Madness

Member
Oct 25, 2017
792
How come freedom of speech debates are only ever about some douchebag saying racist or hate-speech adjacent shit lol.

Are they? In my example of my post, I remember people decrying that Bahar Mustafa was arrested for just a joke. I just don't understand when you have examples of Poland, especially right now making it a crime for mentioning Polish complicity in the Holocaust, how people are for their governments regulating speech that isn't a crime. Let's be real, there are laws for harassment, stalking, libel, defamation, uttering threats, disorderly conduct, advocating sedition, or incitement to commit violence, causing mass panic. A lot of speech falls under that regard, but now grossly offensive humor or comments should be hate speech? The UK that wants to ban porn sites under the guise of culture, that wants to be read whatsapp messages and break end to end encryption, you want them to have even more power over what you can or cannot say? What if a more religious group comes to power and they crack down on speech that would be blasphemous? What if you get another Brexit like scenario and a far right group gets elected that makes it difficult to speak out. Things change very quickly. Who the hell thought Marine Le Pen would be challenging for the French Presidency or that Italy would elect the first far-right party since World War II?
 
Oct 26, 2017
10,499
UK
So according to some of y'all if I shave my mustache and accidentally forget the middle and say "I look like hitler lol" I should go to jail and am a neo nazi? That's stupid

If you then release a video where you repeatedly say "Gas the Jews" and "Sieg heil" only for it to be supported by you massively antisemitic fanbase who flood it with hateful comments. Sure?
 

De Amigo

Member
Dec 19, 2017
483
I can't imagine why my posts where I point out how he is certifiably racist for trying to deport Mexicans keeps getting ignored. :extremely big think:
 

Lundren

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,745
It should be pretty obvious, but I feel like a lot of people are missing the point lately. When the words are used to incite hatred, cause violence and make people want to actually do these things, then yes, it's hate speech. Making a dog react to comments is VERY clearly a joke. Especially when prefaced by him SAYING IT'S A JOKE. He didn't ask or make anyone watching do anything. They just laughed or clicked off the video. Like they were meant to. Not take him to jail. It's super obvious when someone is trying to spread hate, and this was definitely not it.

He says it's a joke guys. Case closed. Nobody has ever tried to put out their shitty views and then pretended it was a joke. Who doesn't find Nazi imagery funny?

Point is, as long as he isn't literally yelling that he is a literal Nazi or KKK member or actively filming himself torching a mosque, how can we know what is really in his heart?
 

Ponn

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 26, 2017
3,171
But he's not a nazi. Nor a white supremacist from anything I've seen. Did I miss something or is the assumption that person in right camp+ Nazi joke means they are a Nazi?

Obviously it makes them an ally to minorities and Jews everywhere.

"Eh, he's not a Nazi. Just a white supremicist that makes gas all Jews jokes. He's cool."
 

KHarvey16

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
9,193
The alternative I've created is that I don't have to fear for my life because of racist abuse. You would think a country with blatantly corrupt and racist police force that murders it's citizens with no repercussions (and the country at large is fine with this) and treats members of it's society as second class citizens wouldn't be sitting on a high horse dictating how poor another countries treatment racist actions but here we are.

The proof is in the pudding that stats speak for themselves.

You're right, because it's worse in the US than it is in these places obviously everything the US is doing is 100% wrong and what others are doing is 100% right. No need for introspection or questions about what works best! We don't have to imagine this as a complicated problem that spans all human civilization and stems from a vast number of contributing factors, no, no. Whatever makes me personally feel best and seems right is how it should be. No thinking necessary.
 

Ralemont

Member
Jan 3, 2018
4,509
I can't imagine why my posts where I point out how he is certifiably racist for trying to deport Mexicans keeps getting ignored. :extremely big think:

Well, for one you just keep saying it without giving anyone links. I'd like to read it if you do because that could change things.

Point is, as long as he isn't literally yelling that he is a literal Nazi or KKK member or actively filming himself torching a mosque, how can we know what is really in his heart?

