I Defend Your Right To Speech Revealing That You Are A Despicable Person -- And We All Should
Houston #BlackLivesMatter supporter Monica Foy tweeted something truly terrible -- a tweet reflecting her apparent support for the cold-blooded murder of Sheriff's Deputy Darren Goforth.
From Breitbart's Brandon Darby:
Foy deleted the tweet after numerous individuals began criticizing her on the social media platform. Immediately prior to the offending tweet, Foy tweeted her support for #BlackLivesMatter. Her Facebook account shows that she studies English literature at Sam Houston University.
On Twitter, people (@aleykhat is one) started hammering the school, demanding that they do something about her speech.
Unfortunately for civil liberties, Sam Houston State University, per campus free speech defenders theFIRE.org, isn't so hot on free speech.
If Foy used the wifi at school to tweet her message, she's probably in some trouble. (SHSU "Internet Usage Policies" as of September, 2014):
All individuals are accountable for their actions relating to SHSU information technology resources. Direct violations include the following: ... Intentionally accessing, creating, storing or transmitting material which SHSU may deem to be offensive, indecent or obscene (other than in the course of academic research or authorized administrative duties where this aspect of the research or work has the explicit approval of the SHSU official processes for dealing with academic ethical issues).
I think she's horrible to have tweeted that -- and I also think she deserves our strong support of her free speech.
People coming after her on Twitter, demanding that the college take action, are the antithesis of do-gooders. We all need to support the free speech of assholes and truly terrible people. That's how the speech of all of us remains free.
In short, I not only defend your right to say absolutely terrible things -- I celebrate it.
And finally, a word from @ClarkHat and @BlazerMc88:
Personally, I prefer it when idiots are nice and open about it. It's good the way they make it nice and obvious, so you don't have to waste time finding out for yourself. Not sure about how I feel about the university's attitude toward students using their wifi to make offensive statements.
Can they truly regulate that? Are they prepared to come down on all the horny coeds using their wifi to view porn, for instance? Or is porn okay, while making idiotic offensive statements gets you in trouble?
I think either the university should not concern itself with what the students do with the wifi, since (as far as I know) it's impossible to regulate, or make the students buy their own.
Still shaking my head over the idea that someone who has "creepy perv eyes" (an objective fact, of course) deserves to get shot. And of course, we all know that you can tell a "creepy perv" by their looks. As I recall, Ted Bundy was able to attract at least some of his victims by the very fact that he looked so innocuous.
Patrick at September 1, 2015 10:53 PM
Personally, I prefer it when idiots are nice and open about it. It's good the way they make it nice and obvious, so you don't have to waste time finding out for yourself.
Perfectly said Patrick.
JFP at September 2, 2015 1:24 AM
This opens another chapter in the ongoing drama: what happens now when this ridiculous person has to call the police?
You know at some point in her life she'll have to.
Radwaste at September 2, 2015 2:25 AM
Marty Feldman had creepy perv eyes...
mer at September 2, 2015 3:34 AM
Is everyone missing the point of this?
When a cop gets shot, and someone implies he might have "had it coming", it's EVIL AND WRONG.
When a cop shoots someone, everyone jumps on the victim. Hey, that might be EVIL AND WRONG also.
And free speech is free speech. Not just the free speech you like.
DrCos at September 2, 2015 3:42 AM
Actually, Dr Cos, noone seems to be missing the point. Reread the post, especially towards the bottom where Amy pretty much says:
"... short, I not only defend your right to say absolutely terrible things -- I celebrate it."
All the replies so far, noone has said anything remotely like "Monica Foy should have her license to speak revoked" (as you are implying).
As for cops involved in shootings (as either the shooter or the shootee), I prefer to wait until ALL the facts are in before jumpin on anyone.
mer at September 2, 2015 5:00 AM
You have the right to free speech. You do not have the right to consequence-free free speech. If the school doesn't want their internet used for certain activities, that's their right. If she doesn't like it, she can not pay them her money to attend that school. That's her right.
She's scum. No one does anything to deserve being executed without trial, in this country. I personally hope her revealing her views (as was her right) ruins her life.
momof4 at September 2, 2015 5:40 AM
She deserves the same treatment she would get if she advocated the death of a political figure.
Expecting cops, firemen, and other first responders to exposure themselves to ambush can not be tolerated.
You really don't want citizens feeling like they need to protect these guys. You really don't but there are many that will and treat the area like a war zone.
I don't need a gun. I just need to be there in the crowd w/something from the kitchen or the tool shed. After listening to 'fools' talking about killing them 'suckers' I might misunderstand and feel threatened for my life.
The 'old guys' in the crowd who have relatives in the 'danger zone' being helped will probably help by being quiet.
Bob in Texas at September 2, 2015 6:18 AM
I'm finding it hard to gin up sympathy one of the twitter rage mobsters who will cheerfully go after me and my employment if they think I said anything untoward in their presence.
