Count Dankula found guilty of hate crime

[Heladys]

Awww. How cute. Lol. I didn’t realize you operated on that level of discourse. Adorable. I thought I was talking to a fully matured adult, but I guess we can’t hold onto that image of you anymore. Have a good day lad. Run along.

Oh, bravo. Pulling the equivalent of a 'kid' dismissal really makes your case, kid.

Shoo now.

- - - Updated - - -

That was fast on that confirmation. Have fun and shitpost away. You're not worth anyone's time.

Nothing is worth your time when you have such a basic language skill deficit you should be addressing first.

Get on that. We'll be here for you when you're properly conversant.

[Zython]

Antifa physically attack people to stop them speaking. This is a false equivalency. It's a joke because at the top of the video he points out as much in clear terms and denigrates nazis while doing so. The massive issue with this case is the judge and prosecution dismissing context and intent, if that is the legal precedent, anything that anyone says can be interpreted as the prosecution pleases and used against them. This is totalitarian territory.

Did he throw out valid evidence of this, or was there none to begin with? Or perhaps there was stronger evidence to the contrary?

[urasim]

And the jury?

I'm pretty sure there wasn't a jury...

[Deleted]

The delusional belief that hatespeech should be protected is a rightwing-wide issue.

A, no reasonable person could define this as hatespeech B, uncontroversial speech by definition does not need protection, C, Hate speech is a fluid category, that i assure you will be used on leftwing people in the fullness of time, as it has each and every time free speech is set aside.
Just as an example have you ever uttered a single derogatory word about Christians? -

[Noradin]

False. Free speech is a fundamental tenet of liberalism. I fought for it as a liberal in the 90s and I’ll fight for the exact same thing now. Regardless of “no true Scotsman” fallacies.

It isn't, what you mean is "freedom to express ones opinion".

[TheRainman]

Read the article, haven't read the entire thread. When I hear the phrase "found guilty" I immediately think of a trial by jury. All the article says is that,

"Sheriff Derek O'Carroll said the video was "threatening and grossly offensive."

He found Meechan guilty of sending by "means of a public electronic communications network a message or other matter that is grossly offensive or of an indecent, obscene or menacing character".

Giving his verdict, Sheriff O'Carroll said: "In my view, there is no doubt it's grossly offensive."


What the fuck does that mean? In his opinion? Does Scotland do things differently there where sheriffs can pass out official 'verdicts'? Being ignorant of Scottish jurisprudence, that article and the title of this thread seems very misleading.

Anyone in the know care to enlighten me?

[Venara]

Closing this thread.

Too many reports, too much bickering and personal attacks. There's little to no constructive discussion happening any more. We're essentially down to people arguing amongst each other, then reporting each other for flaming, etc.