German police raid 36 homes over hateful postings on social media

[Ghostpanther]

I'm making a conclusion based on how you present your reply, you specifically mention flag burning as if it was something to be really concerned about, it pretty obvious that you think it a terrible thing.

Once again, you are judging too quickly based on what you want to see. I mentioned the burning the flag because it does represent that the legal interpretation of freedom of speech goes beyond more than just what we say. The mention of going too far was more in reference to the context of the example of displaying or conducting a show about the assassination of a sitting president. Or even death threats to anyone.

[Deleted]

Even with the spelling?

RT isnt that great on english. They share that fate with me.

[zenkai]

Thought is not being policed. Publicly espousing harmful comments is.



Try shouting racist comments in the US at the top of your lungs. Or 'fire'.

One would put me in jail and one wouldn't, your point is stupids

- - - Updated - - -

If the populace is sane and intelligent, the leaders wise and responsible and the state fair and equal then yes.

And what happens when those leaders start making things you don't find offensive, offensive?

[Doctor Amadeus]

you can shout racist comments at the top of your lungs, you just can't directly threaten someone. could go outside and scream "death to jews" if you want, but if you say "kill that specific jew right there" then it's a crime.

and it is thought policing to stop people from saying this shit. that's exactly what thought policing is.

this is trash, anyone that supports this is trash.

What is the distinction between saying kill a white man vs, kill whitey?

Because I don't see any, if you said either of those things and worked under me I'd fire your ass on the fucking spot, joking or not, someone I liked or not. You don't LIKE white people as an example, FINE, you are free to think whatever you want, You, YOU can even go home on your property and say whatever kinds of nasty things and ideas you want.

But the moment you decided to PICK someone anyone, or a group, and start spewing racist hateful bullshit to the point that decent people and folk have to put up with that, then YOU not they are the problem.


Action not your thinking becomes everybody else's problem

[zenkai]

Freedom of speech as guaranteed by 1A is the right to peaceably assemble, redress grievances with the government, and is protection that congress will not enact laws that favor a religion (*cough*christianity*cough*), prevent practice of religion, or abridge the press.

Freedom of speech, in the colloquial sense and beyond the scope of 1A, does not protect people from the consequences of their speech. In fact, there are many, many restrictions on speech.

Your post is full if bigotry and ignorance, aside from that. You don't understand freedom of speech and limited freedom of speech. Yeah you can't make threats and stuff like that but it protect you from getting prosecuted for spouting ignorant racist view points. Learn the difference, especially since you're abusing your freedom of speech by spouting stupid shit.

[Doctor Amadeus]

One would put me in jail and one wouldn't, your point is stupids

- - - Updated - - -

And what happens when those leaders start making things you don't find offensive, offensive?

If people are sane, representatives is wise, and leaders just, you aren't punishing people for merely what they find offensive. Someone that is causing harm by regulating their hate on people because of the way they were born, isn't offensive. It is an action of violence. Words can kill, and words can break bones, they can even stop or start wars.

[zenkai]

Always the idiotic "slippery slope" argument.

Just as gay marriage would lead to people to advocate for rights to marry farm animals.

It's not idiotic, read a history book. Hell it's happening in modern times, look at all the snowflakes getting offended and wanting to shut people down and act violent toward them when they don't agree with them.

I disagree with you but I wouldn't silence your view point I would let you continue to embarrass yourself.

[Kiri]

you can shout racist comments at the top of your lungs, you just can't directly threaten someone. could go outside and scream "death to jews" if you want, but if you say "kill that specific jew right there" then it's a crime.

and it is thought policing to stop people from saying this shit. that's exactly what thought policing is.

this is trash, anyone that supports this is trash.

Thought policing is encroaching on people's privacy to ensure that such opinions may not be had even in private, through strong surveillance. That way, thought was policed in that novel. However, German law only applies to publicly espousing these opinions, not privately.

Then again, apparently you would support a group of people going into a synagogue and screaming that loudly at the assembled Jews. Because nothing bad could ever come from that and the Jews just need thicker skin I guess?

[derpkitteh]

What is the distinction between saying kill a white man vs, kill whitey?

Because I don't see any, if you said either of those things and worked under me I'd fire your ass on the fucking spot, joking or not, someone I liked or not. You don't LIKE white people as an example, FINE, you are free to think whatever you want, You, YOU can even go home on your property and say whatever kinds of nasty things and ideas you want.

But the moment you decided to PICK someone anyone, or a group, and start spewing racist hateful bullshit to the point that decent people and folk have to put up with that, then YOU not they are the problem.


Action not your thinking becomes everybody else's problem

in your example, "kill whitey" would be fine to shout, unless it's someone pointing at someone specifically. then it becomes a threat, and that is illegal.

i think everyone should be able to say whatever they want, whenever they want, in public space. if facebook/twitter decide to ban that type of speech, they are a private platform and may do so. the government should NEVER be the ones to control what is said there, ever. that is infringing on personal liberty.

