By that logic if you are in favour of actionable threats being illegal you should have no problem with this. It's just speech after all.
I'm also in favour of limits on speech, but I draw the line at threats and sustained harassment. I don't think the tweet in the article rises to that level, and I don't think I'm a hypocrite for allowing that tweet but not allowing threats.
I do understand there are benefits to the all-or-nothing approach to free speech though.
I'm also in favour of limits on speech, but I draw the line at threats and sustained harassment. I don't think the tweet in the article rises to that level, and I don't think I'm a hypocrite for allowing that tweet but not allowing threats.
I do understand there are benefits to the all-or-nothing approach to free speech though.