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.
But you haven't because you still haven't posted any proof that you claims are correct. I even did a google search of "Mark Meechan deport mexicans" and found nothing about that.
Recommend watching his debate with Destiny. I think this guy might be one of the stupidest people Destiny has "debated".
It doesn't have to taint the rest of us living in the EU, that's what.Putting aside the incredible ridiculousness of that latter sentence, what does this case have to do with the EU?
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.
I just posted it on the same page dude https://twitter.com/CountDankulaTV/status/959118383986946051?s=20But you haven't because you still haven't posted any proof that you claims are correct. I even did a google search of "Mark Meechan deport mexicans" and found nothing about that.
Coatbridge, which explains a lot. This is also public record before anyone asks.
I just posted it on the same page dude https://twitter.com/CountDankulaTV/status/959118383986946051?s=20
Are you going to answer my question whether you think that "bad comedy" should warrant an arrest or not?
I remember this video, can't believe he got found guilty of a hate crime. Also can't believe these low quality posts in this thread. Eg. "I checked out his twitter and he looks like a cunt" like wtf. Also, he's clearly not a nazi.
Sorry wasn't ignoring you I just missed that one. It wasn't just "bad comedy" though was it? Is was a racist and anti Semitic act perpetrated under the guise of "humour" and going by the mans history was likely more than simply him trying to annoy his girlfriend. So, to answer your question, yes he should have been arrested.
Sorry wasn't ignoring you I just missed that one. It wasn't just "bad comedy" though was it? Is was a racist and anti Semitic act perpetrated under the guise of "humour" and going by the mans history was likely more than simply him trying to annoy his girlfriend. So, to answer your question, yes he should have been arrested.
The court isn't evaluating his history, they are evaluating the video alone.Sorry wasn't ignoring you I just missed that one. It wasn't just "bad comedy" though was it? Is was a racist and anti Semitic act perpetrated under the guise of "humour" and going by the mans history was likely more than simply him trying to annoy his girlfriend. So, to answer your question, yes he should have been arrested.
He's signal boosting it to try and get them deported but he's letting his followers do it for him, I still count that as trying to get them deported. They do this a lot, quote tweet someone doing something but never directly do it yourself so your angry followers will do it for you and you can claim "Well it wasn't me and I cant control my fans."It's shitty for him to have people "salty" about it (forcibly being removed my home sure would get me "salty") but it doesn't look like he did any of the reporting himself like you claimed.
Erm, only 16 conutries (almost all of them european) punish people for holocaust denial. Majority of the world, including Norway and Denmark, have no problem with you denying holocaust.In UK hate speech is illegal, and saying to gas the jews is one of them. Only in US you will be allowed to deny the holocaust, works well for the US doesn't it?
racism and nazi jokes are not "jokes" its another platform to to spread hate. Everyone asking for proof of him being a nazi isnt going to be satisfied until someone is dead, is how people get killed by this shit.I remember this video, can't believe he got found guilty of a hate crime. Also can't believe these low quality posts in this thread. Eg. "I checked out his twitter and he looks like a cunt" like wtf. Also, he's clearly not a nazi.
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.
The court isn't evaluating his history, they are evaluating the video alone.
I remember this video, can't believe he got found guilty of a hate crime. Also can't believe these low quality posts in this thread. Eg. "I checked out his twitter and he looks like a cunt" like wtf. Also, he's clearly not a nazi.
R v Paul Chambers (appealed to the High Court as Chambers v Director of Public Prosecutions), popularly known as the Twitter Joke Trial, was a United Kingdom legal case centred on the conviction of a man under the Communications Act 2003 for posting a joke about destroying an airport to Twitter, a message which police regarded as "menacing". The conviction was widely condemned as a miscarriage of justice,[2][3][4][5] and was appealed three times, the conviction being quashed as a result of the third appeal.[6]
During late December 2009 and early January 2010, cold weather had resulted in considerable disruption across northern England. Robin Hood Airport in South Yorkshire was one of many airports which was forced to cancel flights. On 6 January 2010,[7][8][9] an intending traveller, Paul Chambers, then aged 28,[10] who was planning to fly to Northern Ireland to meet his then girlfriend (later wife), posted a message on Twitter:
Crap! Robin Hood airport is closed. You've got a week and a bit to get your shit together otherwise I'm blowing the airport sky high!![11]
A week later, an off-duty manager at the airport found the message whilst doing an unrelated computer search.[9] The airport management considered the message to be "not credible" as a threat,[9]but contacted the police anyway. Chambers was arrested by anti-terror police at his office,[9] his house was searched and his mobile phone, laptop and desktop hard drive were confiscated.[11] He was later charged with "sending a public electronic message that was grossly offensive or of an indecent, obscene or menacing character contrary to the Communications Act 2003".[9][12] On 10 May, he was found guilty at Doncaster magistrates' court,[9] fined £385 and ordered to pay £600 costs.[10] He lost his job as a consequence.[11]
He's not advocating for violence or persecution in the video, it's clearly done for shock value. It's obviously stupid and in poor taste but I don't see why either should be considered criminal.
