3 ms·
The problem I see here is that any law to help someone to feel safe is an infringement on someone elses's freedom. We have laws against murder for example, that
by amaccuish 8y ago
The problem I see here is that any law to help someone to feel safe is an infringement on someone elses's freedom. We have laws against murder for example, that obviously infringe people's freedom, but we way it up and decide it's definitely better to have such laws. The "unrestricted free speech" arguement tends to have so many exceptions "calling fire" etc. that I feel you can't really argue against this.
Disclaimer: Brit, supporter of reasonable speech
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- maym86 8y agoRight. We already draw lines. The following wouldn't be a strong argument for removing the laws against robbery: What if I accidentally get accused of robbery because I pick up someone's belonging to return it to them when they had left it somewhere. I would rather have robbery laws and deal with these cases as they arise than not have robbery laws at all. Same goes for harrasment.