[jmuncaster]

Sounds like a straw man. The comment did not say “no restrictions whatsoever” - my read is that it said that even the most sensible sounding restrictions on incitement to violence have their difficulties. It’s messy and nuanced.

I agree with your sentiment to deal more with actual, not theoretical problems. However, I think there have been enough actual historical examples of abuses of power in free speech regulations that are self-reinforcing. This should create a high bar when considering any particular restriction. It’s not paranoia, it’s lessons learned.

So some restrictions? Sure, and the courts have indeed allowed some. But they are and ought to be well-reasoned exceptions with clear distinctions so we don’t end up with something akin to a thought-police.