Freedom of speech must have limits and censorship because I believe that for one's thoughts to be taken into consideration, they should be expressed in a passionate but respectful way. My definition of free speech is the ability to speak your mind and express your thoughts about what is happening in the world around you in a respectful manner. We all have the right to express our opinions, but we should also be careful about our choice of words that describe threats, religious beliefs, and expressing our own opinion. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay If a man were to go on the Internet and make a video saying he hates LBGYTs and will kill them, that comment will not be inadmissible because at that point he is commenting on a hate crime and the 1st amendment does not protect hate crimes which may involve but are not limited to antigay, racist or sexist. According to the Encyclopedia Britannica article, hate crimes such as racist threats, antigay threats, and sexist slurs are not protected by the 1st Amendment. As if he went on the internet and made a video saying that the world is turning into a gay community and that he doesn't agree with the law that allows gay marriage, this is legitimate because he is expressing his opinion on how feels about it. There is a line drawn on what is tolerated and what is not tolerated; the line is drawn when it starts to offset people's basic human rights and rights to life. We express our thoughts without knowing whether we have gone too far or whether we have crossed our limit. In the Supreme Court case Elonis v. United States; Elonis was convicted after making subjective threats on the Internet saying things like "I have enough explosives to take care of the state police and sheriff's department" and "I'm trying to make a name for myself. No more elementary schools in a ten mile radius for start the most heinous school shooting ever imagined… The only question is… which one?” He fought with the government claiming that the 1st Amendment gave him the intent of the threat and that he did not mean it maliciously. Federal courts have held that “true threats” can be interpreted in so many ways that that doesn't mean they aren't threats; you are simply saying that the threats are illegal and harmful, it doesn't matter if it is said that way or in jest, it is still a serious matter. Please note: this is just an example. Get a custom paper from our expert writers now. Get a Custom Essay Freedom of speech in America has not been perfect, you cannot shout dangerous things like fire or anything that might trigger panic in the crowd. We can express our opinions, but again there are limits that should not be crossed such as racist, violent, antigay, sexist etc. Some may say that it is not constitutional but it is constitutional to thwart people's basic human rights or rights to life.