As Judge Stapleton further noted, there are numerous federal criminal statutes which utilize a "reasonably should know" or similar standard [10] and which have withstood constitutional challenges. Id.

—the Fifth Circuit upheld a conviction under 18 USC § 231284 of individuals who gave instructions at a meeting on how to make and assemble explosive and incendiary devices in order to prepare the attendees for "the coming revolution.'

For example, 18 USC § 231 (a)(1) prohibits a discrete type of conduct involving expression by making it a crime to teach or demonstrate the use, application, or making of any firearm, explosive, or incendiary device, as well as any technique capable of causing injury or death to persons, knowing, having reason to know, or intending that the same will be unlawfully used …

One method of drafting a constitutional paraphernalia statute is to revise the Model Act so as to conform with the opinions of the re-many federal statutes, and has often been upheld by the courts. Id

—we note that the courts have interpreted the federal riot statutes in such a manner as to uphold their constitutionality.

"Before proceeding to an analysis of the constitutionality of these statutes, it is worth noting that the Civil Obedience Act of 1968, 18 USC § 231 (a)(1)(1994), the federal statute upon which many of these state statutes were based, see Freeman, supra note 60, at 3, has been upheld as constitutional.

—defendants were found guilty of using interstate travel to promote extortion, extending credit, and collecting an extension of credit through extortionate means when one of them posed as "Tony from the syndicate" to scare the victim into paying a gambling debt.

[BOOK] The free flow of information: Media law and freedom of expression in the …

[PDF] Closing the Barn Door after the Genie Is out of the Bag: Recognizing a …

[CITATION] 1997 REPORT ON THE AVAILABILITY OF BOMBMAKING INFORMATION