Comment by Traster

To be honest, this isn’t a very good article. Take for example the fire in a crowded theatre point. The article basically just moans about the people making the argument, points out that judicial precedent has moved on since 1919, and lists people that disagree with it. Well sure, but what the article doesn’t actually do is give a good answer as to why you should be allowed to make false statements in the knowledge it will cause harm to others. It doesn’t really provide an answer at all and that’s always the case for these articles - they’re very good at providing reassurance for people who already agree, but very little else.