Remember this?

No, don't use spiders, they'll get loose. Tell junkies there's 100 lbs of cocaine, meth, and heroin stashed in there.

Now there's a good idea

Right next to the cure for blindness?

Well think about how the WBC wants gays dead and to go to hell. Well the gays get no right to speak if they were in the same room, it's kind of like trials back in the 1960's in the south with police brutality against black people. 99% the people got away with it. The same is similar. In 2017, if a cop who's from the WBC assaulted a gay person(s), and the cop was from the WBC, there's no way in hell that the gay person would win, let alone be allowed to speak.
To summarize: The WBC, if they had the power that they wanted, Gay wouldn't exist anymore. Probably through police brutality and extinction.

The thing is, we have systems in place to prevent police brutality. They don't always work, admittedly, but they're there so that a situation like that doesn't happen. And for the record, the WBC doesn't like the police. That is also a very specific situation that very rarely happens, because of the systems in place to prevent police brutality. There's also a difference between police brutality and a justified asskicking.

Free speech isn't what it's cracked up to be. I say kill the canary.

Free speech is what lets you say that. if you don't like free speech then don't comment at all it will be just like not having it.

Playing devil's advocate: But that's infringing on his right to free speech, so where do we cross the line

People should not have absolute freedom of speech. A good example: it should be illegal to for anyone to use hate speech officially.

no it shouldn't. Let them say whatever they want, then we can see them for the shitheads that they really are.

People should have absolute freedom of speech period. If you try and decide what hate speech is you get into some real fucked up legal issues. I, personally, have issues already with the fact it is a crime to yell fire in public when there is no fire... or bomb in an airport. "Yo that shit is FIRE!" or "Yo dat's the BOMB!" are both enough to get your ass detained. Shit, speaking in arabic quietly is enough to get your ass detained in an airport if some turd thinks you are a threat. That has happened at least twice in the past year, one time the dude was talking about a theoretical math problem and the second time he was responding to his family wishing him well on his flight.

Yes you can, but you can get out. Hate speech shouldn't be banned. But it definitely should be suppressed. Your fire and bomb examples are correct, those should be allowed. But not the isolated words. Punishment should also vary in severity based on context, most cases being a slap on the wrist. Heavily swearing around a child. Very bad if in a child-themed area, say a playground or near a school, not so bad if in a neutral area, like a train satiation. Ok, if I'm a place you wouldn't expect children to be, say, a bar. The thing no one seems to realize is that there's a massive stretch of middle ground between letting people say whatever the fuck they want whenever the hell they want and chucking them in prison for 20 years just for saying something along the lines of "maybe things would be a little better if [person in authority] did x."

ya but now your trying to make laws based on opinion. it should be punishable if you swear in front of a child you say why it dose no harm to any one. Its just vulgar as far as you're concerned what about cussing in front of a nun they find that very offensive. you either have free speech for all or policed speech want to know what that looks like Russia has a good example rite now go try to talk about how it ok to be gay in Russia and see what happens. They decided gay is offensive and there is no protection of free speech there. Not like in the USA any way.

I would advise even against the suppression of hate speech unless you want the government to tell you what it is okay "to hate," or to what extent you can hate it.
Or there is no distinction and "hate speech is hate speech," in which case several of the top comments on this very thread would arguably be "suppressed."
You do make a good point about there being a massive middle ground, kinda reminded me of this, so for humor and because it's topical: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zopw7WQpwsI
I think the current limits we have are good. I want the bastards to speak so I know who they are so that one of my friends doesn't end up inviting me to a party and fucking surprise it's an underground nazi convention. I'd rather just not be friends in the first place.
Second, because I'm not afraid of their arguments. They're pretty fucking easy to beat.
Nazis: hey, turns out killing people because Aryan is bad
WBC: Hey, here's all the Bible passages that prove you're BS
etc. Simplified cont.

but you get the picture. Anytime they pop up with "Communism has never been tried," or "We need a white ethno state," or whatever they're spouting, let them speak. Then systematically destroy their entire arguments.
It's a lot easier to recruit (i think), when you're so dangerous/edgy that the government has to suppress you specifically. And then they grow in the shadows.
That's not what I want. I want to shine a fucking spotlight on them and expose them for their stupidity and oftentimes lies.