Can satire go "too far"?

Its a very good question and really got me thinking.

I think the US first amendment provides more freedom than my native UK on this. I also agree to the exceptions of the first amendment though; apart from obscenity, which I think is too ambiguous and in the eye of the beholder.

1.1Incitement
1.1.1Incitement to suicide
2False statements of fact
3Obscenity
4Child pornography
5Fighting words and offensive speech
6Speech owned by others
7Commercial speech

There is a difference between free-speech and consequence free speech. Basically views should be allowed as long as they don't unreasonably contravene the freedom's of others. I do think that people should be allowed by law to have political opinions, even if they are offensive to others.

However, offensive language should still be called out and argued against. To do so is also a freedom. When people defend an appalling statement by saying 'its just free speech,' that is a very weak and disingenuous argument. To say that what you say must be credible because you are legally free to say it does not wash as a justification for the validity of views. If person X says something that is offensive and ridiculous and person Y says so, both are exercising free speech but only one of them is actually right.

I do think satire should be allowed and the best satire does have an edge and sail close to the wind. I don't think controversial satire should be banned but we should be free to call it out if it is crass, cynical or unnecessarily offensive. For example, those famous Charlie Hebdo cartoons about the prophet Mohammed were and should be legal though were pretty pathetic in my view.

No. Hate speech shouldn't be banned. The term "hate speech" should be banned. If people are saying bad things, they will alienate themselves. Otherwise don't listen. People need to be offended more than ever in this overly sensitive culture.

Idk, but comedians shouldn't be the only people allowed to tell a joke.