I maybe mistaken, but I'm pretty sure that most of the people who post positively about #BlackLivesMatter are twitter rage mobsters who will have a cow about anyone who tweets #AllLivesMatter.
This is what free speech for me but not thee feels like when you're the not thee. Let her bask in it for a while.
Then SHSU should leave her alone and let her deal with her peers shunning her.
I R A Darth Aggie at September 2, 2015 6:20 AM
And I just looked, wanting to get a sense of her twitter history, and the little gutless coward has deleted her account (or made it unfindable, if that's possible).
Maxim 16: Your name is in the mouth of others: be sure it has teeth.
I R A Darth Aggie at September 2, 2015 6:44 AM
She will learn that stupidity lives forever on the internet. Should she graduate, I'm sure she will find a job search interesting.
MarkD at September 2, 2015 6:47 AM
I'm with Patrick; I like it when stupid and vindictive people have opportunities to show exactly what they are. Saves me a lot of trouble.
Cousin Dave at September 2, 2015 7:09 AM
Foy's been arrested on an existing warrant:
http://www.breitbart.com/texas/2015/09/02/texas-woman-who-tweeted-deputy-deserved-execution-arrested-on-assault-charge/
Amy Alkon at September 2, 2015 7:34 AM
Amy, maybe the one she assaulted had "creepy perv eyes."
Patrick at September 2, 2015 8:30 AM
All the replies so far, noone has said anything remotely like "Monica Foy should have her license to speak revoked" (as you are implying).
Until the post(s) following...
The point remains that the media and others are quick to say this kind of thing about victims when they are gunned down by the police...
That's "free speech" and so is this. And yes, we do have the right to 'consequence-free' free speech. She didn't incite violence here. She just pissed a lot of people off. Trump has the same effect.
drcos at September 2, 2015 8:46 AM
DrCos, I didn't overlook the fact that what she said was evil and wrong, I simply didn't want to belabor the obvious.
Amy's post was about free speech and her right to say terrible things. Amy treated it as a given that what she said was horrible, and I did likewise. I assume everyone else did, too. I don't think any of the posters who replied need to be told that what she said was disgusting, or why it was so disgusting.
Patrick at September 2, 2015 8:56 AM
I don't agree that justice has been served here. Cops should not be able to choose whom to arrest based on who annoys them. If that warrant hadn't been out there, I bet they would have planted something on her and made the bust anyway. Just like the year of harassment by cops that Zimmerman got after his rightful win in court.
The more behavior like this I see, the more I think Ms. Foy's original question was called for. Cops who bust or beat up people for sassing them (or for consensual crimes) are more of a danger to us than not having them around.
jdgalt at September 2, 2015 9:10 AM
Interesting, I read her comment and assumed she was parodying all the "he musta doon something to deserve it, he looks like a thug" comments that some out whenever a black kid gets shot.
NicoleK at September 2, 2015 10:31 AM
First, suspects are rarely "gunned down" by the police. When the police do use excessive force, or any force at all, the case is reviewed (often by a civilian review board) and a debate about police use of force is ignited. Police are answerable to society for their use of force, excessive or not
Second, we empower the police to enforce laws and ensure safety. We require that they complete hours of education and training in law enforcement and public safety before we sanction them. We hold the police accountable.
And, yes, there are some exceptions in small towns for staffing considerations - but even those are usually required to eventually acquire some training and certification.
Thugs who pump 15 rounds into an already dead victim are not empowered by society, nor are they enforcing laws or ensuring safety. In fact, this thug endangered public safety by spraying hot lead around a gas station.
Because of that sanction, we generally assume that anyone shot by the police must have engaged in some action that precipitated the use of force, even inadvertently. We generally give the police the benefit of the doubt.
As a society, we are usually shocked and dismayed in those cases in which we find that the police were not justified in the use of force since we place such trust in them and grant them a near-reflexive benefit of the doubt.
And what societal good is to be derived from the brutal murder of Deputy Goforth? At a gas station filling his patrol car with lawfully purchased gasoline? Gasoline that could have ignited if struck by a wayward bullet.
What societal sanction did his murderer have in his use of force? Was he authorized by a judge or societal mandate to carry a firearm in public in search of targets?
Yes, we call the woman who alleged that Goforth deserved it because of his "creepy perv eyes" evil and wrong. She sanctions open season on police officers. She makes no valid argument for the brutal murder of Deputy Goforth - no self-defense claim, no community anger claim, no defense at all, save that he had "creepy perv eyes" and so, must have deserved it.
And you'll notice, she had an outstanding warrant for physical assault on a coworker. Ever notice how so many people who express supposedly righteous anger toward the police are not exactly upstanding members of society?
Conan the Grammarian at September 2, 2015 10:42 AM
Conan: And you'll notice, she had an outstanding warrant for physical assault on a coworker.
Why is no one asking what the coworker might have done to deserve being assaulted? That coworker might have had creepy perv eyes.
