|
Martian posted:We literally do 'such a thing' in Europe Eh, not really. Hate speech laws haven't turned European countries into dystopias or anything like that, but they do get abused fairly often and seem to have had limited effect in stopping the spread of bigotry.
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2019 20:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 22:24 |
|
|
Welp. https://twitter.com/postlocal/status/1092877542967660544?s=21 Seems like this is getting earlier and earlier every year.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2019 22:25
|
|
|
FoolyCharged posted:The cops did a pretty good job of telling them to gently caress off this time. Meanwhile, in Califonia, the cops and the FBI decided to protect Neo-Nazis who, among other things, stabbed someone, and instead investigate and charge the counterprotestors, including the person who was stabbed, while cooperating with the Neo-Nazis and reassuring them that they wouldn't be charged. So, you know, I think it's pretty fair to not trust the cops to help in these situations.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2019 22:50
|
|
|
Silver2195 posted:Eh, not really. Hate speech laws haven't turned European countries into dystopias or anything like that, but they do get abused fairly often and seem to have had limited effect in stopping the spread of bigotry. Where is stormfront hosted?
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2019 23:02
|
|
|
Roland Jones posted:Meanwhile, in Califonia, the cops and the FBI decided to protect Neo-Nazis who, among other things, stabbed someone, and instead investigate and charge the counterprotestors, including the person who was stabbed, while cooperating with the Neo-Nazis and reassuring them that they wouldn't be charged. So, you know, I think it's pretty fair to not trust the cops to help in these situations. Nah dude its both sides. Arming up to protect protesters from cops and nazis is the same as being a violent racist.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2019 23:02
|
|
|
Lead out in cuffs posted:Where is stormfront hosted? Russia.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2019 23:22
|
|
|
I really can't imagine why Dead Reckoning, a person who just loves when black people (kids and adults) get shot and who repeatedly defended the actions of their killers every time a thread about it came up, doesn't like the idea of curbing hate-speech.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2019 23:23
|
|
|
FoolyCharged posted:The article literally has a picture of a banner reading death to the kkk. It describes the dudes with guns as "left wing militia". They are literally wearing masks and burning effigies. That's a crowd working itself up to go after "the other guy" and it wouldn't have taken much for stuff to get ugly. FoolyCharged posted:The cops did a pretty good job of telling them to gently caress off this time. This implication that Nazi sympathetic police officers were communicating behind the scenes with the KKK doesn't quit read the way you want it to.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 00:22
|
|
|
Helsing posted:This implication that Nazi sympathetic police officers were communicating behind the scenes with the KKK doesn't quit read the way you want it to. Yes, ones with the remarkable power to.. tell the guy publicly declaring he'll ignore the law that he'll get arrested if he does that. They have truly infiltrated our systems and possess power unlimited.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 01:04
|
|
|
ummel posted:I'm curious if they think a rifle is a good countermeasure for car ramming. I'm not sure armed guards flanking the march would have saved anyone. I'd like to point out in that particular case, the attacker drove away and escaped after the attack, which strongly implies he valued his life and freedom. If he'd gotten out of the car afterwards with a knife and fought until his death I might agree with you, but it seems pretty clear to me some immediate deterrent such as a bunch of bullets in the face might have brought him to a different decision. e: to be a little more clear, I agree armed guards are not that effective in deterring suicidal attackers but this wasn't that Flesh Forge fucked around with this message at 01:48 on Feb 6, 2019 |
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 01:46
|
|
|
Zanzibar Ham posted:I really can't imagine why Dead Reckoning, a person who just loves when black people (kids and adults) get shot and who repeatedly defended the actions of their killers every time a thread about it came up Ah the one situation where he sees no slippery slope nor potential for abuse in unlimited unaccountable government power
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 02:32
|
|
|
'won't someone think of the poor nazis'
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 03:50
|
|
|
Martian posted:We literally do 'such a thing' in Europe yes and you throw people in jail for teaching their dog stupid tricks. its not compatible with human rights or free expression.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 05:06
|
|
|
But Mr Eisenhower, sir, what about the Nazis' right of free expression
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 08:41
|
|
|
