IntroductionThe purpose of this essay is to critically examine the limits of free speech. Limits or constraints on freedom of expression, in most cases, refer to the abuse of freedom of expression, which may cause harm or offense. The essay focuses on defining the types of expression, or more specifically speech, that are considered the limits of free speech. The essay is divided into two main parts, the evaluative part and the in-depth part. The first section explores different views on establishing standards to model restrictions on free speech or to prevent abuses of free speech. In this part, John Stuart Mill's harm principle, Feinberg's harm principle, and the liberal view of constraints on free expression are explored, including crucial parts of their theory and their limitations. Evaluations of the theories will be presented. Mill's harm principle does not clearly illustrate harm caused by speech but by behavior. It also failed to define psychological harm. In Feinberg's case, he innovatively proposed psychological offense through speech. However, it did not place as much emphasis on physical and psychological offenses. Almagor (1993: 465) evaluated his theory, demonstrating that the two types of offenses should be equated. The orthodox liberal view on modeling harm through speech is another way of listing restrictions on free speech. In my opinion, the list of topics for incitement to harm is endless due to the changing situations of expression that cause different harms over time. The second section proposes a new and improved model for limiting freedom of expression. The pros and cons of the theories are listed. The new model, comprising two arguments, attempts to overcome...... middle of paper ......ack, p111-112.McCloskey, HJ (1963) Mill's Liberalism. Philosophical Quarterly 13.—— (1980) Privacy and the right to privacy. Philosophy, 55: 17-38 —— (1982) Limits to freedom of expression. J. Value Inquiry, 16: 47-58.Mill, JS (1948[1859]) On Liberty. London, Dent, Everyman. Pullman, P. (2005) Against “identity”. In: Appignanesi, L (ed.) (2005) Free expression is not an offense. London, Penguin Books. Simester, AP and Hirsch, AV (2002) Rethinking the Offense Principle. Legal Theory, vol. 8, number 03, p. 269-295. Skorupski, J. (1989) John Stuart Mill. London, Routledge. Simpson, RM (2013) Dignity, harm and hate speech. Law and Philosophy, 32: 701-728. Sturges, P. (2006) Limits to freedom of expression? Considerations arising from the Danish Cartoons Case, IFLA Journal, 32: 181. Illinois Supreme Court. (1978) Skokie v. NSPA, 373 NE 2d, 21. Opinion.