[sointeresting]

Huh? The link you posted shows that Trump condemned the shooting, calling it "horrific" and saying the shooter will prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. You're equating not flying flags at half mast, despite condemning the violence, to gloating over murder. You're trying to justify the gloating and celebration of violence and it's disgusting.

[lostlogin]

It is disgusting.

And it’s also free speech to gloat about it. Is it legal to sack someone who is gleeful?

The consensus on Hacker News was that New Zealand made an error blocking and banning the video of the Christchurch mosque shootings.

What’s the right way to handle these scenarios? Kirk was a free speech advocate with strong views on gun violence, further complicating things.

[platevoltage]

This whole "Kirk was a free speech advocate" nonsense needs to stop. It wasn't true then, and it certainly isn't true now.

https://www.professorwatchlist.org

[CMay]

That website has a list of professors they claim were interfering with, educating against or are openly against free speech.

https://www.professorwatchlist.org/tags/anti-1st-amendment

I just randomly clicked one of the professors in that list:

- "Shaviro has been suspended after he posted on Facebook that it would be better for people to kill their political opponents than to protest them. In a now-deleted post, Shaviro wrote:"

- “So here is what I think about free speech on campus. Although I do not advocate violating federal and state criminal codes, I think it is far more admirable to kill a racist, homophobic, or transphobic speaker than it is to shout them down.”

That's straight from the website, which may or may not be accurate or true. The way it looks, is still about the way it looks given the larger context of the rest of its post.

It's particularly relevant given the recent events.

[lostlogin]

>This whole "Kirk was a free speech advocate" nonsense needs to stop.

That’s different. ‘They’ don’t have the right to say those things, but Kirk maintained his right to say what he liked.

[sointeresting]

The 1st amendment doesn't protect your job, never has.

[platevoltage]

This is exactly right. People get fired over social media posts all of the time. The 1st amendment absolutely gives people the right to boycott these employers if they see fit though.

[lostlogin]

Do you mean ‘The 1st amendment absolutely gives people the right to boycott these employees if they see fit’.

Sorry, I’m not American so have little idea how it works.

[platevoltage]

No, I meant what I said.

I also did not agree against the legality of being fired for a social media post. It's been happening since social media first existed.

You also can't boycott an employee. I really don't know what point you are trying to make here.

[lostlogin]

I’m not trying to make a point. I was trying to understand if it’s legal to sack someone in the US if you don’t like their views and I didn’t read your comment carefully enough.

[xethos]

If you work for the government, shouldn't it?