Your Parents posted:yes and you throw people in jail for teaching their dog stupid tricks. its not compatible with human rights or free expression. I had to look up what you were talking about, apparently some rear end in a top hat youtuber in Scotland trained his dog to respond to the phrase 'gas the jews' by raising its paw in a Sieg Heil-gesture. He then, of course, claimed that it was 'ironic' and 'only to annoy his girlfriend'. There are a ton of sensationalistic articles that claim he 'faces up to a year in prison', but in reality he wasn't jailed but fined 800 pounds. quote:Airdrie Sheriff Court heard the footage violated laws against grossly offensive material and “contained menacing, anti-Semitic and racist material”. Funny that you feel the need to defend this piece of poo poo in 2019, after we have seen what allowing 'ironic' not really online fascism leads to in the USA, with what happened in Charlottesville as the most obvious example. And you even claim that it is incompatible with human rights, as opposed to allowing people to enthousiastically express the wish to gas all Jews which is totally compatible with human rights apparently. I'll take hate speech laws over that, thanks. I'd post that paradox of tolerance comic here, but you can google it yourself. Martian fucked around with this message at 09:29 on Feb 6, 2019 |
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 09:23
|
|
|
Martian posted:I had to look up what you were talking about, apparently some rear end in a top hat youtuber in Scotland trained his dog to respond to the phrase 'gas the jews' by raising its paw in a Sieg Heil-gesture. He then, of course, claimed that it was 'ironic' and 'only to annoy his girlfriend'. Yeah, that bolded part, that's the part he's in the poo poo for. Anyone trying to claim "for teaching his dog a trick", "for telling a joke" or even "because his dog does a nazi salute" is full of poo poo. He's in the poo poo because he said "gas the jews", repeatedly, and wouldn't apologise or back down. But anyway, imagine defending this guy. https://twitter.com/countdankulatv/status/990990230026117121 Elector_Nerdlingen fucked around with this message at 11:30 on Feb 6, 2019 |
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 11:18
|
|
|
Uh-oh  https://twitter.com/repdebdingell/status/1093155099873034240?s=21
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 16:09
|
|
|
Goddamn it. Not John. May flights of sick burns and good governance guide you, sir.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 16:48
|
|
|
Virginia is goin' fine. https://twitter.com/washingtonpost/status/1093192309188055040
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 18:01
|
|
|
I’ve got a great idea - why don’t we just decide that blackface is perfectly OK? Ya gotta hand it to me, that’s a good solution! EDIT: I have been informed that under no circumstances do you “gotta hand it to me.”
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 18:36
|
|
|
FoolyCharged posted:Yes, ones with the remarkable power to.. tell the guy publicly declaring he'll ignore the law that he'll get arrested if he does that. They have truly infiltrated our systems and possess power unlimited. FBI warned of white supremacists in law enforcement 10 years ago. Has anything changed? PBS posted:In the 2006 bulletin, the FBI detailed the threat of white nationalists and skinheads infiltrating police in order to disrupt investigations against fellow members and recruit other supremacists. The bulletin was released during a period of scandal for many law enforcement agencies throughout the country, including a neo-Nazi gang formed by members of the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department who harassed black and Latino communities. Similar investigations revealed officers and entire agencies with hate group ties in Illinois, Ohio and Texas. Even the FBI Thinks Police Have Links to White Supremacists — but Don’t Tell the New York Times The Intercept posted:THE TIMES PIECE has a passage on a joint 2009 assessment by DHS and the FBI, which warned of the growing white supremacist threat. The assessment caused outrage among adherents of the growing right-wing political movement known as the tea party, as well as conservatives in general; among other complaints, they took umbrage at the report’s claim that veterans were at high risk of right-wing radicalization. Then-DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano bowed to the pressure, disavowed the document, and apologized to veterans. But as the report’s lead researcher, Daryl Johnson, told Speri last year, “Federal law enforcement agencies in general — the FBI, the Marshals, the [Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives] — are aware that extremists have infiltrated state and local law enforcement agencies and that there are people in law enforcement agencies that may be sympathetic to these groups.” The FBI has Quietly Investigated White Supremacist Infiltration of Law Enforcement The Intercept posted:N 2009, SHORTLY after the election of Barack Obama, a Department of Homeland Security intelligence study, written in coordination with the FBI, warned of the “resurgence” of right-wing extremism. “Right-wing extremists have capitalized on the election of the first African-American president, and are focusing their efforts to recruit new members, mobilize existing supporters, and broaden their scope and appeal through propaganda,” the report noted, singling out “disgruntled military veterans” as likely targets of recruitment. “Right-wing extremists will attempt to recruit and radicalize returning veterans in order to exploit their skills and knowledge derived from military training and combat.”
