing I live near Middleboro. I'm going to go there, and swear my head off in front of City Hall, then sue the city for infringing upon my freedom of speech.

No you aren't.

[Deleted]

All they need is for one person who recieves this ticket to challenge it, and the whole law will topple.

[Adam Jensen]

I don't fucking think people will fucking enforce this fucking stupid law. I mean, its fucking unreasonable when you fucking think about it. Twenty fucking dollars for fucking saying words like fuck? Fuck that.

---------- Post added 2012-06-12 at 05:00 PM ----------

To me, this is taking it way too far. If you cuss in public, people think negatively of you. But to me, why is that? What is so different and magical about "cuss-words"? I really don't get it. Those words have "distateful" meanings sure, whatever, but so many other words do too that people never think twice about. Instead of going downtown and saying "oh I'd fuck her! ohh yeah!" I'd just say "I'd bang her all night!" or something like that, or instead of "You asshole" I'd say "You jerk", but what is the difference? In reality, there is none. We're just brought up to believe there is, but all in all they're just WORDS.

In short, they're cracking down on people cussing in public instead of people who are actually causing problems. Also, I'd like to see someone with vocal-tourettes in their downtown area (yes I know not everyone who has tourettes cusses, I have tourettes and I don't, but some do). "Sir you've racked up a $500 fine now" "But officer, I'm medically unwell in that regard" "Don't care, it's the law".

Agreed. All jokes aside, I never understood "swearing." They're just words. Who decides which ones are vulgar and which ones we aren't allowed to use?

[KingHorse]

It's appalling how some of you are trying to rationalize/make exceptions on what free speech is, how it's used or when/where. Free speech is Free speech is free speech. Volume of said speech doesn't change it, select words doesn't change it. Again you may not agree with usage of profanity, but you don't get to make exceptions on what free speech is.

By this logic any prude with a hair up their ass can start applying that to any topic they don't like. "Whats that your slamming my church and my political view?" here's a fine for cough cough public disturbance.

It's being rationalized and explained because your concept of "free speech is free speech" isn't how it works. The Supreme Court has ruled a couple times on exactly what free speech means. And the people in this thread are explaining what those rulings mean and how they pertain to this law.

Yelling "fire!" in a crowded building when there is indeed no fire, for instance, is not protected as free speech. Because it endangers all of the people in the building who would immediately try to flee for their lives.

In other words: yes, you do get to make exceptions to what free speech is. Or the Supreme Court does anyway.

[Maglen]

It's being rationalized and explained because your concept of "free speech is free speech" isn't how it works. The Supreme Court has ruled a couple times on exactly what free speech means. And the people in this thread are explaining what those rulings mean and how they pertain to this law.

Yelling "fire!" in a crowded building when there is indeed no fire, for instance, is not protected as free speech. Because it endangers all of the people in the building who would immediately try to flee for their lives.

In other words: yes, you do get to make exceptions to what free speech is. Or the Supreme Court does anyway.

But in this specific case the speech in question, profanity, is protected by the Constitution and supported by the Supreme Court. Just because you don't like what someone says doesn't mean you can try to censor it, unless it's deemed hate speech.

[KingHorse]

Haha speak of the devil, in comes the moderators whom dont have a real job in to ban someone for speaking their mind. Must be rough having to resort to the internet to have domain over someone in a fantasy pixel land because in real life they are fry cooks and no one likes/respects them.

Yah, fight the man, you rebel you!

---------- Post added 2012-06-12 at 05:24 PM ----------

But in this specific case the speech in question, profanity, is protected by the Constitution and supported by the Supreme Court. Just because you don't like what someone says doesn't mean you can try to censor it, unless it's deemed hate speech.

And I agree. Did you read the quote I was responding to? Or just assume my opinion?

For clarity: my opinion is that this law is shit, and infringes on the Constitutional rights of the citizens of this town.