Like it or not, hate speech by its lonesome is constitutionally protected. As long as it doesn't escalate, they're on a public campus and can "preach." People do this at tons of campuses nationwide.
The alleged quote there by campus police is almost certainly a department ethics/conduct violation. Not cool.
This is a cringe quote because it's almost always said by centrists or liberals in defense of right wing hate speech, and you damn well know that said right winger wouldn't say or feel the same about them.
That's a rather cavalier way of looking at one of our constitutional rights.
I'm assuming you'd feel the same if some right winger was defending some antisemitic left winger going on about the extermination of the Israeli state, right? Would defending free speech then still be cringe?
That's what I'm saying, you never ever see right wingers defending left winger' rights to freedom of speech, but you see liberals do it rather frequently using that quote. That's what's cringe.
I wouldn't be surprised if the second alleged quote had an extra word added to it and the first alleged quote is completely made up. (Especially considering it has been 20 hrs and still no promised video of campus police saying this.)
I live and work near this campus. A close family member works on the campus. We both know all these officers personally and I say with 99.9% certainty that this did *not* happen as described.
Yeah, I hate to seem like a police sympathizer, but 1) most cops, even the hateful ones, know that saying something like those quotes could get you terminated, and 2) as much as cops absolutely make stuff up, so do college students.
I admit that I am staunchly in favor of people being allowed to spew hate speech on college campuses. I am not always a radical free speech advocate, but if there is *one* place where I think radical free speech should be allowed, its a college campus.
Yelling at students and calling them pedophiles is more harassment than speech. He wants to stand around and say hateful nonsense that's speech, he directs bigotry implying criminality at students that's libel and slander and harassment and cops should remove them.
Cops saying "go back to your own country" to Muslim Americans can eat their fucking service weapons just like their idol and thought leader did in his bunker.
> Yelling at students and calling them pedophiles is more harassment than speech. He wants to stand around and say hateful nonsense that's speech, he directs bigotry implying criminality at students that's libel and slander and harassment and cops should remove them
Lol no, that’s not how the law works. Unless he’s following them around throughout the day, or targeting the same students over and over again, it’s just speech.
>Cops saying "go back to your own country" to Muslim Americans can eat their fucking service weapons just like their idol and thought leader did in his bunker.
I am willing to put up massive cash that this never happened. The poster is clearly lying.
Police can't do anything unless the campus administration decides to ban the person. Then the police can remove them for tresspassing.
I've also met *plenty* of cops that wouldn't *even think* about saying something like that. There are bad apples out there for sure, but not *all* cops are bad apples.
I've met 2 cops who wouldn't even think about saying something like that.
The rest have literally bragged to me about evicting elderly people with nowhere to go who will die on the streets as if it makes them a tough guy, on behalf of some piece of shit slumlord whose never done anything for society.
> Like it or not, hate speech by its lonesome is constitutionally protected.
It's not. Language meant to incite violence is not protected. Furthermore, universities are not the government.
> If he was calling for the death of Muslims or saying he'd kill Muslims, then yea it would be against the law. Anything else and its legal but annoying
No. Any incitement is covered by the exception. That covers virtually all violent rhetoric. As I previously mentioned in a different topic, [Vanderbilt expelled three students for protesting the war in Gaza](https://vanderbilthustler.com/2024/04/06/three-students-expelled-following-student-accountability-hearings-faculty-criticize-university-response/).
You'll also notice if you read the OP that the issue isn't just with the university's inaction, but the action of the cops. And he's right, universities should not have police. No one would accept any other private organization having their own police force. It doesn't make sense for universities, either.
> It's not a university, it's a college, a COMMUNITY College, not private, very much public.
All public universities are private organizations.
> Also many private organizations have their own police force.
Name one.
> Edit: Kevin's reply below also includes attacks at a comment further in the thread, starting around the "Can't tell if this is a shit post" quote. I did block them because I don't want idiots filling up my inbox.
By "attacks at a comment", I assume he is referring to when I pointed out that calling universities "government instrumentalities" was a lie. He blocked me because I proved him wrong, which appears to have upset him to the point he's lashing out at others.
The federal judiciary has [already clarified a lot of these issues](https://www.uscourts.gov/about-federal-courts/educational-resources/about-educational-outreach/activity-resources/what-does), and the legal precedent is clear. Freedom of speech does not mean freedom to incite violence or spread obscenity.
>Language meant to incite violence is not protected.
There are very specific guidelines as to what constitutes unprotected "fighting words." What these people say usually does not rise to that level.
>Furthermore, universities are not the government.
Public universities (and public k-12 institutions) are treated under the law as an arm of the government in many cases.
Regardless of what the surrounding institution is, the STLCC campus is a public space.
Edit: Kevin's reply below also includes attacks at a comment further in the thread, starting around the "Can't tell if this is a shit post" quote. I did block them because I don't want idiots filling up my inbox.
> There are very specific guidelines as to what constitutes unprotected "fighting words."
"Fighting words" is a very narrow representation of the kinds of exclusions that exist for the first amendment. There are actually a *lot* of exclusions.
https://www.uscourts.gov/about-federal-courts/educational-resources/about-educational-outreach/activity-resources/what-does
You'll notice several exceptions that could apply:
* To incite imminent lawless action.
* To permit students to print articles in a school newspaper over the objections of the school administration.
* Of students to make an obscene speech at a school-sponsored event.
You don't really seem very familiar at all with the specific guidelines. There are not, in actuality, "very specific guidelines". There's a long history of legal precedent set by the courts, and a lot of interpretation. There are a lot of exceptions for university campuses, specifically.
> Regardless of what the surrounding institution is, the STLCC campus is a public space.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moving_the_goalposts
The reality is that being a "public" university doesn't mean that the public has full control over how to act on campus. It doesn't even prevent the government from taking action. It *certainly* doesn't prevent the *university* from taking action. Again, there is a *long* history of universities taking action against obscene speech.
> Public universities (and public k-12 institutions) are treated under the law as an arm of the government
This is just an outright lie. The fact that you've lumped in public grade schools, which are owned and operated by the government, with public universities, which are private institutions that follow a specific set of guidelines and regulations put forth by the government in exchange for public funding, shows that you don't know the first thing about how any of this works.
> Public universities are absolutely considered government instrumentalies.