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 20:14
|
|
|
Martian posted:I had to look up what you were talking about, apparently some rear end in a top hat youtuber in Scotland trained his dog to respond to the phrase 'gas the jews' by raising its paw in a Sieg Heil-gesture. He then, of course, claimed that it was 'ironic' and 'only to annoy his girlfriend'.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 21:09
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:Who, then, do you trust to decide which jokes are funny and which jokes are criminal? Without robust protection for free speech, what would have prevented a Republican congress and the Trump DoJ from deciding that "gently caress the police" is hate speech and BLM is a prohibited movement? You're basically right about this, even though you're obviously pointing it out for bad-faith reasons.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 21:17
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:Who, then, do you trust to decide which jokes are funny and which jokes are criminal? Without robust protection for free speech, what would have prevented a Republican congress and the Trump DoJ from deciding that "gently caress the police" is hate speech and BLM is a prohibited movement? Who, then, do you trust to decide which kind of deaths are murder? Without robust protection for murders, what would have prevented a Republican congress and the Trump DoJ deciding that "being dead inside" is murder and everyone feeling existential dread is prohibited?
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 21:18
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:Who, then, do you trust to decide which jokes are funny and which jokes are criminal? Without robust protection for free speech, what would have prevented a Republican congress and the Trump DoJ from deciding that "gently caress the police" is hate speech and BLM is a prohibited movement? When millions of police, who were born police, and have no choice but to be police because their parents were police and their parents before them were police have been rounded up and put in gently caress chambers and buried in unmarked graves we can revisit that.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 21:31
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:Who, then, do you trust to decide which jokes are funny and which jokes are criminal? Without robust protection for free speech, what would have prevented a Republican congress and the Trump DoJ from deciding that "gently caress the police" is hate speech and BLM is a prohibited movement? Nothing prevents that now, cops murder black people with no accountability or repercussions. As for BLM they don't have first amendment rights as far as the FBI is concerned https://theintercept.com/2018/03/19/black-lives-matter-fbi-surveillance/
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 21:46
|
|
|
I don't think that, because one group de facto doesn't enjoy the full protection of the law at all times, we should strip legal protection from everyone. It's an indication that we should be defending those protections with greater strength. HootTheOwl posted:Who, then, do you trust to decide which kind of deaths are murder? Without robust protection for murders, what would have prevented a Republican congress and the Trump DoJ deciding that "being dead inside" is murder and everyone feeling existential dread is prohibited? Relentless posted:When millions of police, who were born police, and have no choice but to be police because their parents were police and their parents before them were police have been rounded up and put in gently caress chambers and buried in unmarked graves we can revisit that. Dead Reckoning fucked around with this message at 21:56 on Feb 6, 2019 |
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 21:53
|
|
|
Slo-Tek posted:Russia. Only since Charlottesville, and then only because the ISP decided it would be bad business to keep associating with them, not because of US law. Your Parents posted:yes and you throw people in jail for teaching their dog stupid tricks. its not compatible with human rights or free expression. Other than "what the gently caress is wrong with you for defending a dude who kept going on about genociding jews", anti-hate-speech laws exist in Canada, Australia, South Africa, Brasil, Chile and a host of other countries. The US is very much an odd nation out with its fervent need to defend the "free speech rights" of nazis.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 21:59
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:I hope you can see that "can we truly say whether a person has died?" is a specious comparison to, "It's OK to prohibit speech, but only speech I subjectively find offensive." I hope you can see that "can we truly say whether speech is hateful?" is a specious comparison to, "It's OK to prohibit killings, but only killings I subjectively find offensive."
