5 ms·

That’s pure trolling: First off, the Article 13 in question was already rejected once by Parliament and is expected to be repealed against (but it doesn’t hurt

by klmr 8y ago

That’s pure trolling: First off, the Article 13 in question was already rejected once by Parliament and is expected to be repealed against (but it doesn’t hurt to be cautious, good on Mozilla). > GDPR While not uncontroversial, GDPR is generally seen as a good thing by experts. > arresting people who train their dog to do a bellamy salute This didn’t happen. The man was arrested for hate speech, not for gestures his dog made. It’s also unrelated to EU law. > arresting people for having potato peelers in public This didn’t happen. The man was arrested for wielding a weapon in public. This weapon happened to be a knife (but not a potato peeler, though it was called that by the press: it had a fixed > 3″ long blade) but the nature of the weapon is secondary; what’s relevant for the arrest was the fact that the man wielded it as a weapon. And, again, this has nothing to do with EU legislation. And some additional context: the knife wielding laws in the UK are indeed pretty draconian but the UK, which is generally pretty low on violent crimes, has a specific problem with knife crimes and is therefore tackling the problem heads-on. Seems reasonable. > I can't think of a single reason other than vacation days that I'd ever want to live there. Really? https://www.numbeo.com/quality-of-life/rankings_by_country.jsp https://www.numbeo.com/quality-of-life/rankings_by_country.j... (In fact, even with occasional questionable laws being passed on EU levels the legal situation in the EU, both on EU and on country level, is still a lot saner than e.g. in the US.)

raverbashing 8y ago
> First off, the Article 13 in question was already rejected once by Parliament and is expected to be repealed against (but it doesn’t hurt to be cautious, good on Mozilla). As they say, don't count your chickens before they're hatched
- klmr 8y ago
  I’m not — I’m actually contacting my MEP.
- jotm 8y ago
  Rejected by a very close vote, must I say. That's ridiculous, imo
pjc50 8y ago
> the UK, which is generally pretty low on violent crimes, has a specific problem with knife crimes and is therefore tackling the problem heads-on. Sadly neither the problem nor the solution is new - the ban on knives in public dates to at least 1953. It's interesting (and very Brexity) that people blame these things on the EU when they're both very much British criminal law independent of the EU.
- klmr 8y ago
  To clarify: I find the UK’s knife ban stupid, and it affects me personally (I often cook at friends’ places and, if these friends have no proper knives, I bring my chef’s knife; I also own two valuable antique swords but the rules for bringing them into the country are so complicated that they are indefintely stored at my parents’ place in another country). But like you said, it has nothing to do with EU legislation. And there’s a specific historical context which at least gives some explanation as to why the rule exists in the first place.
  - poooogles 8y ago
    >To clarify: I find the UK’s knife ban stupid, and it affects me personally (I often cook at friends’ places and, if these friends have no proper knives, I bring my chef’s knife There's nothing in UK law that prevents you from doing this. Bring along a cook book and store the knife securely (and keep it in your bag) and you're going to be fine. If you get stopped by the police mention it straightaway and move from there. The legislation is written broad enough that discretion is possible in cases like this. Where it's going to look funny is when you're stopped with it in a pub at 9pm on a Saturday night. So yeah I see both sides (I might go for a beer down the local after cooking on the way home with the knife for example), but really there's not much wrong with your knife laws IMO.
    - klmr 8y ago
      Broad discretion in such laws is the problem. It puts you at the mercy of an individual police officer's whim. More broadly it facilitates discrimination. This isn't a theoretical problem: I know people in London who, due to stop and search, would never dare to carry knives, no matter the reason.
jimmaswell 8y ago
You seem to have intentionally ignored "and its member states." What am I supposed to take away from that quality of life ranking? Yes, the US is below a few EU countries and above others. And it's an average, which means it doesn't mean you can't have a better quality of life in the US than you would in Denmark depending on your individual situation. I for one would be much less happy having to deal with more than doubled gas prices and restricted individual freedoms.
- klmr 8y ago
  > You seem to have intentionally ignored "and its member states." I didn’t, but your comment insinuates that it’s all the same. As for restricted individual freedoms, this betrays a lot about your background. EU contries value equal opportunity over individual freedom for a select few. For minorities and poor people, the EU fares a lot better on individual freedoms than the US does.
  - chimeracoder 8y ago
    > For minorities and poor people, the EU fares a lot better on individual freedoms than the US does That's not true at all. All you have to do is go to France to see how far Europeans are willing to go to restrict the individual freedoms of minorities. Of course, you won't get data on just how much those groups are in the minority, because France has also conveniently made it illegal to collect this data, but you don't have to have exact numbers to see that the French government has no problem passing laws that directly curtail minorities' freedoms.
    - klmr 8y ago
      > All you have to do is go to France I’ve lived in France for several years. And yes, I agree that France unduly restricts individual freedoms (and protested against it). I’m not claiming that any single country is perfect. I’m claiming that they are, on balance, better than the US (when you’re poor and/or a minority). Basic personal safety is a prerequisite for freedom: If you can’t even be sure that you can afford medical care keeping you alive, or if you need to worry that institutionalised racism means you get shot by police or thrown in jail for a trivial misdemeanour that earns a white person a slap on the wrist … then “freedom” is simply a theoretical concept. And yes, institutional racism also exists in France (and in every other European country) but it’s much less normalised than in the US.
chimeracoder 8y ago
> First off, the Article 13 in question was already rejected once by Parliament and is expected to be repealed against It was rejected rather narrowly (278-318) a few months ago, and only because some of the coalition that voted against it wants to pass a slightly weaker version of the other clauses instead.
fermigier 8y ago
"Article 13 in question was already rejected once by Parliament" -> Article 13 has not been rejected by the EP. What has been rejected is a proposal to fast-track the proposal with no debate. See https://juliareda.eu/eu-copyright-reform/ https://juliareda.eu/eu-copyright-reform/ "The Legal Affairs Committee narrowly approved the plans (with slight changes) – but in a surprise move, the Parliament then refused to rubber-stamp the Committee’s position, opening it up for further debate."
- klmr 8y ago
  We’re saying the same thing. The Legal Affairs Committee isn’t the Parliament, it’s merely a committee. The EP only had two options here: either vote in favour of the article (“rubber-stamping”) or rejecting it. That’s what they did. The procedure in this case is to revise the proposal, which is exactly what’s happening here. This is working as intended. Of course the fact that the defeat was rather narrow is cause for concern, don’t get me wrong.
hhjinks 8y ago
>The man was arrested for hate speech And the hate speech he was convicted for was training his dog to do a "Bellamy salute".
- klmr 8y ago
  This is simply wrong. The judgement clarifies explicitly that the hate speech in question was the antisemitic slogans that were used as cues, and which were audible on the video.