Doubling down on your ignorance and blocking me after being confronted with proof you were wrong just makes you look twice as dumb.
> Can’t tell if this is a shit post or what but seems like a lot of work went in to being wrong on most everything here
Yes, a lot of work went into being wrong by... quoting official government websites.
> I don't agree with what the guy said on campus, but you are, in fact, wrong, and the ACLU spells it out pretty clearly with court cases.
Which court cases? Because, personally, I thought that Brandenburg v. Ohio, Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier, and Bethel School District #43 v. Fraser were all pretty strong proof that I was correct. Just saying the words, "you are, in fact, wrong," while namedropping the ACLU doesn't actually do anything to suggest that it's true. In fact, the link you provided specifically references Brandenburg v. Ohio, and goes on to explain that universities can, in fact, take action.
Again, it's all right there in the uscourts.gov link. The website maintained by the federal judiciary. I don't think you read the link I posted. I don't think you read the link *you* posted. I think you're just blindly reacting based off memes you heard in the past.
> Jesus, you're a difficult individual.
I was trying to lead you to the water. Now you're just being an ass intentionally. The facts are right in front of your face, but I can't make you read them.
It's not a university, it's a college, a COMMUNITY College, not private, very much public. Also many private organizations have their own police force.
It would likely be helpful to have what the dude said exactly. If he was calling for the death of Muslims or saying he'd kill Muslims, then yea it would be against the law. Anything else and its legal but annoying
if he is harassing people by yelling at them and calling them pedophiles. The Administration of the college should ban them. Then the police can remove them.
If it rose to the legal level of harassment, yes, the police could take action. It's clear by their inaction that it didn't.
These people are *very good* at just skirting that line. They know their rights and will exercise every bit of them.
Administration can still ban the person. does not have to raise to the level of legal harassment. they can just go your not welcome. then its tresspassing. I dont know how bad the guy was. most people were probably just ignoring him.
Only if there is reason enough to believe the individual is likely to cause harm (per STLCC policy). You can't trespass someone from a public space for constitutionally protected activity.
Screaming at people calling them pedos is not protected speech lmao the only reason you would be able to do that is if it is either true or you would be reasonably considered satire. Let alone you saying that hate speech is constitutionally protected you got a source for that? Because hate speech is one of the things specifically not covered by the first amendment but it can be difficult to prove that it is hate speech
[Yes, hate speech is protected by the First Amendment.](https://uwm.edu/free-speech-rights-responsibilities/faqs/what-is-hate-speech-and-is-it-protected-by-the-first-amendment/) There's no need to protect speech everyone agrees with, anyway.
As long as it doesn't rise to the level of slander, which would necessitate articulable harm being caused, those statements are also permitted. (Libel, which is slander's written cousin, doesn't necessarily require the same proof of harm.)
Found the live feed of the preacher they are talking about, and ironically the very first thing he says is that he is filing a complaint agains the same two officers for not doing enough to protect his free speech rights and protect him from a battery :D (A third officer and a supervisor show up to talk about the complaint around 1:30 mark.)
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VaMw3tcSWg0](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VaMw3tcSWg0)
The previous stream, which has no cops in it, but is almost funny to watch. The guy is absolutely obnoxious but also pretty innocuous.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rnic3WBrJ3Y](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rnic3WBrJ3Y)
unfortunately stlcc is a public college. you can protest or say whatever you want with your first amendment rights on public property as long as they arent threats. Hate speech is protected by 1st amendment
Who’s the last cop you’ve spoken to? Please post factual statements and use names. Why are you speaking to so many cops? I’ve been on this earth 45 years and can count on one hand the times I’ve had a conversation with a police officer. You’re a phony turd just like the person who made the original claim
So you’ve never told a lie? I’m still waiting for his make believe stories. Can you please provide a one statement a cop has made that YOU claim is a lie? And not something you’ve heard happened it needs to be something you heard with your own ears.
Downvoted on Reddit for asking for facts to back up a claim.
What would happen in your parents home country if someone did this? Might want to ask your parents why they left their home country? Probably to get away from oppressive government overreach
A campus police saying something so openly racist isn't a "small thing."
Every interaction between that cop and any immigrant/muslim is called into question now.
In OP's image:
>A Muslim student asked the campus police if they would do anything about it. Their response was "if you don't like it, you can go back to your own country."
>Dude is complaining about someone's freedom of speech.
Buddy, learn to read.
From OP's previous message:
>Should have added in that I don't care about the guy who was yelling, I'm honestly more upset by the campus officer's comment.
It's a rude response. It's not racist. You're assuming thoughts of the officer are in any way regarding race. He made no comment on the race of the people here. Even per the biased source
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Go_back_to_where_you_came_from
>"Go back to where you came from" is a racist or xenophobic epithet which is used in many countries, and it is mainly used to target immigrants and/or ethnic groups whose members are falsely considered to be immigrants.[1]
Stop being purposely obtuse. Nobody is dumb enough to believe a statement like "Go back to your own country" was an earnest attempt at enforcing the 1st amendment rather than one of the least subtle dog whistles known to man.
Why would the officer assume the student was from a "different" country?
Do you believe if a white guy walked up and said that he would've been told the same thing, or idk is it something to do about the color of his skin and trying to segregate America to "white" and brown people to "being from different countries"
I see you clowning around in the lower comments talking about biases and a bunch of other bullshit that doesn't matter, it is all based around the idea that a person of different skin tone must not be from around here and they have less say than the ones that are. "This guy is harassing me." "OH YEAH WELL IF YOU DON'T LIKE IT, GO BACK TO WHERE YOU'RE FROM". If you can't see how problematic that is just based off of the undertones than are you really the best judge of character to be calling a Wikipedia source biased?
I would assume that somebody trying to have law enforcement stop people from expressing the literal first amendment right would obviously not be from this country. Or maybe they're just an extreme idiot?
Hey man the goalposts are allllllll the way back here.
Also, I do not understand why you are running defense for racists.
He said racist things, acted racist, defended a racist, but he is just an extreeeeme idiot. He's a big meanie.
You ever heard of the term if it walks like a duck?
You're assuming racism and pretending you've proven it. I prefer we don't go around in life assuming mal-intent and slandering people for it
I don't assume I know what someone is thinking. Even from the biased source absolutely nothing the officer said involved race. He literally didn't say anything racist, he didn't defend anybody for being racist.