So you do believe intent is important, despite saying it isn't before? Do you feel the link I posted earlier should be a criminal offense?
Yup, another example of this very same law being abused for situations which are clearly poor attempts at humor and not actual threats.He is a bit of a cunt, but him being a cunt shouldn't be correlated as "only people I like have rights in the eyes of the state".
When the courts act like North Korea with intent/context you get stupid shit like this
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twitter_Joke_Trial
I agree with the judge earlier saying what you put out there can have consequences, but a court of law shouldn't be above "intent/context" by stating "we simply decide". That's veering into the often "misused" lingo of "thought-crime".
Losing your job, being shunned, going viral and being lambasted are all social consequences but having the state convict you and put you on trial is a whole different realm. One where intent/context SHOULD be the thing that saves you from jail/having a criminal record.
They aren't growing, they are withering. It only looks like growth because many of those who've kept it to themselves or their social circle are now exposing themselves.
https://www.splcenter.org/news/2017...secutive-year-trump-electrifies-radical-rightHate groups increase for second consecutive year as Trump electrifies radical right
The number of hate groups in the United States rose for a second year in a row in 2016 as the radical right was energized by the candidacy of Donald Trump, according to the Southern Poverty Law Center's (SPLC) annual census of hate groups and other extremist organizations, released today.
The SPLC found that the number of hate groups operating in 2016 rose to 917 – up from 892 in 2015. The number is 101 shy of the all-time record set in 2011, but high by historic standards.
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?
He's signal boosting it to try and get them deported but he's letting his followers do it for him, I still count that as trying to get them deported. They do this a lot, quote tweet someone doing something but never directly do it yourself so your angry followers will do it for you and you can claim "Well it wasn't me and I cant control my fans."
That doesn't mean that there are more people overall who hold those views, rather more of the people who hold those views feel comfortable and able to publically express them.Off thead subject but I had to reply to this.
This isn't true. At least not in America.
https://www.splcenter.org/news/2017...secutive-year-trump-electrifies-radical-right
Are you trying to tell me that letting racists/homophobes/etc. say whatever they want isn't working???Off thead subject but I had to reply to this.
This isn't true. At least not in America.
https://www.splcenter.org/news/2017...secutive-year-trump-electrifies-radical-right
I agree, except I would change "them" to "you." If we're going to throw people in jail for crimethink, let's start with the censors first. Then we'll sort things out from there.Throw them in jail, punch them in the face, make lives of people who spread hate as hard as you can make them is the only way to stop them.
That doesn't mean that there are more people overall who hold those views, rather more of the people who hold those views feel comfortable and able to publically express them.
uh.... What you're proposing sounds like exactly what the Nazis did - but hey, I guess it's okay when we're the ones doing it, amirite!Throw them in jail, punch them in the face, make lives of people who spread hate as hard as you can make them is the only way to stop them.
Making a "humorous" (differs on opinion) joke relating to Nazis does not equal being a Nazi.
I guess Pewdiepie should be arrested and be considered a Nazi now too, based on what people say in this thread.
I disagree. I laughed more at this than most punching up jokes. Offensive humor has its place, you just have to know how to do it.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...an-charged-over-alleged-killallwhitemen-tweet
Does no one remember Bahar Mustafa? She luckily had her charges dropped but remember to keep this in mind when it works against you... Did this racist guy really commit a hate crime with his video? We speak of overburdened prison populations and you want this guy arrested,charged and sentenced? Draconian government laws should always be challenged.
Granted he is a bad person, his views abhorrent, but he uploaded a video where he was taunting his gf and trained his pug to raise his paws saying Nazi stuff about jews.
But hey, if the people in the UK want this, that is their choice. You reap what you sow. Just remember when you give your government the power to regulate some speech, it can be all speech and it would just take the election of a certain group to outlaw something else you may stand for.
We are in total agreement.He is a bit of a cunt, but him being a cunt shouldn't be correlated as "only people I like have rights in the eyes of the state".
When the courts act like North Korea with intent/context you get stupid shit like this
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twitter_Joke_Trial
I agree with the judge earlier saying what you put out there can have consequences, but a court of law shouldn't be above "intent/context" by stating "we simply decide". That's veering into the often "misused" lingo of "thought-crime".
Losing your job, being shunned, going viral and being lambasted are all social consequences but having the state convict you and put you on trial is a whole different realm. One where intent/context SHOULD be the thing that saves you from jail/having a criminal record.
Are you trying to tell me that letting racists/homophobes/etc. say whatever they want isn't working???