im an avid hip-hop fan and many of the artists i listen to make violent statements towards the government, one rapper even going far enough as to include a full sized picture of the whitehouse with bush, cheney, powell, bin laden, and others lying with bullet holes. you may have heard of the recent eminem track with the lyrics "id rather see the president " which prompted a secret service investigation. my question is, is this legal? and if not, why are underground artists ignored while more mainstream artists are attacked?
id rather see the president deead*
IANAL but I do know that freedom of speech has its limits, and I believe advocating violence is one of them (clear and present danger, maybe?)
I imagine it woud be difficult to prosecute an “artist” because they could claim that they weren’t actually advocating violence, but rather had just created a “character” who was advocating violence.
Finally, what mainstream artist has been attacked for this?
He wasn’t threatening the president but you surely remember the $*&@storm over Ice T’s Cop Killer. I’m not aware that he was specifically prosecuted but he was certainly attacked over it.
Ironic, since he plays a cop now in Law and Order: SVU.
Here’s the relevant federal law:
Eminem recently as i stated in the OP.
what does ANAL or whatever you said mean… the acronym at the beginning of your post…?
IANAL = I Am Not A Lawyer
So it’s ok to threaten others, I guess.
vinniepaz, it’s not what you think. IANA(L)awyer
I am not a lawyer.
ok… but then why are less mainstream artists ignored?
Advocating violence is fine. You can walk around saying “Kill the President!” all day.
What you can’t do is advocate imminent violence- eg. “We’re going to kill the president right now!”
So, unless it’s a live show and the offender then starts walking toward Pennsylvania Avenue with a bat or something, he’s okay.
I think you answered your own question. Less publicity equals less chance that someone will take notice and take action on the perceived threat.
“I’d rather see the president dead”, is simply expressing a preference for one state of affairs over another. It would be very hard, I imaginr, to convince a jury that it constitutes a threat at all. Hence the lack of prosecution.
I hadn’t heard about this investigation before. I’m curious how the Secret Service would investigate song lyrics. Once they sent out a SWAT team to buy the CD, and listen to it, what else did they do? Any details published about this?
I do remember that. A quick look reminds me that there wasn’t an investigation, or at least not in the news I saw, just discussion about whether or not one was warranted.
Here’s CNN online’s story from last December.
“It would be saying too much to make too big a deal out of this,” one Secret Service official said.
Probably try and gauge the motives of why something like that is placed on the CD. See if theres any truth to it, or if its just colourful language.
Bottom line, the Secret Service isn’t stupid – why would it be in their best interest to be? Would anyone, hearing Eminem, known for provoking people and using shock value in his songs, perceive an offhanded comment against Bush as a serious threat? No, I don’t think so. At most, the Secret Service would give it a cursory glance and move on to things that were actually worth their attention.
Threatening a person’s life can be a crime, however it is almost always not a federal crime.