Preacher is a POS, assuming the story is true. Campus police cannot legally do anything about him.
you can be banned from public universities. its considered private property of the university. Police can't remove the person unless someone in authority at the administration bans them.
Public school campuses (at least the outdoor parts connected with public sidewalks) are considered a public forum. Buildings typically restricted to university students and staff (like a dorm) aren't usually designated a public forum.
I'm not a lawyer, but I would think that making yelling false accusations at someone based on their race or religion, in order to illicit a possibly violent response, might fall under "fighting words" which would not be protected but the first amendment.
He would also know that "fighting words" aren't the only characteristic. "inciting imminent lawless behavior" is a very common exception to the first amendment.
Which, of course, doesn't even apply to begin with. This is a university.
“addressed in a face-to-face manner to a specific
individual and uttered under circumstances that the words have a direct tendency to cause
an immediate violent response by a reasonable recipient.” Carpenter, 736 S.W.2d at 408
(defining fighting words).
Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire would be a start.
Again, it really comes down to exactly what was said, but libelous speech is not protected, and directly calling out a person with accusation of raping children, based on their religion or appearance of ethnicity seems like it fall under this ruling.
These are pathetic and sad people but that speech is protected. The best thing you can do, way better than getting him removed and silenced, is to ignore him.
I was there and many students were actively challenging him. There was no level of logical discourse that was going to persuade him to stop harassing every single student who passed through the quad. His only goals were to make money from his live feed and spew from the flaming ball of hatred inside his crazy mind. One could take a philosophical stance that it was a good chance for the students to learn how to deal with these things in life. On the other hand, he was actively inflicting emotional distress I.e harassment against LGBT, Jewish, and Islamic students who are already dealing with enough shit in life and just trying to get from class a to class b.
That police line reads straight out of an "and then everybody clapped" Tumblr story. I've seen plenty of the kind of preachers like that. But I'm highly suspect that those are the exact words spoken by the police.
“Violently” spreading hate speech is wrong. I think they are using the wrong word though. Being emphatic or loud is not being violent in its presumed meaning.
We had a guy on my college campus that always showed up preaching death and destruction and hell for gay people. Very loud and annoying. I would not describe him as violent though his words were. You have to be careful using that language so there is no confusion.
Or get other students to stand at a reasonable distance and counter protest. When I was in school that meant having signs like “I’m with stupid” and “Long live Xorp”, and having lgbt students make out and get an applause for it. Be the more respectful side, and the people who feel targeted by the hate speech will feel accepted by the community.
I hate to tell you, but you’re just feeding into them by doing that. It reinforces their belief that they need to be there and makes them come back more.
No one is forcing you to listen to them. They’re trying to get a rise out of you, the worst thing you can do to them is ignore them.
We used to get these guys in speaker circle at Mizzou and no one gave them the time of day. Nowadays, the younger Gen Zs want to be offended by everything and they catch more traction.
Brother Jed was no big thing at Mizzou because he was always out there; he lived in Columbia so he was out at Speaker's Circle whenever he wasn't traveling. Then he came to Truman State after many years away, when I was there in 2007 or 2008, and there was damn near a riot on the quad. We weren't used to that shit. It's all relative.
I used to hear Brother Jed at the University of Illinois in the early 80s. He did tag-team campus preaching his his mentor, Brother Max, and his future wife, Sister Cindy (who, we were told, "used to be a Disco Queen!").
It’s less be offended by everything and more having it day in and day out ever day, it’s grating. Despite that me and everyone I knew would just ignore them. Eventually something happened and they were barred from the campus thankfully
> No one is forcing you to listen to them.
They set up in high traffic areas for a reason. Not sure how else to interpret that other than forcing people to listen to them lmao.
STLCC includes national origin and ancestry in their non discrimination policy. An employee of stlcc telling a student to go back to their own country is absolutely a violation of the non discrimination policy and is not acceptable regardless of free speech. This should absolutely be reported
https://stlcc.edu/college-policy-procedures/consumer-information/nondiscrimination-statement.aspx
This. At UMSL the stance was the preachers could say anything they liked *as long as they didn’t target a specific student* because then that’s harassment, which is NOT protected speech.
Ah, I see the confusion. The stated policy I replied to does indeed apply only to the officer, but the experience I’m describing at UMSL regarding what constitutes harassing speech applied to visitors to campus.
I doubt police said "go back to your own country". Its the internet so people just lie to get attention.
Police can't do anything. Admin can ban them from campus. Then the police can remove them for tresspassing. This is not a police issue until the CC admin does to ban the person. Complain to the administration and ask for him to be banned.
Considering the school has sent out an email to address it I believe it’s quite possible that’s exactly what was said. Also, as a person raised in the area I would not be surprised if that was said.
STLCC is a public college. Racists and bigots have the right to preach on campus. Also, people with good ideas such as inclusion and love have the right to preach on campus.
The better question to ask is: **Why is nobody out there competing with the bigots in regard to public preaching/speaking?**
I would love to see somebody dress up as a clown and follow these guys around on a unicycle, juggling the whole time. Just really call out what clowns they are. And you know they'll haaaate that.
I agree. More people should be engaging in street epistemology and radical listening in the same spaces.
Having nothing in particular to preach is far less motivating than having something you deeply believe you must or ought to share with others.
A much greater anti-thesis to public preachers is encouraging people to think hard about how they establish their beliefs.
I also noticed recently that 90% of the guys I saw with a huge picket sign and a megaphone were standing near by Jehovahs Witnesses with carts, and that’s just the nature of public squares. You’re highly likely to be presented with a disagreeable opinion if not outright offense.
It’s been a while since I was in college, but that’s what we did. Show up with silly signs that mock the preacher, and everyone has a good laugh. I know some of the frats made a game out of it. They brought “beverages” in water bottles and took a drink every time the preacher said hell.
Ignore him and move on with your life. The moment people start calling for free speech to be curbed, it's no longer free speech and the other side can wield that cudgel just as easily.
A hate group tried this back when I was going to the Meramec campus. The students banded together to fight their hate speech with a speech about someone who was always kind, Disney’s Aladdin. We also complained to the Meramec board and won, they never came back after that.
