He is comparing sending IP messages to freedom of speech. The debate is : are you for full freedom of speech or not?
In many countries with high level of freedom of speech, you can still be sued for just saying things : wrongly accusing someone, sending death threats, disclosing under NDA, etc
The logic of lone_haxx0r is noting that, physically killing someone is already illegal and punished, so why is sending death threats also illegal ?
We all know that it's for peace of mind of people, and also probably based on statistical evidences that some jokes may have turned bad.
Anyway, this pseudo freedom of speech is beneficial for rich people and big corporations as you can just throw more money to defend yourself with more words, and attack anyone who have a valuable piece of knowledge to your organization.
Snowden and Assange are good examples of why we should further liberate freedom of speech. Their intent was to inform people of a danger, but what they did (hacking) is so far considered illegal.
So, yes, we can charge people based on their intents, but in practice (for example if someone isn't able to express their intents, or in case of a government secret agency) it doesn't respect freedom of people.