[Michael Smith]

"Words (especially on a piece of paper) don't do anything. Words expressed with emotion behind them can do something."

How old are you? About nineteen or so? I am not so much against what you are saying from an ideological standpoint as I am a purely pragmatic standpoint. Like it or not, I don't think you can can consider it a free speech issue to be able to write a "story" about killing a real live sitting President. Don't you understand the multitude of implications behind blanketly allowing that?

I'm no newbie to this site, and some years ago an individual on this site posted something that was clearly a joke about doing away with Slick Willie. You know what happened next. Within an hour after the post, two US Secret Service agents knocked on his door and questioned him extensively about his remark. They knew he wasn't really serious, but it didn't matter. I guess my point here is that there is a line here that we cannot cross, even if we fundamentally disagree with it. Yes, we live in a free country, but we still must obtain a permit to assemble in public. Yes, we have free speech, but not when it broaches on the advocation of militant overthrow of the government. Common sense should apply here, and common sense tells me, as someone who has written previously published work, that one cannot write whatever they want and hide behind the banner of "It's just fiction."

[birbear]

I'm no newbie to this site, and some years ago an individual on this site posted something that was clearly a joke about doing away with Slick Willie. You know what happened next. Within an hour after the post, two US Secret Service agents knocked on his door and questioned him extensively about his remark. They knew he wasn't really serious, but it didn't matter.

My age is rather immaterial, but I'm 33.

I think there's something vastly different between a novel (an obvious work of fiction) and an anonymous posting on a website (something inherently sinister about it being anonymous.)

Obviously if somebody sends a letter, posts a message, leaves a voice mail, tacks a note on a tree threatening the President (or anybody specific for that matter) it needs to be investigated.

A book, a novel, a piece of fiction that has been written for entertainment purposes doesn't qualify (in my opinion, and I think in the opinion of the USSC) as a legitimate threat to anybody.

Is it tacky and tasteless, unquestionably so. Is it done to create controversy to create more sales, of course it is. Does it cross the line? I don't think so.

I'm very adamant about my first amendment protections (I've made my living as a writer for a period of time). Without strong first amendment protections, it doesn't matter who we have sitting in whatever office.