We've been discussing the question of people's responsibility for words. For example, when Trump waxes nostalgic for the days when people like the hecklers in his crowds would be taken out on stretchers, is he responsible (morally or legally) if that happens? Or, if Bernie Sanders criticizes Donald Trump's presidency, is he responsible if some guy half-way across the country shoots a Congress member (yeah, I know, that's absurdly more attenuated, but there are people trying to argue it, so I'll throw it out there.)?
Along those lines, I wanted to call attention to a new verdict that really changes the legal landscape with regard to the question.
http://www.cnn.com/2017/06/16/us/michelle-carter-texting-case/index.html
In short, a kid named Michelle Carter was found guilty of involuntary manslaughter for urging her suicidal boyfriend to kill himself. The case turned on a phone call between the two, where he exited a carbon-monoxide-filled truck, where he was trying to kill himself, and she encouraged him to get back in. The defense pointed out she'd started by trying to encourage him not to kill himself, but over time came to believe he was in so much psychological pain it was his only way out. The prosecution argued she was cynically seeking the popularity boost that would come at high school from being the grieving girlfriend.
So, what do people here think? I'm pretty close to a free-speech absolutist, so I'm appalled by the verdict. I think that encouraging someone to commit violence, either against others or against himself, should be viewed as protected speech under the First Amendment. I believe there's a line that can be crossed, where the person is actually incentivizing the conduct (e.g., promising to pay a contract killer for a murder, or promising to pay the legal bills of a thug who assaults the speaker's political enemies), and then it's no longer free speech. But short of something like that, I think people should be free to make whatever arguments they want, even arguments in favor of violence.
It's not hard to picture how a precedent like the Michelle Carter case could lead down a dangerous legal path. For example, what about cases where doctors or loved ones suggest to a seriously ill patient that it's not worth putting himself through the hell of treatment for a few extra months of life? If the patient listens to that advice, his death could be said to be attributable to those words. Similarly, what if you were to text "you should kick his ass" to a friend who is complaining about bad treatment -- if that text is discovered after your friend actually does assault the person, should you share in legal liability for that?