Patrick at September 2, 2015 10:53 AM
Nope. Not at all.
If you open your mouth, you are responsible for the words coming out.
You don't get to cry "free speech" and not suffer the ramifications and societal blow-back of what you've said - whether you're a liberal activist, a presidential candidate, or a Klansman.
You do, however, get to be free from government-sanctioned harassment (e.g., writs of attainder) due to the unpopularity of something you said.
She may not have directly called for violence (like the Twitter ragers of FYF911). However, she sanctioned open season on and murder of police officers.
Like Trump? Really? Trump's a blowhard, but despite what you believe, Trump hasn't said anyone deserves to be gunned down while engaged in lawful activities.
Conan the Grammarian at September 2, 2015 11:06 AM
"And yes, we do have the right to 'consequence-free' free speech. "
No. You don't. We don't. You can say things, and people can decide they no longer want to associate with you, for it. Employers can decide you are not the sort they want representing them, and fire you. You can walk up to some bangers girlfriend and tell her she looks like a Ho, but telling the banger you have the right to free speech isn't going to keep you from having your ass beat. You can tell cops you're glad they're killed, but you can't keep them from then running you for warrants.
When he was younger, my little brother liked to smart off to people and then run. One day, he was doing it to the football team on the bus. He thought he'd be safe. Nope. They got off on his stop. To my bro's credit, he took it like a man. And when he got home, far from sympathy, what he got from my mom was "I told you if you kept being a smartass, you were going to get your butt kicked. Now, have you learned your lesson, or will you get shot one day?". He learned his lesson.
And what she said certainly "could" be construed as inciting violence, though I don't think official sanction should befall her. No one arrested her for what she said. But...if you're hiding from a warrant, you probably shouldn't put yourself in the middle of a public controversy. So, no sympathy for her arrest on that warrant, at all.
momof4 at September 2, 2015 11:14 AM
jdgalt - "Cops who bust or beat up people for sassing them (or for consensual crimes) are more of a danger to us than not having them around."
Statistically ALL non-violent people regardles of color have less risk from cops than any other non-LEO/military group.
Statistically ANY group of people singled out as a group that is to be harmed as a matter of normal behavior is at significant risk of harm from people with poor impulse control and much hatred (themselves, each other, other races).
#blacklivesmatter is calling for the murder of cops and white people AND IS NOT being shouted down as being a BAD thing to say.
The fact that no black leader (ours in particular) is not stating that this behavior is not to be tolerated is the same complaint that most make about moderate Muslims not speaking out about radicals.
Silence is tacit approval.
Meanwhile,
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/01/us/murder-rates-rising-sharply-in-many-us-cities.html
Bob in Texas at September 2, 2015 11:19 AM
Bob in Texas: "Silence is tacit approval."
Absolutely - and their "silence" is shouting very loudly.
I'm with Patrick on this - let the idiots open their mouths so we know who they are. Trying to shut them up will only send them "underground" and make them harder to watch out for.
charles at September 2, 2015 11:31 AM
I assumed he meant legal consequences for speech. With some exceptions, yes, he's basically right. We can say whatever we want and not be arrested for it. As for societal consequences, of course we don't have consequence-free speech. Otherwise, none of us could truly have free speech.
If you get to say whatever you want, but I don't get to criticize you for it, then obviously, I don't have free speech. And vice-versa. If you don't get to criticize me for the things I say, then obviously, you don't have free speech.
Patrick at September 2, 2015 11:36 AM
It is correct to say Ms. Foy has the right of free speech. At the same time consequences can follow your use there of. Ms. Foy by accepting and attending Sam Houston State she agreed and signed paperwork saying she would follow the regulations of the school just as I did 37 years ago as a Freshman at SHSU.
One must understand the culture of the campus at Sam as we call our university. Sam Houston State located in Huntsville, Texas is home to the nationally prestigious School of Criminal Justice. It is why there was such an outpouring on Social Media on the University's facebook page. Also in Huntsville is the Headquarters for Texas Dept. of Criminal Justice, state's prison system. There are five TDCJ prison units in the city limits and an additional two in the county.
Kim at September 2, 2015 1:14 PM
Ms. Foy by accepting and attending Sam Houston State she agreed and signed paperwork saying she would follow the regulations of the school just as I did 37 years ago as a Freshman at SHSU.
But at the same time many colleges have argued, and courts have agreed in every instance, that such codes of conduct are not binding contracts and neither side is legally obligated to abide by them
lujlp at September 2, 2015 2:27 PM
Nicely said, Patrick.
BTW, remember Alexandra Wallace, ex-UCLA student, and her infamous Youtube video from March 2011?
http://www.thesportsbank.net/the-bank/alexandra-wallace-racist-youtube-ucla-632/
Interesting comments, including the last one.
(it's not certain that that the woman in the photo is the same person)
You can also find satirical videos under "Best Alexandra Wallace Responses."
lenona at September 5, 2015 11:13 AM
Leave a comment