3 ms·

Each European country has its own laws, but most countries never had anything resembling "freedom of speech" as an American would understand it. Every country h

Each European country has its own laws, but most countries never had anything resembling "freedom of speech" as an American would understand it. Every country has a list of "limitations" on free speech. It is also not something people care about.

fipar 8y ago
Every country has "limitations", including the US. See, for example, the obscenity trials in the US.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
pjc50 8y ago
The number of people in this thread pretending that ECHR article 10 doesn't exist is far too high.
- throwawayjava 8y ago
  lumberjack did not say that the EU does not have a freedom of expression. lumberjack did say that the EU doesn't have freedom of speech "as an American would understand it". Article 10 of the ECHR as interpreted by the ECtHR is very different from the First Amendment to the United States Constitution as presently interpreted by SCOTUS. It's also worth noting that the First Amendment as presently interpreted by SCOTUS protects some speech that was not always unambiguously protected; see e.g., a good fraction of humans pre-1970-or-so, the evolution of the court's treatment of obscenity, speech in the schoolhouse, and so on. In some sense, even previous Americans didn't have freedom of speech as a modern American would understand it.
- maxk42 8y ago
  And you're pretending ECHR Article 10 § 2 doesn't exist. Freedom of speech isn't freedom of speech if there's a giant asterisk next to it.
  - antientropic 8y ago
    Freedom of speech is not a binary thing. No country in the world has absolute freedom of speech. However most EU member states are among the most free in the world (see e.g. https://rsf.org/en/ranking https://rsf.org/en/ranking).
    - sbov 8y ago
      That list has little relevance on this subject, because if you look at their methodologies they look at a lot more than government influence. (see https://rsf.org/en/detailed-methodology https://rsf.org/en/detailed-methodology) In fact it lists the US below pretty much every European country, and the US is known to have some of the most permissive free speech laws.
      - DanBC 8y ago
        > and the US is known to have some of the most permissive free speech laws. But look at all the US kids having armed police sent to their homes because they swore on Xbox live.
        2trill2spill 8y ago
        > But look at all the US kids having armed police sent to their homes because they swore on Xbox live. I'm assuming you have links or evidence to back those claims up. Or are you mistaking this for kids getting swatted[1], because I certainly haven't heard of kids getting in trouble with police for swearing on Xbox live and I feel like that would make national news. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swatting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swatting
        hermitdev 8y ago
        It's not because of swearing, it's generally because of a grudge. Making false statements to police is not protected speech. In every instance of this happening that I'm aware of when police are able to track down the individual(s) responsible, they are prosecuted, generally to the fullest extent of the law. It's dangerous to make something like a murder/suicide threat, and it should be treated & prosecuted as such. Yes, the police probably overreact, but they don't necessarily know it's a hoax.

fipar 8y ago

Every country has "limitations", including the US. See, for example, the obscenity trials in the US.

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]

pjc50 8y ago

The number of people in this thread pretending that ECHR article 10 doesn't exist is far too high.

throwawayjava 8y ago
lumberjack did not say that the EU does not have a freedom of expression. lumberjack did say that the EU doesn't have freedom of speech "as an American would understand it". Article 10 of the ECHR as interpreted by the ECtHR is very different from the First Amendment to the United States Constitution as presently interpreted by SCOTUS. It's also worth noting that the First Amendment as presently interpreted by SCOTUS protects some speech that was not always unambiguously protected; see e.g., a good fraction of humans pre-1970-or-so, the evolution of the court's treatment of obscenity, speech in the schoolhouse, and so on. In some sense, even previous Americans didn't have freedom of speech as a modern American would understand it.
maxk42 8y ago
And you're pretending ECHR Article 10 § 2 doesn't exist. Freedom of speech isn't freedom of speech if there's a giant asterisk next to it.
- antientropic 8y ago
  Freedom of speech is not a binary thing. No country in the world has absolute freedom of speech. However most EU member states are among the most free in the world (see e.g. https://rsf.org/en/ranking https://rsf.org/en/ranking).
  - sbov 8y ago
    That list has little relevance on this subject, because if you look at their methodologies they look at a lot more than government influence. (see https://rsf.org/en/detailed-methodology https://rsf.org/en/detailed-methodology) In fact it lists the US below pretty much every European country, and the US is known to have some of the most permissive free speech laws.
    - DanBC 8y ago
      > and the US is known to have some of the most permissive free speech laws. But look at all the US kids having armed police sent to their homes because they swore on Xbox live.
      - 2trill2spill 8y ago
        > But look at all the US kids having armed police sent to their homes because they swore on Xbox live. I'm assuming you have links or evidence to back those claims up. Or are you mistaking this for kids getting swatted[1], because I certainly haven't heard of kids getting in trouble with police for swearing on Xbox live and I feel like that would make national news. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swatting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swatting
      - hermitdev 8y ago
        It's not because of swearing, it's generally because of a grudge. Making false statements to police is not protected speech. In every instance of this happening that I'm aware of when police are able to track down the individual(s) responsible, they are prosecuted, generally to the fullest extent of the law. It's dangerous to make something like a murder/suicide threat, and it should be treated & prosecuted as such. Yes, the police probably overreact, but they don't necessarily know it's a hoax.