[Deleted]

LOL, as far as I know this forum isn't owned by the American government.

Not yet. Just wait for Donalds second legislative period.

[Krigaren]

I do not disagree with your points. But when the Supreme Court rules even the burning of the national flag is a expression of freedom of speech, it does show the freedom extends to more than just actual speech. Does it go too far at times? Absolutely in my opinion.

Granted, but imo, burning a flag isn't a threatening act. It can be viewed in a variety of different ways, like being unpatriotic, disrespectful, etc, but it's not a specific threat against any person or group of people. Just like the Shakespeare performance isn't a specific threat against Trump, but rather a satirized version of him.

My stance is that freedom of speech should only extend to just before someone starts making personal threats. If yelling "bomb!" at an airport is punishable and not covered by 1A, then harassment to the point of making a person(s) genuinely fear for their lives, even if it's across something like Facebook or Twitter, should also be punishable, or at the least taken seriously. The Kathy Griffin photo would fall under this, imo.

[derpkitteh]

Thought policing is encroaching on people's privacy to ensure that such opinions may not be had even in private, through strong surveillance. That way, thought was policed in that novel. However, German law only applies to publicly espousing these opinions, not privately.

Then again, apparently you would support a group of people going into a synagogue and screaming that loudly at the assembled Jews. Because nothing bad could ever come from that and the Jews just need thicker skin I guess?

i am for the most anarchic version of free speech. but under current laws, i would not be ok with them going into the synagogue. i would be ok with them shouting it from public land across the street from the synagogue.

[Krigaren]

Your post is full if bigotry and ignorance, aside from that.

Oh Zenkai, you silly.

[Doctor Amadeus]

Your post is full if bigotry and ignorance, aside from that. You don't understand freedom of speech and limited freedom of speech. Yeah you can't make threats and stuff like that but it protect you from getting prosecuted for spouting ignorant racist view points. Learn the difference, especially since you're abusing your freedom of speech by spouting stupid shit.

It depends on where you are standing from, if the society is NOT sane, and people are not intelligent, if is very possible, that people might view YOU in a negative light, for your skin color, for your gender, or who you choose to love.

And if you are the target of hate and violence and there is a real history, if there are numbers of those not like you, being encouraged by others through SPEECH to hate you, then violence is the next thing to follow.


That isn't just thought or expression, that is an idea being committed to action or prejudice, persecution, discrimination. Your life and those of maybe the few like you can be in real danger from shit like that, and it isn't because it hurts your FEELINGS.

[Kiri]

i am for the most anarchic version of free speech. but under current laws, i would not be ok with them going into the synagogue. i would be ok with them shouting it from public land across the street from the synagogue.

Why? It is a honest question because I can never understand why free speech has to allow verbally hurting people. What is gained by that?

[Deleted]

Gestapo still upp and running.

[Doctor Amadeus]

in your example, "kill whitey" would be fine to shout, unless it's someone pointing at someone specifically. then it becomes a threat, and that is illegal.

i think everyone should be able to say whatever they want, whenever they want, in public space. if facebook/twitter decide to ban that type of speech, they are a private platform and may do so. the government should NEVER be the ones to control what is said there, ever. that is infringing on personal liberty.

No in my example "kill whitey" is absolutely NOT ok to shout or say. I don't care what race it is, and I don't need to speak for them but people can speak up WITH each other and go you know what, that shit is NOT OK.

I also think people should be able to say whatever they want, but there is a time and place, and maybe audience. The general public does not have to put up with your bullshit when you decide to abuse your freedom on the backs of how they have to live, and it's for no other reason than WHO they are, not anything they have actually done.


As for corporations to have liberty over government of the people, EH, NO!

[derpkitteh]

Why? It is a honest question because I can never understand why free speech has to allow verbally hurting people. What is gained by that?

nothing is gained by it. it's terrible, i hate it.

but it's about what is lost when it's taken away. where do they stop once they start taking away the racist's rights? they don't. that's their in, and once they have an in they will take and take until they are in full control.

they are not to be trusted. so we have to deal with distasteful things to keep them at bay.

[zenkai]

If people are sane, representatives is wise, and leaders just, you aren't punishing people for merely what they find offensive. Someone that is causing harm by regulating their hate on people because of the way they were born, isn't offensive. It is an action of violence. Words can kill, and words can break bones, they can even stop or start wars.

People who are in power abuse power, as someone who as argued that point many times you think you would understand that.

[Knolan]

Does anyone have a link for the content posted?

If they posted:

"I will kill all those fucking kebabs", then I would be OK with an investigation / police action. OTOH, If they posted:

"I think we need to deport immigrants that commit crimes and adopt a harder stance against muslins that are committing crimes on our country.", then it is quite ridiculous that they would deserve any kind of persecution.