It doesn't matter what's in his heart as we don't jail for "thought" crimes. If his actions show that he's a Nazi, then yes this video changes in context.
 
Oct 25, 2017
3,784
Jail? Maybe not, a place unknown? probably. Definitely going to be on every watchlist that can be thought of, no fly list for sure. Definitely going to be vilified by news organizations and the government will be used to show that ALL Muslims are horrible people who want to destroy America, and I would definitely have a certain segment of America chanting I should be locked up, and another segment who will be silent about all of it while in the same breath saying that we should hug Nazis and listen to them to help and shit and the free peach.

What you're saying is a criticism of the application of a law rather than the law itself as well as the cultural outlook of its application. Both of these things are worthy of criticism, but the law itself is and should be neutral, so this just comes off as a whataboutism to me. None of those things should happen to you and the people that think it should are massive hypocrites, but that's not what the topic is about.
 

VaporSnake

Member
Oct 28, 2017
4,603
But he's not a nazi. Nor a white supremacist from anything I've seen. Did I miss something or is the assumption that person in right camp+ Nazi joke means they are a Nazi?
You didn't get the memo? You can be branded a Nazi/White Supremacist without any evidence these days, all you gotta do is blurt it out and it'll probably stick since no one can really prove it one way or the other. I mean, I'm sure there's plenty of posters who upon seeing my post (or yours) will dismiss it instantly thinking to themselves "that guys alt right!" despite leaning left to my core but that's just the way of things, people don't want nuanced opinions anymore.
 

Flabber

Member
Oct 31, 2017
1,050


Recommend watching his debate with Destiny. I think this guy might be one of the stupidest people Destiny has "debated".

This is amazing. I'm only 7 minutes in and Destiny clearly wants to put his head through a wall.

Right now he is trying to argue that him having seen lots of videos of violence by the far left is equally as valid as Destiny having read lots of data on violence by the alt-right.
 

De Amigo

Member
Dec 19, 2017
483

Deleted member 888

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
14,361
More comments by the Judge

'In my view it is a reasonable conclusion that the video is grossly offensive. 'The description of the video as humourous is no magic wand. This court has taken the freedom of expression into consideration. But the right to freedom of expression also comes with responsibility. 'The accused is quite obviously an intelligent and articulate man. The accused knew that the material was offensive and knew why it was offensive.

'Despite that the accused made a video containing anti-Semitic content and he would have known it was grossly offensive to many Jewish people.'

'The Crown contention is that the inclusion of the dog is an attempt to muddy the waters around him making, producing and posting the video. 'He says that he knows the context of the video but in a criminal court in Scotland he does not decide the context of anything, the court decides the context.'

Freedom of expression comes with responsibility? Yes. The court decides the context? Eh, no. The evidence decides the context.

'He says that he knows the context of the video but in a criminal court in Scotland he does not decide the context of anything, the court decides the context.'

That does sound like something you'd hear from China/North Korea.
 

Principate

Member
Oct 31, 2017
11,197
You're right, because it's worse in the US than it is in these places obviously everything the US is doing is 100% wrong and what others are doing is 100% right. No need for introspection or questions about what works best! We don't have to imagine this as a complicated problem that spans all human civilization and stems from a vast number of contributing factors, no, no. Whatever makes me personally feel best and seems right is how it should be. No thinking necessary.
There's plenty of need for introspection but when you offer an alternative it's usually nice to have a some data to prove that this method is better. I don't agree with this decision and work should be done as with all legal systems to ensure the punishment fits the crime and has a positive effect on society.

The thing usual when American propose the benefits of free speech they not talking about adjustments to make these more fair but rather alignment to those in America while not giving a single piece of evidence why that's an improvement. That's pointless. If your going to take for example monetary advice from someone neck deep in debt the minimum criteria should be some fact based evidence of it's benefits.
 

QuantumBro

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
288
I can't imagine why my posts where I point out how he is certifiably racist for trying to deport Mexicans keeps getting ignored. :extremely big think:

Maybe because you still haven't posted sources for those claims and it has nothing to do with whether this guy should be punished for uploading the dog video.
 