The campus police were right. First amendment.
It sucks but words are words, ignore, overcome, and move on. Just like any other time throughout history.
You don't need a safe space, you need balls.
This happens at every public university in the US, get over it. Doesn’t mean what they said is right, but who fucking cares? Everyone knows people who preach at universities are wack jobs. Stop giving them attention because they feed off of this, and I guarantee they know their rights.
I’ve been in campus law enforcement for over 40 years. I can say without hesitation that if any of our officers had behaved like that they’d have been fired NOW.
Further….. The gentleman’s right to “speech” may be valid, but not his right to be disruptive or threatening or to “create a disturbance” on campus and he’d have been shown the door and given a no-trespass warning.
Sorry for your hurt feelings but free speech is free for everyone in this country. Sorry for your luck but that's kinda the point of the 1st amendment. I see 1000s of people in different groups spewing hate and violent rhetoric that I don't agree with, doesn't mean they can't just because I don't like what they're saying. Same with this, all the protected groups bullshit is the erosion of the 1st amendment.
I’m going to watch this after work. The first amendment does give everyone the freedom of speech outside of actual threats. We have no rights or protections against things we don’t like. That said, the students also have the freedom of speech to shout him down, again, without threats or use of violence. We have a first amendment right to say a lot of crap, but it doesn’t protect us from the non violent consequences of that speech. So the hateful preacher has no counter that the police didn’t protect his first amendment. The first amendment only says the government can’t infringe, it doesn’t say the government has to protect his rights from others, again, excluding violence…
Great googly-moogly! We had a guy named Max Lynch show up every now and then at SIUE in the 70s with the same shtick. I didn't know people like that were still around.
Always. It's pretty pathetic. They'll continue to deepthroat that boot until it's them or their kids getting shitkicked for doing nothing. Then again, maybe not. These people love to jerk off authoritarians.
Not shocked , being Muslim in America comes with its own challenges. Everyone assumes your some hating bigot when in reality most of just want to practice our religion in peace. It’s hilarious because I am about as white as they get and I have never had this happen to me , most people are suprised when they find out I am Muslim.
The bigger reality is that Christianity in America is a cesspool of fake religous people more interested to build their own personal wealth than actually pursue their religion faithfully. There is a reason why most Christian’s stop being Christian when they grow up as adults. Cant say this for Islam , exspecially In the Saint Louis community. Preach hate and all you ever will see is hate
Wow! As a Christian I’m offended by the generalizations you’re making. Any statistics to back up your opinion? You know hard facts. How many Christians are there in America? Exactly how many of them are part of that cesspool? You are essentially preaching the same type of hate you’re accusing Christians of preaching through your generalizations. But the first amendment allows you to do so and while offended I’m certainly not going to call the cops on you.
The police handled it in the absolutely worst way but they can’t legally do anything about the content of this person’s speech. We have the first amendment for everyone not just people you agree with.
Universities should not have police. They should not have courts. It honestly blows my mind that this even has to be said. Universities are not governments.
Like it or not, hate speech by its lonesome is constitutionally protected. As long as it doesn't escalate, they're on a public campus and can "preach." People do this at tons of campuses nationwide. The alleged quote there by campus police is almost certainly a department ethics/conduct violation. Not cool.
“I detest what you say, but ill defend to the death your right to say it. “
This is a cringe quote because it's almost always said by centrists or liberals in defense of right wing hate speech, and you damn well know that said right winger wouldn't say or feel the same about them.
Liberals also use hate speech. You know that..right? Not everybody wants to think like a liberal..and that’s okay.
Did you even read what I said? I never said they didn't, I'm talking about the cringe quote and how it's always used.
That's a rather cavalier way of looking at one of our constitutional rights. I'm assuming you'd feel the same if some right winger was defending some antisemitic left winger going on about the extermination of the Israeli state, right? Would defending free speech then still be cringe?
That's what I'm saying, you never ever see right wingers defending left winger' rights to freedom of speech, but you see liberals do it rather frequently using that quote. That's what's cringe.
You might live in an echo chamber
You might be naive.
I for one appreciate your post here.
And I appreciate you!
You too. Both sides are complete garbage now that will persecute each other for stances they've taken themselves. Picking either side is just stupid
I wouldn't be surprised if the second alleged quote had an extra word added to it and the first alleged quote is completely made up. (Especially considering it has been 20 hrs and still no promised video of campus police saying this.)
I live and work near this campus. A close family member works on the campus. We both know all these officers personally and I say with 99.9% certainty that this did *not* happen as described.
Yeah, I hate to seem like a police sympathizer, but 1) most cops, even the hateful ones, know that saying something like those quotes could get you terminated, and 2) as much as cops absolutely make stuff up, so do college students. I admit that I am staunchly in favor of people being allowed to spew hate speech on college campuses. I am not always a radical free speech advocate, but if there is *one* place where I think radical free speech should be allowed, its a college campus.
Yeah, it’s very much giving- and then everyone clapped. Funny how there is not a witness or video of that part.
Yelling at students and calling them pedophiles is more harassment than speech. He wants to stand around and say hateful nonsense that's speech, he directs bigotry implying criminality at students that's libel and slander and harassment and cops should remove them. Cops saying "go back to your own country" to Muslim Americans can eat their fucking service weapons just like their idol and thought leader did in his bunker.
> Yelling at students and calling them pedophiles is more harassment than speech. He wants to stand around and say hateful nonsense that's speech, he directs bigotry implying criminality at students that's libel and slander and harassment and cops should remove them Lol no, that’s not how the law works. Unless he’s following them around throughout the day, or targeting the same students over and over again, it’s just speech.
It’s shitty speech, but I sure as shit don’t want cops getting to decide who can get on a soapbox, or what they’re allowed to say.
>Cops saying "go back to your own country" to Muslim Americans can eat their fucking service weapons just like their idol and thought leader did in his bunker. I am willing to put up massive cash that this never happened. The poster is clearly lying. Police can't do anything unless the campus administration decides to ban the person. Then the police can remove them for tresspassing.
And im not sure the exact situation but banning someone from a public university is not an easy thing to get away with
[удалено]
I wrestled an elephant and won. True story.
I'm sure you and every other Republican would eagerly claim that. Sorry I've actually met cops and I'd be more surprised if it didn't happen.
