Keith, extending your logic to the case at hand, you appear to be saying that the Texas kid would be OK if he meant to shoot up a classroom and eat a kid's heart but since he was joking it was "deliberate deception" and therefor he has to "deal with the consequences."

Is that what you are trying to say? If so you are wrong. Just as wrong and songwronger was in calling this an "attack" on the "First Amendment." The case in Texas is limit on the bounds of acceptable sarcasm. Sort of like the trouble you are given if the TSA agent asks if you have anything illegal in your carry on and you jokingly say, "Just a bomb."