Branu

Banned
Feb 7, 2018
1,029
Even if we're to assume that it was made in jest, that his comments and use of the dog were simply a poor attempt at comedy, who makes that kind of joke? Who finds even a scintilla of humor in a joke about an act that saw millions exterminated? How is that at all not a reflection of something profoundly wrong with this man? Am I condoning his imprisonment in the gulags for this? No. But am I crying that he was punished, however leniently, for making a joke of this nature? Of course not. And it really says a lot about anyone who thinks that this kind of "humor" is to be tolerated without repercussions in a civil society.
 

Deleted member 888

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
14,361
No, there are separate British laws that refer to hate speech and hate crimes. This law is explicitly not about hate speech, hence the lighter sentence.

The sentence hasn't been given yet, it is next month. The charge has just been applied as being 'grossly offensive' under the communications act. Sentencing can be up to 6 months in prison, or a fine, or both.
 

syllogism

Member
Oct 25, 2017
90
The court absolutely decides the context as the evidence doesn't speak for itself; despite the doctrine it falls to the court to interpret the evidence.
 

De Amigo

Member
Dec 19, 2017
483
Maybe because you still haven't posted sources for those claims and it has nothing to do with whether this guy should be punished for uploading the dog video.
Late on the reply there, but to add I wasn't replying to say it should show him being guilty but I'm trying to show all of the " but he seems like a normal guy outside of this" posters that he isn't Average Joe and is a skeezebag outside of this case.
 

Deleted member 888

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
14,361
The court absolutely decides the context as the evidence doesn't speak for itself; despite the doctrine it falls to the court to interpret the evidence.

Yes, it does, it was clearly stated in the video it was a joke to wind up his girlfriend. The court is essentially saying here they'll ignore that and just insert their own feelings to what the context is. That isn't something the court should be doing, they should be remaining neutral, even if the content is highly offensive. If the context is given it should be taken as is (or queried as stated), if it isn't given, then it is up to the court to question to seek context.
 

bluie_

Member
Oct 28, 2017
54
Well at least the UK is leaving the EU, because this was too much bullshit to stomach. Anyone defending this verdict is obviously grossly offensive to me, and is just as deserving of jail.
 

honest_ry

Banned
Oct 30, 2017
4,288
No clue who the guy was and then took a look at his Twitter page.

Looks like a cunt. And he also looks familiar. Where in Scotland is he from?
 

Kyougar

Cute Animal Whisperer
Member
Nov 3, 2017
9,431
If you're going to equate Mitt Romney and John McCain to a group that advocates shooting refugees as they cross the border into Germany, then I got nothing for you.

There are enough GOP assholes that say the same thing about Mexicans. Let's talk again when the AFD has the majority in the election.

unlimited free speech is cancer. You can spill bullshit about race and religion and the affected people can't do anything about it. You can gather 50 people in front of a hospital and spout racist and sexist language while a LBGT cancer patient is slowly dying and outside the assholes talk about gods will and that the sinner will die because he/she was gay.
 

Sedef122

Member
Nov 7, 2017
392
jesus christ...is this serious?

If you disagree at least tell me why. Comedy can and should be able to cover even the darkest of subject matter but if you are going to cover something that could conceivably be harmful to a group of people your material cannot just be an attack, it needs to be more than that. The most recent example that comes to mind is the latest Ricky Gervais stand up special, he dedicated far too much time attacking trans people...and that was it, there was no message, no irony, just an attack on a group of people under the guise of "humour". Punching down for a quick joke at the expense of someone else is bad comedy, simple as that.
 
Last edited:

Nerokis

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,630
Well at least the UK is leaving the EU, because this was too much bullshit to stomach. Anyone defending this verdict is obviously grossly offensive to me, and is just as deserving of jail.

Putting aside the incredible ridiculousness of that latter sentence, what does this case have to do with the EU?