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 22:09
|
|
|
If countries with these laws inevitably become authoritarian hellscapes, you should be able to find a better example of the terrible injustice of it all than the guy who was fined when he wouldn't back down about his supposed right to say "gas the jews" whenever he likes as long as his dog does a trick afterwards.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 22:16
|
|
|
Elector_Nerdlingen posted:If countries with these laws inevitably become authoritarian hellscapes, you should be able to find a better example of the terrible injustice of it all than the guy who was fined when he wouldn't back down about his supposed right to say "gas the jews" whenever he likes as long as his dog does a trick afterwards. It’s almost like these people fully understand how they can try to weaponize free speech laws.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 22:24
|
|
|
HootTheOwl posted:I hope you can see that "can we truly say whether speech is hateful?" is a specious comparison to, "It's OK to prohibit killings, but only killings I subjectively find offensive." People love murder when cops and soldiers do it and hate it when I post about how people should kill politicians. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 22:25
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:I don't think that, because one group de facto doesn't enjoy the full protection of the law at all times, we should strip legal protection from everyone. It's an indication that we should be defending those protections with greater strength. The people you want to protect are the ones stripping protection from the other groups you claim to want to protect Dead Reckoning posted:I hope you can see that "can we truly say whether a person has died?" is a specious comparison to, "It's OK to prohibit speech, but only speech I subjectively find offensive." So you don't believe in legislation against slander, libel, fighting words, incitement, obscenity, etc? Or are you under the impression that there's no subjective element in determining what speech falls in these categories?
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 23:19
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:So you don't believe in legislation against slander, libel, fighting words, incitement, obscenity, etc? All of those are defined pretty narrowly in the US context (to the point where "fighting words" in particular doesn't meaningfully exist as a First Amendment exception anymore), so I'm not sure that's much of a gotcha.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2019 00:06
|
|
|
Silver2195 posted:All of those are defined pretty narrowly in the US context (to the point where "fighting words" in particular doesn't meaningfully exist as a First Amendment exception anymore), so I'm not sure that's much of a gotcha. Narrowly ≠ non-subjective You could define hate speech as narrowly as you want so this isn't much of an objection
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2019 00:20
|
|
|
Imagine if we didn't have any laws against assault, just a police force that arbitrarily assassinated black people and only black people for assault even if they were acting in self-defense. "We should make laws against assault because black people are getting beaten up." "But then black people might get arrested for assault even when they were just defending themselves!" "They get executed for that now, at least a law would sometimes protect them from attackers" "That's even more reason not to make it illegal to assault anyone!"
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2019 00:29
|
|
|
Zanzibar Ham posted:I really can't imagine why Dead Reckoning, a person who just loves when black people (kids and adults) get shot and who repeatedly defended the actions of their killers every time a thread about it came up, doesn't like the idea of curbing hate-speech. Love to spend Black History Month reading notoriously low-key but high key racist Dead Reckonings posts defending the free speech of literal Nazis
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2019 00:36
|
|
|
Koalas March posted:Love to spend Black History Month reading notoriously low-key but high key racist Dead Reckonings posts defending the free speech of literal Nazis To quote some rear end in a top hat: "Check out rap sheet and past!" (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2019 00:58
|
|
|
Hate speech is hilariously easy to define. I'm not a big city lawyer, but "speech intended to intimidate, defame, denigrate, or incite violence against a protected class" is a piss easy place to start. It's like saying we'll never have words to describe a smell.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2019 01:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 22:24 |
|
|
You could write a perfectly objective narrow law like "it is unlawful to say the words 'kill the Jews'" but I bet he'd still have a problem with it, the subjectivity isn't the issue. Also ya know his insistence that a cop's subjective determination that a black child needs to die by extrajudicial execution cannot be questioned.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2019 02:10
|
|