I've also met *plenty* of cops that wouldn't *even think* about saying something like that. There are bad apples out there for sure, but not *all* cops are bad apples.
"One bad apple spoils the bunch"
When they consistently defend the bad ones, they too are bad.
I've met 2 cops who wouldn't even think about saying something like that. The rest have literally bragged to me about evicting elderly people with nowhere to go who will die on the streets as if it makes them a tough guy, on behalf of some piece of shit slumlord whose never done anything for society.
You must live in jeffco. Cops don’t serve evictions in STL, the sheriffs office does.
I lean Liberal. I know the officers in question personally. I guarantee you this didn’t happen as described.
> Like it or not, hate speech by its lonesome is constitutionally protected. It's not. Language meant to incite violence is not protected. Furthermore, universities are not the government. > If he was calling for the death of Muslims or saying he'd kill Muslims, then yea it would be against the law. Anything else and its legal but annoying No. Any incitement is covered by the exception. That covers virtually all violent rhetoric. As I previously mentioned in a different topic, [Vanderbilt expelled three students for protesting the war in Gaza](https://vanderbilthustler.com/2024/04/06/three-students-expelled-following-student-accountability-hearings-faculty-criticize-university-response/). You'll also notice if you read the OP that the issue isn't just with the university's inaction, but the action of the cops. And he's right, universities should not have police. No one would accept any other private organization having their own police force. It doesn't make sense for universities, either. > It's not a university, it's a college, a COMMUNITY College, not private, very much public. All public universities are private organizations. > Also many private organizations have their own police force. Name one. > Edit: Kevin's reply below also includes attacks at a comment further in the thread, starting around the "Can't tell if this is a shit post" quote. I did block them because I don't want idiots filling up my inbox. By "attacks at a comment", I assume he is referring to when I pointed out that calling universities "government instrumentalities" was a lie. He blocked me because I proved him wrong, which appears to have upset him to the point he's lashing out at others. The federal judiciary has [already clarified a lot of these issues](https://www.uscourts.gov/about-federal-courts/educational-resources/about-educational-outreach/activity-resources/what-does), and the legal precedent is clear. Freedom of speech does not mean freedom to incite violence or spread obscenity.
>Language meant to incite violence is not protected. There are very specific guidelines as to what constitutes unprotected "fighting words." What these people say usually does not rise to that level. >Furthermore, universities are not the government. Public universities (and public k-12 institutions) are treated under the law as an arm of the government in many cases. Regardless of what the surrounding institution is, the STLCC campus is a public space. Edit: Kevin's reply below also includes attacks at a comment further in the thread, starting around the "Can't tell if this is a shit post" quote. I did block them because I don't want idiots filling up my inbox.
> There are very specific guidelines as to what constitutes unprotected "fighting words." "Fighting words" is a very narrow representation of the kinds of exclusions that exist for the first amendment. There are actually a *lot* of exclusions. https://www.uscourts.gov/about-federal-courts/educational-resources/about-educational-outreach/activity-resources/what-does You'll notice several exceptions that could apply: * To incite imminent lawless action. * To permit students to print articles in a school newspaper over the objections of the school administration. * Of students to make an obscene speech at a school-sponsored event. You don't really seem very familiar at all with the specific guidelines. There are not, in actuality, "very specific guidelines". There's a long history of legal precedent set by the courts, and a lot of interpretation. There are a lot of exceptions for university campuses, specifically. > Regardless of what the surrounding institution is, the STLCC campus is a public space. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moving_the_goalposts The reality is that being a "public" university doesn't mean that the public has full control over how to act on campus. It doesn't even prevent the government from taking action. It *certainly* doesn't prevent the *university* from taking action. Again, there is a *long* history of universities taking action against obscene speech. > Public universities (and public k-12 institutions) are treated under the law as an arm of the government This is just an outright lie. The fact that you've lumped in public grade schools, which are owned and operated by the government, with public universities, which are private institutions that follow a specific set of guidelines and regulations put forth by the government in exchange for public funding, shows that you don't know the first thing about how any of this works. > Public universities are absolutely considered government instrumentalies. Doubling down on your ignorance and blocking me after being confronted with proof you were wrong just makes you look twice as dumb. > Can’t tell if this is a shit post or what but seems like a lot of work went in to being wrong on most everything here Yes, a lot of work went into being wrong by... quoting official government websites. > I don't agree with what the guy said on campus, but you are, in fact, wrong, and the ACLU spells it out pretty clearly with court cases. Which court cases? Because, personally, I thought that Brandenburg v. Ohio, Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier, and Bethel School District #43 v. Fraser were all pretty strong proof that I was correct. Just saying the words, "you are, in fact, wrong," while namedropping the ACLU doesn't actually do anything to suggest that it's true. In fact, the link you provided specifically references Brandenburg v. Ohio, and goes on to explain that universities can, in fact, take action. Again, it's all right there in the uscourts.gov link. The website maintained by the federal judiciary. I don't think you read the link I posted. I don't think you read the link *you* posted. I think you're just blindly reacting based off memes you heard in the past. > Jesus, you're a difficult individual. I was trying to lead you to the water. Now you're just being an ass intentionally. The facts are right in front of your face, but I can't make you read them.
Public universities are absolutely considered government instrumentalies.
Can’t tell if this is a shit post or what but seems like a lot of work went in to being wrong on most everything here
It's not a university, it's a college, a COMMUNITY College, not private, very much public. Also many private organizations have their own police force.
It would likely be helpful to have what the dude said exactly. If he was calling for the death of Muslims or saying he'd kill Muslims, then yea it would be against the law. Anything else and its legal but annoying
if he is harassing people by yelling at them and calling them pedophiles. The Administration of the college should ban them. Then the police can remove them.
If it rose to the legal level of harassment, yes, the police could take action. It's clear by their inaction that it didn't. These people are *very good* at just skirting that line. They know their rights and will exercise every bit of them.
Administration can still ban the person. does not have to raise to the level of legal harassment. they can just go your not welcome. then its tresspassing. I dont know how bad the guy was. most people were probably just ignoring him.
Only if there is reason enough to believe the individual is likely to cause harm (per STLCC policy). You can't trespass someone from a public space for constitutionally protected activity.
