4 ms·

> We criminalize exactly one form of speech: speech that creates exigent danger. What are these 'many' forms that you speak of? We criminalize all sorts of spe

> We criminalize exactly one form of speech: speech that creates exigent danger. What are these 'many' forms that you speak of? We criminalize all sorts of speech, everything from libel to copyrighted works. You live in a country under the permission of government. Never forget that. > Let's ask a simple question: Don't ever ask simple questions. It shows lack of thought.

darawk 9y ago
> We criminalize all sorts of speech, everything from libel to copyrighted works. > You live in a country under the permission of government. Never forget that. You could equally and more accurately say government governs under the permission of the people. > Don't ever ask simple questions. It shows lack of thought. No, much better to dodge counter-arguments to which you are incapable of formulating a response.
- mozumder 9y ago
  > You could equally and more accurately say government governs under the permission of the people. Indeed, which is why we limit freedom of speech. These things don't happen without the public's approval. This isn't the world where you get to do what you want. This is the world where you get to do what government (= the public in a democracy) allows you to do. I'm sorry you thought otherwise. I get the desire to defend free speech, but as everyone is already aware, several people have ALREADY died directly from this horrific and dangerous event, organized by criminals and terrorists. Be thankful AirBnB has sided with safety. Welcome to the real world, where people actually die as a result of the words they say, instead of "theory" world.
  - darawk 9y ago
    > This isn't the world where you get to do what you want. This is the world where you get to do what government (= the public in a democracy) allows you to do. Oh, quite to the contrary. The citizenry of this country and its government are actually quite in agreement with me. That's why we have freedom of speech here - because we believe the principle outweighs the negative effects of subversive speech. >I get the desire to defend free speech, but as everyone is already aware, several people have ALREADY died directly from this horrific and dangerous event, organized by criminals and terrorists. So, we should ban anything capable of causing deaths? We don't ban cars. We don't ban airplanes. We don't even ban guns. Why don't we ban these things? Because we believe that the number of deaths they cause is acceptable relative to the value they provide. Yes, that's right. We callously calculate that cars are worth more to us than the thousands of people they kill every year. And if cars are worth that, freedom of speech is definitely worth the tiny handful of people who's live it may end annually.
    - deleted 9y ago
      [deleted]
masonic 9y ago
We criminalize all sorts of speech, everything from libel to copyrighted works. Libel and copyright violations are not criminalized (civil law, rather than criminal law, applies).
- mozumder 9y ago
  > Libel and copyright violations are not criminalized (civil law, rather than criminal law, applies). No, both of those definitely also involve criminal statutes. Also, another example of criminalized speech is sedition. And didn't some girl get convicted last week of convincing her boyfriend to commit suicide? I don't even know why people think there's unlimited free speech...

darawk 9y ago

> We criminalize all sorts of speech, everything from libel to copyrighted works. > You live in a country under the permission of government. Never forget that. You could equally and more accurately say government governs under the permission of the people. > Don't ever ask simple questions. It shows lack of thought. No, much better to dodge counter-arguments to which you are incapable of formulating a response.

mozumder 9y ago
> You could equally and more accurately say government governs under the permission of the people. Indeed, which is why we limit freedom of speech. These things don't happen without the public's approval. This isn't the world where you get to do what you want. This is the world where you get to do what government (= the public in a democracy) allows you to do. I'm sorry you thought otherwise. I get the desire to defend free speech, but as everyone is already aware, several people have ALREADY died directly from this horrific and dangerous event, organized by criminals and terrorists. Be thankful AirBnB has sided with safety. Welcome to the real world, where people actually die as a result of the words they say, instead of "theory" world.
- darawk 9y ago
  > This isn't the world where you get to do what you want. This is the world where you get to do what government (= the public in a democracy) allows you to do. Oh, quite to the contrary. The citizenry of this country and its government are actually quite in agreement with me. That's why we have freedom of speech here - because we believe the principle outweighs the negative effects of subversive speech. >I get the desire to defend free speech, but as everyone is already aware, several people have ALREADY died directly from this horrific and dangerous event, organized by criminals and terrorists. So, we should ban anything capable of causing deaths? We don't ban cars. We don't ban airplanes. We don't even ban guns. Why don't we ban these things? Because we believe that the number of deaths they cause is acceptable relative to the value they provide. Yes, that's right. We callously calculate that cars are worth more to us than the thousands of people they kill every year. And if cars are worth that, freedom of speech is definitely worth the tiny handful of people who's live it may end annually.
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]

masonic 9y ago

We criminalize all sorts of speech, everything from libel to copyrighted works. Libel and copyright violations are not criminalized (civil law, rather than criminal law, applies).

mozumder 9y ago
> Libel and copyright violations are not criminalized (civil law, rather than criminal law, applies). No, both of those definitely also involve criminal statutes. Also, another example of criminalized speech is sedition. And didn't some girl get convicted last week of convincing her boyfriend to commit suicide? I don't even know why people think there's unlimited free speech...