|
It would be a shame if he didn't get one under 185 (or settles with him somehow).
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2016 17:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 07:59 |
|
|
the whole idea of a beleidigungsklage is dumb
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2016 18:05
|
|
|
It is not and serves a very value purpose. (To answer with as much effort and quality as you put in your post.)
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2016 18:31
|
|
|
blowfish posted:the whole idea of a beleidigungsklage is dumb Andere Ansicht: Claudia Roth.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2016 18:34
|
|
|
blowfish posted:the whole idea of a beleidigungsklage is dumb
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2016 08:38
|
|
|
Mithaldu posted:It is not and serves a very value purpose. (To answer with as much effort and quality as you put in your post.) Unless someone's mean words do some level of damage beyond "  muh feelings " (like inciting violence) it is, in fact, dumb that courts need to bother with that poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2016 13:37
|
|
|
Huge Böhmi fan here. Pretty confident the lawsuit won't go very far. Even if the poem is not satire itself, it was recited in the context of a piece regarding Erdogan's censorship on a mild extra3 song about him, which was clearly satirical. He just announced on Facebook that he's taking some time off TV. I just hope this mess doesn't keep him away for very long.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2016 13:55
|
|
|
Speaking of which, how is the Internet connection in german prisons?
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2016 14:35
|
|
|
blowfish posted:Unless someone's mean words do some level of damage beyond " In case you missed the memo, German law considers "feelings" tangible. In fact, the very first one says so. Also, while not incite, insults can cause violence. Going through courts prevents that.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2016 14:41
|
|
poty posted:Huge Böhmi fan here. Pretty confident the lawsuit won't go very far. Even if the poem is not satire itself, it was recited in the context of a piece regarding Erdogan's censorship on a mild extra3 song about him, which was clearly satirical. Well, there are several problems with that argument, beginning with the fact that only the poem had subtitles in Turkish and that the poem was very sexual, an area in which the Bundesverfassungsgericht has often decided that the victims 1GG rights are more important than the artists 5GG rights. I think the case can really go either way. I just hope that people understand that Chomsky's quote about freedom of speech quote:Goebbels was in favor of free speech for views he liked. So was Stalin. If you’re really in favor of free speech, then you’re in favor of freedom of speech for precisely the views you despise. Otherwise, you’re not in favor of free speech. Has to be inverted in this case, which means if you place certain limits on free speech, your commitment to them needs to be the strongest if you agree with the intention of the author to insult a person. Defending Böhmermann is not fighting for freedom of speech but it's pandering to a certain audience, a real fight for freedom of speech would be if you defended idiots from the AfD posting bullshit on Facebook, but in that area the SPD has very different ideas.
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2016 14:41
|
|
|
Mithaldu posted:In case you missed the memo, German law considers "feelings" tangible. In fact, the very first one says so. Also, while not incite, insults can cause violence. Going through courts prevents that. The concept of Menschenwürde being extended to also cover something as inconsequential as personal feelings is also dumb.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2016 14:54
|
|
|
Just saying "xxx is dumb" does not make a convincing argument. It sounds rather poor honestly.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2016 14:59
|
|
|
Mithaldu posted:Just saying "xxx is dumb" does not make a convincing argument. It sounds rather poor honestly. The entire question is about a value judgement, which is whether mere insults should be punishable even if they do no damage beyond being an insult. There are no objective arguments to be made for or against this.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2016 17:07
|
|
|
I do believe an objective discussion about this can be had, if one is willing to have one. For example you mentioned damage resulting from speech as being an important factor and mentioned hate speech as something you consider legitimately illegal. Now consider that hate speech is illegal even when it does not result in damage. And lastly consider that insults carry a similar potential to result in damage (how many brawls, shootings, feuds, wars have there been over such). Don't you think it makes sense to sort these two types of speech in the similar category of speech that has (different, though real) potential to cause damage.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2016 18:20
|
|
|
Mithaldu posted:I do believe an objective discussion about this can be had, if one is willing to have one. For example you mentioned damage resulting from speech as being an important factor and mentioned hate speech as something you consider legitimately illegal. Now consider that hate speech is illegal even when it does not result in damage. And lastly consider that insults carry a similar potential to result in damage (how many brawls, shootings, feuds, wars have there been over such). Die meisten Straftatbestände, die umgangssprachlich "hate speech" sanktionieren schützen abstrakte Interessen der Allgemeinheit (öffentl. Ordnung) und nicht die Partikularinteressen der Gruppe, gegen die gehated wird.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2016 18:22
|
|
|
Und der Endeffekt bei 185 ist derselbe.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2016 18:27
|
|
|
Mithaldu posted:It would be a shame if he didn't get one under 185 (or settles with him somehow). Just to clarify, with "one" do you mean, that it would be a shame if he wasn't prosecuted or if he wasn't found guilty? If the former, because you hope for a discussion about this law (and change) or because you hope he's found guilty. If the latter, AfD-Wähler, Saarländer or türkischer Nationalist? Show us, where did the thin, pale guy touch you(r honor)?
