In the essay Shouting Fire, Alan M. Dershowitz wrote about American's right to freedom of speech. Dershowitz argues that every American has the right to freedom of speech, which is under the protection of the Bill of Rights. However, in some instances, such rights are misused by people. The author's argument about the misuse of freedom of speech misuse anchors on using different past cases discussing the issues. To demonstrate more on this argument, Dershowitz uses an example of a person who shouts "fire" in a crowded movie theatre when there is no fire. He says how the saying is misused, for example, the case Falwell vs. Hustler. From his perspective, Jerry Falwell won a lawsuit against Hustler Magazine, but the Supreme Court it necessary to uphold the case and overturned the ruling. He also explains how he feels about the use of bomb threats and pulling fire alarms. The essay states, "one who shouts fire in a theatre cannot clam his or her defends under the freedom of speech right, in a court of law."
Dershowitz uses a persuasive technique to express his opinion on the freedom of speech protections in the country. The author appeals to logic as a way to convey the idea that despite people having the right to freedom in the country, using such rights as a form of defence in the court of law should not be the right way to act. Dershowitz argues, "the government does, of course, have some arguably legitimate bases for suppressing speech which bear no relationship to shouting Fire!. However, he makes a persuasive claim that even though such government restriction can also lead to harm in some instances, "the mechanisms of causation are very different from that at work when an alarm is sounded." Part of his appeal to the respect of the freedom of speech is his logical and rational appeal that people should not use their freedom of speech to course panic. He claims, "If we built fireproof theatres and let people know about this, then the shouting of "Fire!" would not cause panic." It is a logical argument by the that by shouting Fire, it causes panic, and this could cause injuries. The author further makes a persuasive argument that shouting Fire is like "dialing 911 and falsely describing an emergency; making a loud, gunlike sound in the presence of the President" which he describes as misuse of freedom of speech.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The essay organization is a sequential description of ideas. It begins by describing Jerry Farwell's lawsuit against Hustler Magazine, which is overturned. The author then describes the circumstances surrounding it and how it has impacted people's notion on the freedom of speech in the country. The essay then shows other cases which outline freedom of expression, and this brings in the idea about protecting some specific information such as those regarding military movements . What follows next is the distinction between protecting sensitive information and in a situation where freedom of speech cannot be used as protection, for instance, in a situation where a person shouts Fire, yet, there is no fire in a theatre. In the end, the authors give his opinion by claiming people's right to freedom of speech cannot be used to protect oneself in a court of law if that person infringes on someone else's freedom.
The essay's main strength is using the different past cases to elaborate on the idea that the author presents in this case. The author chooses to use Jerry Farwell's lawsuit against Hustler Magazine, and this creates a lot of credibility on these arguments. It, therefore, validates the arguments he makes in this case. Another strength is the analysis of both sides of the argument he presents in the argument by analyzing and incorporating both opposing sides and giving a reason for invalidating such points. The only weakness in the article is the overemphasis of a single idea without giving much explaining the reason why the Bill of Rights should protect all people even in the circumstances of shouting Fire where there is none.