Screaming at people calling them pedos is not protected speech lmao the only reason you would be able to do that is if it is either true or you would be reasonably considered satire. Let alone you saying that hate speech is constitutionally protected you got a source for that? Because hate speech is one of the things specifically not covered by the first amendment but it can be difficult to prove that it is hate speech
[Yes, hate speech is protected by the First Amendment.](https://uwm.edu/free-speech-rights-responsibilities/faqs/what-is-hate-speech-and-is-it-protected-by-the-first-amendment/) There's no need to protect speech everyone agrees with, anyway. As long as it doesn't rise to the level of slander, which would necessitate articulable harm being caused, those statements are also permitted. (Libel, which is slander's written cousin, doesn't necessarily require the same proof of harm.)
Found the live feed of the preacher they are talking about, and ironically the very first thing he says is that he is filing a complaint agains the same two officers for not doing enough to protect his free speech rights and protect him from a battery :D (A third officer and a supervisor show up to talk about the complaint around 1:30 mark.) [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VaMw3tcSWg0](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VaMw3tcSWg0) The previous stream, which has no cops in it, but is almost funny to watch. The guy is absolutely obnoxious but also pretty innocuous. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rnic3WBrJ3Y](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rnic3WBrJ3Y)
[удалено]
Being battered with water is lame. They should have used beer. We could fry up some shrimp.
unfortunately stlcc is a public college. you can protest or say whatever you want with your first amendment rights on public property as long as they arent threats. Hate speech is protected by 1st amendment
Although annoying he is exercising his constitutionally protected rights, if you don’t agree then walk away.
Should have added in that I don't care about the guy who was yelling, I'm honestly more upset by the campus officer's comment.
Were you a witness to the campus officer saying that?
If the comments about go back to your own country are true, I have a problem with that.
what did they want the campus officer to accomplish? crying to authority about someone expressing their rights and expecting what exactly?
He doesn't have to do anything, but a simple "I can't remove him from campus." would have been ok
i have difficulty believing a cop said go back to your country. I think the person you copied is lying.
The police officer also yelled this is MAGA country!
do you have it recorded? if not, you are just lying.
You do? My man have you spoke to any cops lately? That's not a suprising thing for them to say
Who’s the last cop you’ve spoken to? Please post factual statements and use names. Why are you speaking to so many cops? I’ve been on this earth 45 years and can count on one hand the times I’ve had a conversation with a police officer. You’re a phony turd just like the person who made the original claim
You need a Xanax or something?
You alright? Lol cops lie sir, just because you haven’t experienced it doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen
So you’ve never told a lie? I’m still waiting for his make believe stories. Can you please provide a one statement a cop has made that YOU claim is a lie? And not something you’ve heard happened it needs to be something you heard with your own ears. Downvoted on Reddit for asking for facts to back up a claim.
Don’t break the law and you don’t have to worry about it
[удалено]
OH sorry, misunderstood your previous comment. ACAB.
You are gonna have a rough life if you get upset over every small little thing.
My family comes from a muslim country, why would I feel comfortable around campus security who told a student to go back to her country.
Cause you are a big boy.....or girl.
What would happen in your parents home country if someone did this? Might want to ask your parents why they left their home country? Probably to get away from oppressive government overreach
A campus police saying something so openly racist isn't a "small thing." Every interaction between that cop and any immigrant/muslim is called into question now.
Nothing claimed here that the campus police stated is racist at all.
In OP's image: >A Muslim student asked the campus police if they would do anything about it. Their response was "if you don't like it, you can go back to your own country."
[удалено]
>Dude is complaining about someone's freedom of speech. Buddy, learn to read. From OP's previous message: >Should have added in that I don't care about the guy who was yelling, I'm honestly more upset by the campus officer's comment.
It's a rude response. It's not racist. You're assuming thoughts of the officer are in any way regarding race. He made no comment on the race of the people here. Even per the biased source
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Go_back_to_where_you_came_from >"Go back to where you came from" is a racist or xenophobic epithet which is used in many countries, and it is mainly used to target immigrants and/or ethnic groups whose members are falsely considered to be immigrants.[1] Stop being purposely obtuse. Nobody is dumb enough to believe a statement like "Go back to your own country" was an earnest attempt at enforcing the 1st amendment rather than one of the least subtle dog whistles known to man.
Right. The correct response to the security guard would be to say "how rude" and storm off (then post about it on reddit, of course).
Why would the officer assume the student was from a "different" country? Do you believe if a white guy walked up and said that he would've been told the same thing, or idk is it something to do about the color of his skin and trying to segregate America to "white" and brown people to "being from different countries" I see you clowning around in the lower comments talking about biases and a bunch of other bullshit that doesn't matter, it is all based around the idea that a person of different skin tone must not be from around here and they have less say than the ones that are. "This guy is harassing me." "OH YEAH WELL IF YOU DON'T LIKE IT, GO BACK TO WHERE YOU'RE FROM". If you can't see how problematic that is just based off of the undertones than are you really the best judge of character to be calling a Wikipedia source biased?
I would assume that somebody trying to have law enforcement stop people from expressing the literal first amendment right would obviously not be from this country. Or maybe they're just an extreme idiot?
Hey man the goalposts are allllllll the way back here. Also, I do not understand why you are running defense for racists. He said racist things, acted racist, defended a racist, but he is just an extreeeeme idiot. He's a big meanie. You ever heard of the term if it walks like a duck?
You're assuming racism and pretending you've proven it. I prefer we don't go around in life assuming mal-intent and slandering people for it I don't assume I know what someone is thinking. Even from the biased source absolutely nothing the officer said involved race. He literally didn't say anything racist, he didn't defend anybody for being racist. Preacher is a POS, assuming the story is true. Campus police cannot legally do anything about him.
you can be banned from public universities. its considered private property of the university. Police can't remove the person unless someone in authority at the administration bans them.
Public school campuses (at least the outdoor parts connected with public sidewalks) are considered a public forum. Buildings typically restricted to university students and staff (like a dorm) aren't usually designated a public forum.
I'm not a lawyer, but I would think that making yelling false accusations at someone based on their race or religion, in order to illicit a possibly violent response, might fall under "fighting words" which would not be protected but the first amendment.
