5 ms·

Hate speech laws aren't completely uncommon, so individual users would be liable for creating it. In NZ law, it's part of our Human Rights Act: http://www.legi

Hate speech laws aren't completely uncommon, so individual users would be liable for creating it. In NZ law, it's part of our Human Rights Act: http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1993/0082/latest/DLM304642.html http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1993/0082/latest/D... "It shall be unlawful for any person to publish or distribute written matter which is threatening, abusive, or insulting, or to broadcast by means of radio or television or other electronic communication words which are threatening, abusive, or insulting"

labster 8y ago
I wish the United States had that law, instant impeachable offense for our president. Especially the insulting part, he seems to need to insult others in order to breathe.
- lopmotr 8y ago
  It could apply to you too for saying what you did just then. That's why hate speech laws are horrible. You can't criticize politicians. You can't even criticize ideas if there are people who insist on tying their identity to those ideas. They stifle public sharing of ideas. Just look at the Nazi pug conviction in the UK - 800 pound fine for training a dog wrong. His neighbor was also charged for calling him a Nazi in retaliation!
  - Pica_soO 8y ago
    This- also history thought us that shunned and silenced ideas, get a "cool" bonus with the youth, who just search for a reason to provoke the previous generation. Its unbelievable, that the same methods that where used to "prevent" the spreading of Gangsta-culture, and horribly "failed" (because the music was good) are used to contain extreme-right ideas. As a result a whole generation of youth, will take to the alt-right as a "our-culture" movement and do the hitler-crib-walk. If the left ever want to recover from living historys memory fading, it has not only to rethink its core concepts but also its tools. Cause there attempts at society control basically boil down to supporting the opposing sites cause. Half, of those alt-righters you see, are basically under-class trying to distance themselves as far as possible from what is perceived as entitled culture-controll-class of university dwelling aristocrats. In short, that is the proletariat the left was made off. The irony. It also does not help that whenever you talk with them, this hidden enthusiasm for totalitarian systems (Putins Russia/China) flares up, where "the gloves are off" for Place-unwanted-Group-Here.
    - KozmoNau7 8y ago
      You have a very strange view of "the left".
      - mantas 8y ago
        It's kinda correct though. Not all Left is such, but the problem is Left is tolerating people with such ideas as long as they are Left. Edit: for all the downvoters, explain why Left tolerates Stalinists or USSR apologists in their ranks. Recently the Left seem to have a problem with antisemitism on some countries too.
        KozmoNau7 8y ago
        "The left" is not some sort of grand organization with common leadership and common goals. I certainly don't support tankies nor the USSR dictatorship and oppression, nor do the vast majority of people with left-wing views.
        mantas 8y ago
        There's enough people who pretend to be "the Left" and do support or at least enable those people. Thus "the Left" is retarded. But some sane parts are OK. I'd prefer leftist to drop umbrealla naming and just split into factions. Pro-totalitarian/tankies, commie apologists, social democrats etc. But when I offer that, people seem to defend grandiose "the Left" :/
        KozmoNau7 8y ago
        Maybe if you stopped antagonizing and name-calling people with left wing views, you would be met with a lot less hostility. "There's enough people who pretend to be "the Right" and do support or at least enable [fascists and neo-nazi]. Thus "the Right" is retarded. But some sane parts are OK."
        mantas 8y ago
  - pjc50 8y ago
    > You can't criticize politicians This is of course not how hate speech laws actually work, they're not a criticism shield. > 800 pound fine for training a dog wrong No, the fine was for posting a video which contained the phrase "gas the jews" used repeatedly in a deliberately offensive manner. http://www.scotland-judiciary.org.uk/8/1962/PF-v-Mark-Meechan http://www.scotland-judiciary.org.uk/8/1962/PF-v-Mark-Meecha...
- ggg9990 8y ago
  you do realize that the president is in charge of enforcing laws?
  - ben_w 8y ago
    That would mean Presidents cannot be impeached without their consent. Are you sure?
- partiallypro 8y ago
  a) why must US politics be interjected into everything? b) I would rather the US have free speech instead of punishing thought crimes.
  - a_t48 8y ago
    It's not really a thought crime when you are calling for abuse of someone else.
    - partiallypro 8y ago
      If there is no action and only rhetoric, then it is in fact, a thought crime.
- labster 8y ago
  I kind of regret posting the above, the ensuing discussion was probably not worth it.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
pitaj 8y ago
Wow that's terribly vague. Insulting people publicly is illegal?
- doesnt_know 8y ago
  It's in the "Other forms of discrimination" => "Racial disharmony" section, so it's applied in the context of racism (there are other sections that dictate other acts such as sexual harassment etc). There is also another section on "131 - Inciting racial disharmony" http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1993/0082/latest/DLM305478.html http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1993/0082/latest/D... which references the previously mentioned section. But also followed up by http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1993/0082/latest/DLM305482.html http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1993/0082/latest/D... "No prosecution for an offence against section 131 shall be instituted without the consent of the Attorney-General."