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2016 19:13
|
|
|
goethe42 posted:AfD-Wähler, Saarländer or türkischer Nationalist? Por que no los tres? I'm sure there are one or two
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2016 19:24
|
|
|
He will get prosecuted under 185 (unless 103 gets to veto that) and i think it should be a guilty verdict, since he quite explicitly intended to break that law and i see no interpretation in which it could be satire. I also don't give a poo poo who is on which side. If it were two Germans or literally any other constellation my position would be unchanged. I find that law valuable due to various factors and support its correct application.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2016 19:31
|
|
Mithaldu posted:He will get prosecuted under 185 (unless 103 gets to veto that) and i think it should be a guilty verdict, since he quite explicitly intended to break that law and i see no interpretation in which it could be satire. I also don't give a poo poo who is on which side. If it were two Germans or literally any other constellation my position would be unchanged. 103 will overwrite 185 for the time being, not that it makes much of a difference, given that the actual crime is the same unless you want to dispute Erdogan's status as a person protected under 103. The potential penalty might be a bit harsher, but I doubt Böhmermann will care too much about the difference, given that it will most likely be just a fine.
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2016 19:40
|
|
|
Mithaldu posted:And lastly consider that insults carry a similar potential to result in damage (how many brawls, shootings, feuds, wars have there been over such). If fighting words are enough to make you start an actual physical fight, it's you who should be fined.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2016 20:10
|
|
|
§185 and §103 are terrible and hugely problematic relics because Beleidigung and the concept of Ehre are not gesetzesbestimmt and clash with §1, among other things. Nullum crimen sine lege should apply here, as should In dubio pro libertate, and the best thing that could come out of this farce is a modernisation, with proper definitions, of these laws. Hopefully one that doesn't create 200k cases a year of more than questionably motivated suits. And trying to hide behind Art 1 GG in this is silly because it's shooting sparrows with cannons and this thing is entirely an StGB centric circus.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2016 20:11
|
|
|
az posted:§185 and §103 are terrible and hugely problematic relics because Beleidigung and the concept of Ehre are not gesetzesbestimmt [...] And trying to hide behind Art 1 GG in this is silly because it's shooting sparrows with cannons and this thing is entirely an StGB centric circus. a good opinion
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2016 20:16
|
|
|
blowfish posted:a good opinion Wie stehst Du dazu, dass die Polizei in Rechte von Bürgern eingreifen kann, wenn Sie die öffentliche Sicherheit und Ordnung in Gefahr sieht? Das ist nämlich um einiges schwammiger formuliert als "Beleidigung" oder "Ehre".
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2016 20:19
|
|
|
Randler posted:Wie stehst Du dazu, dass die Polizei in Rechte von Bürgern eingreifen kann, wenn Sie die öffentliche Sicherheit und Ordnung in Gefahr sieht? Das ist nämlich um einiges schwammiger formuliert als "Beleidigung" oder "Ehre". In general, laws should be well-defined.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2016 20:25
|
|
|
AfD now trying to get on the anti-Muslim bandwagon (just 15 years late, so pretty progressive by their standards): "Wir sind ein christlich-laizistisches Land" You could make a case for Christian, but Germany isn't a laicist country at all. Church tax! State-sponsored religious education! Religious symbols in state buildings. I thought the AfD was the party of professors, now it's the party of not knowing what words mean.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2016 07:05
|
|
|
pidan posted:You could make a case for Christian, but Germany isn't a laicist country at all. Church tax! State-sponsored religious education! Religious symbols in state buildings. I thought the AfD was the party of professors, now it's the party of not knowing what words mean. I thought all the professors got the gently caress out when they noticed their anti-euro and vaguely reactionary regressive party turned into the blatant xenophobe idiot party for people generally angry about arbitrary things.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2016 08:13
|
|
blowfish posted:I thought all the professors got the gently caress out when they noticed their anti-euro and vaguely reactionary regressive party turned into the blatant xenophobe idiot party for people generally angry about arbitrary things. Yep, they are now mostly in ALFA (the new Lucke party). The AfD on the other hand is morphing into your run of the mill right-wing populist party (think FN, FPÖ, Wilders).
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2016 11:11
|
|
|
pidan posted:AfD now trying to get on the anti-Muslim bandwagon (just 15 years late, so pretty progressive by their standards): "Now"? The AfD hasn't been on the anti-muslim bandwagon, they're driving the loving thing! Where have you been the last 12 months?
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2016 14:08
|
|
|
  
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2016 13:59
|
|
|
Oh wait lmao I got it the wrong way around:quote:Der 67. Ord. Bundesparteitag der Freien Demokraten steht unter dem Motto Beta Republik Deutschland. Der Gedanke dahinter: Auch bei der Digitalisierung stehen wir für German Mut. Das heißt: Ausprobieren. Austesten. Auch wenn es nicht sofort perfekt ist. Beta eben. Germany is vaporware imo
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2016 14:00
|
|
|
Something something cuck meme e: nice
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2016 14:08
|
|
|
Smirr posted:Oh wait lmao I got it the wrong way around: "German Mut" is the dumbest loving slogan.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2016 14:12
|
|
|
 und 4,8 Prozent der Stimmen kriegen.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2016 14:19
|
|
|
Germany is beta, I agree. Just not the way they meant. Of course it's retarded; it's Germany's lolbertarians.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2016 14:24
|
|
|
  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8iLKjv2Sz04
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2016 14:25
|
|
|
Those can't be real right Are they just trying to be rich Piraten or something
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2016 14:27
|
|
|
I think it's the other way around, Piraten are now trying to be rich. Considering that several former members of them changed over to the FDP.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2016 14:32
|
|
|
Drone posted:Those can't be real right Kinda but not completely:  Also there's some pretty kickass stuff in the Anträge:   
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2016 14:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 07:59 |
|
|
Nice to see the FDP is still poo poo. FDP - the Manure Party. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2016 16:06
|
|