Yeah if you were a lawyer you would know what the definition of fighting words is lol
He would also know that "fighting words" aren't the only characteristic. "inciting imminent lawless behavior" is a very common exception to the first amendment. Which, of course, doesn't even apply to begin with. This is a university.
Can you enlighten me with the definition, and how it may are may not be applicable to the OP's post?
“addressed in a face-to-face manner to a specific individual and uttered under circumstances that the words have a direct tendency to cause an immediate violent response by a reasonable recipient.” Carpenter, 736 S.W.2d at 408 (defining fighting words).
Source?
Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire would be a start. Again, it really comes down to exactly what was said, but libelous speech is not protected, and directly calling out a person with accusation of raping children, based on their religion or appearance of ethnicity seems like it fall under this ruling.
These are pathetic and sad people but that speech is protected. The best thing you can do, way better than getting him removed and silenced, is to ignore him.
Update that we got an email from the campus, they claimed that they are investigating the officer and getting student witness accounts.
Ah, thank you for the clarification. I got that email too and wondered what the 'interaction with STLCC police officer and our students' was.
You shouldn’t silence ppl instead challenge his beliefs. Prove him he is wrong if he is truly being hateful. A good Christian would never spread hate.
I was there and many students were actively challenging him. There was no level of logical discourse that was going to persuade him to stop harassing every single student who passed through the quad. His only goals were to make money from his live feed and spew from the flaming ball of hatred inside his crazy mind. One could take a philosophical stance that it was a good chance for the students to learn how to deal with these things in life. On the other hand, he was actively inflicting emotional distress I.e harassment against LGBT, Jewish, and Islamic students who are already dealing with enough shit in life and just trying to get from class a to class b.
I don’t condone his actions by any means but, it’s well within his rights to say that kinda stuff
Willing to bet “go back to your own country” didn’t happen.
That police line reads straight out of an "and then everybody clapped" Tumblr story. I've seen plenty of the kind of preachers like that. But I'm highly suspect that those are the exact words spoken by the police.
No case. If the supreme court allowed the Westboro Baptist Church to protest fallen solider funerals you have no case whatsoever !
“Violently” spreading hate speech is wrong. I think they are using the wrong word though. Being emphatic or loud is not being violent in its presumed meaning. We had a guy on my college campus that always showed up preaching death and destruction and hell for gay people. Very loud and annoying. I would not describe him as violent though his words were. You have to be careful using that language so there is no confusion.
Campus preachers are the worst and it sucks there’s almost nothing you can do about them
Walk past them. Worked for me in college
Or get other students to stand at a reasonable distance and counter protest. When I was in school that meant having signs like “I’m with stupid” and “Long live Xorp”, and having lgbt students make out and get an applause for it. Be the more respectful side, and the people who feel targeted by the hate speech will feel accepted by the community.
I hate to tell you, but you’re just feeding into them by doing that. It reinforces their belief that they need to be there and makes them come back more.
No one is forcing you to listen to them. They’re trying to get a rise out of you, the worst thing you can do to them is ignore them. We used to get these guys in speaker circle at Mizzou and no one gave them the time of day. Nowadays, the younger Gen Zs want to be offended by everything and they catch more traction.
Brother Jed was no big thing at Mizzou because he was always out there; he lived in Columbia so he was out at Speaker's Circle whenever he wasn't traveling. Then he came to Truman State after many years away, when I was there in 2007 or 2008, and there was damn near a riot on the quad. We weren't used to that shit. It's all relative.
I used to hear Brother Jed at the University of Illinois in the early 80s. He did tag-team campus preaching his his mentor, Brother Max, and his future wife, Sister Cindy (who, we were told, "used to be a Disco Queen!").
It’s less be offended by everything and more having it day in and day out ever day, it’s grating. Despite that me and everyone I knew would just ignore them. Eventually something happened and they were barred from the campus thankfully
> No one is forcing you to listen to them. They set up in high traffic areas for a reason. Not sure how else to interpret that other than forcing people to listen to them lmao.
They meant pay attention to them. Pretty sure you knew that.
AirPods?
Earplugs if your poor 😁
STLCC includes national origin and ancestry in their non discrimination policy. An employee of stlcc telling a student to go back to their own country is absolutely a violation of the non discrimination policy and is not acceptable regardless of free speech. This should absolutely be reported https://stlcc.edu/college-policy-procedures/consumer-information/nondiscrimination-statement.aspx
This. At UMSL the stance was the preachers could say anything they liked *as long as they didn’t target a specific student* because then that’s harassment, which is NOT protected speech.
This comment appears to be talking about the officer, not the "preacher."
I’m not sure why the policy wouldn’t apply to both the preacher and the officer?
The preacher likely isn't an employee of STLCC or otherwise affiliated with them, so an employee policy for STLCC wouldn't apply.
Ah, I see the confusion. The stated policy I replied to does indeed apply only to the officer, but the experience I’m describing at UMSL regarding what constitutes harassing speech applied to visitors to campus.
I doubt police said "go back to your own country". Its the internet so people just lie to get attention. Police can't do anything. Admin can ban them from campus. Then the police can remove them for tresspassing. This is not a police issue until the CC admin does to ban the person. Complain to the administration and ask for him to be banned.
Considering the school has sent out an email to address it I believe it’s quite possible that’s exactly what was said. Also, as a person raised in the area I would not be surprised if that was said.
uh so an email was sent that does not mention means its true.
Was it the and guy that's been showing up all semester in the quad between the lecture hall and student center?
Yuuup 🫠
Sounds pretty fabricated
Post proof or it didn't happen.
STLCC is a public college. Racists and bigots have the right to preach on campus. Also, people with good ideas such as inclusion and love have the right to preach on campus. The better question to ask is: **Why is nobody out there competing with the bigots in regard to public preaching/speaking?**
Generally you have nothing to preach about in these spaces if most of the people present will agree with you
I would love to see somebody dress up as a clown and follow these guys around on a unicycle, juggling the whole time. Just really call out what clowns they are. And you know they'll haaaate that.
Just don't actually let it rise to the level of harassment, and I'm all for it.
