Would that be anything like yelling "FIRE" in a theatre with the intent to cause bodily harm or create mayhem in a public space?
"KILL HIM" falls under which section?
Here's some Constitutional insight for you:
"The question in every case is whether the words used are used in such circumstances and are of such a nature as to create a clear and present danger that they will bring about the substantive evils that the United States Congress has a right to prevent. It is a question of proximity and degree. When a nation is at war, many things that might be said in time of peace are such a hindrance to its effort that their utterance will not be endured so long as men fight, and that no Court could regard them as protected by any constitutional right. â€
Following Schenck v. United States, "clear and present danger" became both a public metaphor for First Amendment speech[2][3] and a standard test in cases before the Court where a United States law limits a citizen's First Amendment rights; the law is deemed to be constitutional if it can be shown that the language it prohibits poses a "clear and present danger". However, it should be noted that the "clear and present danger" criterion of the Schenck decision was later modified by Brandenburg v. Ohio,[4] and the test refined to determining whether the speech would provoke an imminent lawless action."