labster 8y ago

I wish the United States had that law, instant impeachable offense for our president. Especially the insulting part, he seems to need to insult others in order to breathe.

lopmotr 8y ago
It could apply to you too for saying what you did just then. That's why hate speech laws are horrible. You can't criticize politicians. You can't even criticize ideas if there are people who insist on tying their identity to those ideas. They stifle public sharing of ideas. Just look at the Nazi pug conviction in the UK - 800 pound fine for training a dog wrong. His neighbor was also charged for calling him a Nazi in retaliation!
- Pica_soO 8y ago
  This- also history thought us that shunned and silenced ideas, get a "cool" bonus with the youth, who just search for a reason to provoke the previous generation. Its unbelievable, that the same methods that where used to "prevent" the spreading of Gangsta-culture, and horribly "failed" (because the music was good) are used to contain extreme-right ideas. As a result a whole generation of youth, will take to the alt-right as a "our-culture" movement and do the hitler-crib-walk. If the left ever want to recover from living historys memory fading, it has not only to rethink its core concepts but also its tools. Cause there attempts at society control basically boil down to supporting the opposing sites cause. Half, of those alt-righters you see, are basically under-class trying to distance themselves as far as possible from what is perceived as entitled culture-controll-class of university dwelling aristocrats. In short, that is the proletariat the left was made off. The irony. It also does not help that whenever you talk with them, this hidden enthusiasm for totalitarian systems (Putins Russia/China) flares up, where "the gloves are off" for Place-unwanted-Group-Here.
  - KozmoNau7 8y ago
    You have a very strange view of "the left".
    - mantas 8y ago
      It's kinda correct though. Not all Left is such, but the problem is Left is tolerating people with such ideas as long as they are Left. Edit: for all the downvoters, explain why Left tolerates Stalinists or USSR apologists in their ranks. Recently the Left seem to have a problem with antisemitism on some countries too.
      - KozmoNau7 8y ago
        "The left" is not some sort of grand organization with common leadership and common goals. I certainly don't support tankies nor the USSR dictatorship and oppression, nor do the vast majority of people with left-wing views.
        mantas 8y ago
        There's enough people who pretend to be "the Left" and do support or at least enable those people. Thus "the Left" is retarded. But some sane parts are OK. I'd prefer leftist to drop umbrealla naming and just split into factions. Pro-totalitarian/tankies, commie apologists, social democrats etc. But when I offer that, people seem to defend grandiose "the Left" :/
        KozmoNau7 8y ago
        Maybe if you stopped antagonizing and name-calling people with left wing views, you would be met with a lot less hostility. "There's enough people who pretend to be "the Right" and do support or at least enable [fascists and neo-nazi]. Thus "the Right" is retarded. But some sane parts are OK."
        mantas 8y ago
- pjc50 8y ago
  > You can't criticize politicians This is of course not how hate speech laws actually work, they're not a criticism shield. > 800 pound fine for training a dog wrong No, the fine was for posting a video which contained the phrase "gas the jews" used repeatedly in a deliberately offensive manner. http://www.scotland-judiciary.org.uk/8/1962/PF-v-Mark-Meechan http://www.scotland-judiciary.org.uk/8/1962/PF-v-Mark-Meecha...
ggg9990 8y ago
you do realize that the president is in charge of enforcing laws?
- ben_w 8y ago
  That would mean Presidents cannot be impeached without their consent. Are you sure?
partiallypro 8y ago
a) why must US politics be interjected into everything? b) I would rather the US have free speech instead of punishing thought crimes.
- a_t48 8y ago
  It's not really a thought crime when you are calling for abuse of someone else.
  - partiallypro 8y ago
    If there is no action and only rhetoric, then it is in fact, a thought crime.
labster 8y ago
I kind of regret posting the above, the ensuing discussion was probably not worth it.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]

pitaj 8y ago

Wow that's terribly vague. Insulting people publicly is illegal?

doesnt_know 8y ago
It's in the "Other forms of discrimination" => "Racial disharmony" section, so it's applied in the context of racism (there are other sections that dictate other acts such as sexual harassment etc). There is also another section on "131 - Inciting racial disharmony" http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1993/0082/latest/DLM305478.html http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1993/0082/latest/D... which references the previously mentioned section. But also followed up by http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1993/0082/latest/DLM305482.html http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1993/0082/latest/D... "No prosecution for an offence against section 131 shall be instituted without the consent of the Attorney-General."