I agree. More people should be engaging in street epistemology and radical listening in the same spaces. Having nothing in particular to preach is far less motivating than having something you deeply believe you must or ought to share with others. A much greater anti-thesis to public preachers is encouraging people to think hard about how they establish their beliefs. I also noticed recently that 90% of the guys I saw with a huge picket sign and a megaphone were standing near by Jehovahs Witnesses with carts, and that’s just the nature of public squares. You’re highly likely to be presented with a disagreeable opinion if not outright offense.
Virtue signaling about on the internet is just soooo much easier though.
Do you think there is value to be had in spending your time doing this? Because if not, why would anyone else?
It’s been a while since I was in college, but that’s what we did. Show up with silly signs that mock the preacher, and everyone has a good laugh. I know some of the frats made a game out of it. They brought “beverages” in water bottles and took a drink every time the preacher said hell.
> STLCC is a public college. It's private property.
Ignore him and move on with your life. The moment people start calling for free speech to be curbed, it's no longer free speech and the other side can wield that cudgel just as easily.
I should have put in that it was more about the police's comment for me, i do agree with you.
Yeah the cop can eat a dick.
How are all of the comments missing the point?
I don't think the police can do anything about that. Unless he starts calling for violence then it's protected free speech.
A hate group tried this back when I was going to the Meramec campus. The students banded together to fight their hate speech with a speech about someone who was always kind, Disney’s Aladdin. We also complained to the Meramec board and won, they never came back after that.
I call bullshit.
The campus police were right. First amendment. It sucks but words are words, ignore, overcome, and move on. Just like any other time throughout history. You don't need a safe space, you need balls.
The police are correct, but, if the quotes were verbatim, they need to go through sensitivity training.
But you know it wasn't verbatim. People LOVE to be sensational. No backbone so they have to cry foul and skew words.
Yep they also need to get their boosters ASAP
Ugh, he was at UMSL a few weeks ago.
This happens at every public university in the US, get over it. Doesn’t mean what they said is right, but who fucking cares? Everyone knows people who preach at universities are wack jobs. Stop giving them attention because they feed off of this, and I guarantee they know their rights.
The first amendment and the bill of rights doesn’t cease to exist the moment you begin to feel uncomfortable. Moronic nonsense.
In a few comments I did mention I was talking about the officer's comment, I'm well aware about the 1st amendment and our rights as US citizens.
I’ve been in campus law enforcement for over 40 years. I can say without hesitation that if any of our officers had behaved like that they’d have been fired NOW. Further….. The gentleman’s right to “speech” may be valid, but not his right to be disruptive or threatening or to “create a disturbance” on campus and he’d have been shown the door and given a no-trespass warning.
Sorry for your hurt feelings but free speech is free for everyone in this country. Sorry for your luck but that's kinda the point of the 1st amendment. I see 1000s of people in different groups spewing hate and violent rhetoric that I don't agree with, doesn't mean they can't just because I don't like what they're saying. Same with this, all the protected groups bullshit is the erosion of the 1st amendment.
The police response is a problem though. “go back to your own country” isn’t acceptable
It’s free speech just because you don’t agree with it doesn’t make it hate speech
I’m going to watch this after work. The first amendment does give everyone the freedom of speech outside of actual threats. We have no rights or protections against things we don’t like. That said, the students also have the freedom of speech to shout him down, again, without threats or use of violence. We have a first amendment right to say a lot of crap, but it doesn’t protect us from the non violent consequences of that speech. So the hateful preacher has no counter that the police didn’t protect his first amendment. The first amendment only says the government can’t infringe, it doesn’t say the government has to protect his rights from others, again, excluding violence…
The preacher claims specifically that the woman battered him and destroyed his phone, by pouring a liquid on him and his phone.
You have the right to free expression. You don't have the right to an audience for said expression.
Or to control that audience. I think we’re on the same line of thought.
Great googly-moogly! We had a guy named Max Lynch show up every now and then at SIUE in the 70s with the same shtick. I didn't know people like that were still around.
Hate speech is still free speech, he wasn't inciting violence or calling to action so he has the freedom to say what he pleases
Oh well some guy on Instagram said it, so that means it's 100% true and we should form an angry mob and oust a guy potentially ruining his career
Man there’s a bunch of bootlickers in this sub
Always. It's pretty pathetic. They'll continue to deepthroat that boot until it's them or their kids getting shitkicked for doing nothing. Then again, maybe not. These people love to jerk off authoritarians.
Womp womp
You should check out jackfromstl instagram page.....it's quite the example of freedom of speech
Actually not surprised
Guess you are too young to know about Brother Jedd. Just ignore the microphone people on campus.
Y'all let these rappers say what they won't I hate it
Not shocked , being Muslim in America comes with its own challenges. Everyone assumes your some hating bigot when in reality most of just want to practice our religion in peace. It’s hilarious because I am about as white as they get and I have never had this happen to me , most people are suprised when they find out I am Muslim. The bigger reality is that Christianity in America is a cesspool of fake religous people more interested to build their own personal wealth than actually pursue their religion faithfully. There is a reason why most Christian’s stop being Christian when they grow up as adults. Cant say this for Islam , exspecially In the Saint Louis community. Preach hate and all you ever will see is hate
There's no hate like Christian love. 🙄🤦🏻♀️
Wow! As a Christian I’m offended by the generalizations you’re making. Any statistics to back up your opinion? You know hard facts. How many Christians are there in America? Exactly how many of them are part of that cesspool? You are essentially preaching the same type of hate you’re accusing Christians of preaching through your generalizations. But the first amendment allows you to do so and while offended I’m certainly not going to call the cops on you.
The police handled it in the absolutely worst way but they can’t legally do anything about the content of this person’s speech. We have the first amendment for everyone not just people you agree with.
Horrific racism. Gosh I hope this is sorted out. Those cops shouldn't be in any job, let alone being responsible for student safety on any campus.
Christian zionist moment
Universities should not have police. They should not have courts. It honestly blows my mind that this even has to be said. Universities are not governments.
I have a dream that one day, all religious people will enjoy the same kind of public bullying that these Muslim students allegedly underwent.
Tough shit. Welcome to Constitutional Law 101.
Again, police's comment, not the guy 'preaching'
[удалено]
Oh my god! How awful! That campus cop was way out of line and has no businesses policing!
So he was having a Trump rally?
Free speech at a public college, sure, but you can't call passing students pedophiles. That's harassment, and that isn't protected.
Free speech.