by klmr 8y ago

raverbashing 8y ago

> First off, the Article 13 in question was already rejected once by Parliament and is expected to be repealed against (but it doesn’t hurt to be cautious, good on Mozilla). As they say, don't count your chickens before they're hatched

klmr 8y ago
I’m not — I’m actually contacting my MEP.
jotm 8y ago
Rejected by a very close vote, must I say. That's ridiculous, imo

pjc50 8y ago

> the UK, which is generally pretty low on violent crimes, has a specific problem with knife crimes and is therefore tackling the problem heads-on. Sadly neither the problem nor the solution is new - the ban on knives in public dates to at least 1953. It's interesting (and very Brexity) that people blame these things on the EU when they're both very much British criminal law independent of the EU.

klmr 8y ago
To clarify: I find the UK’s knife ban stupid, and it affects me personally (I often cook at friends’ places and, if these friends have no proper knives, I bring my chef’s knife; I also own two valuable antique swords but the rules for bringing them into the country are so complicated that they are indefintely stored at my parents’ place in another country). But like you said, it has nothing to do with EU legislation. And there’s a specific historical context which at least gives some explanation as to why the rule exists in the first place.
- poooogles 8y ago
  >To clarify: I find the UK’s knife ban stupid, and it affects me personally (I often cook at friends’ places and, if these friends have no proper knives, I bring my chef’s knife There's nothing in UK law that prevents you from doing this. Bring along a cook book and store the knife securely (and keep it in your bag) and you're going to be fine. If you get stopped by the police mention it straightaway and move from there. The legislation is written broad enough that discretion is possible in cases like this. Where it's going to look funny is when you're stopped with it in a pub at 9pm on a Saturday night. So yeah I see both sides (I might go for a beer down the local after cooking on the way home with the knife for example), but really there's not much wrong with your knife laws IMO.
  - klmr 8y ago
    Broad discretion in such laws is the problem. It puts you at the mercy of an individual police officer's whim. More broadly it facilitates discrimination. This isn't a theoretical problem: I know people in London who, due to stop and search, would never dare to carry knives, no matter the reason.

jimmaswell 8y ago

You seem to have intentionally ignored "and its member states." What am I supposed to take away from that quality of life ranking? Yes, the US is below a few EU countries and above others. And it's an average, which means it doesn't mean you can't have a better quality of life in the US than you would in Denmark depending on your individual situation. I for one would be much less happy having to deal with more than doubled gas prices and restricted individual freedoms.

klmr 8y ago
> You seem to have intentionally ignored "and its member states." I didn’t, but your comment insinuates that it’s all the same. As for restricted individual freedoms, this betrays a lot about your background. EU contries value equal opportunity over individual freedom for a select few. For minorities and poor people, the EU fares a lot better on individual freedoms than the US does.
- chimeracoder 8y ago
  > For minorities and poor people, the EU fares a lot better on individual freedoms than the US does That's not true at all. All you have to do is go to France to see how far Europeans are willing to go to restrict the individual freedoms of minorities. Of course, you won't get data on just how much those groups are in the minority, because France has also conveniently made it illegal to collect this data, but you don't have to have exact numbers to see that the French government has no problem passing laws that directly curtail minorities' freedoms.
  - klmr 8y ago
    > All you have to do is go to France I’ve lived in France for several years. And yes, I agree that France unduly restricts individual freedoms (and protested against it). I’m not claiming that any single country is perfect. I’m claiming that they are, on balance, better than the US (when you’re poor and/or a minority). Basic personal safety is a prerequisite for freedom: If you can’t even be sure that you can afford medical care keeping you alive, or if you need to worry that institutionalised racism means you get shot by police or thrown in jail for a trivial misdemeanour that earns a white person a slap on the wrist … then “freedom” is simply a theoretical concept. And yes, institutional racism also exists in France (and in every other European country) but it’s much less normalised than in the US.

chimeracoder 8y ago

> First off, the Article 13 in question was already rejected once by Parliament and is expected to be repealed against It was rejected rather narrowly (278-318) a few months ago, and only because some of the coalition that voted against it wants to pass a slightly weaker version of the other clauses instead.

fermigier 8y ago

"Article 13 in question was already rejected once by Parliament" -> Article 13 has not been rejected by the EP. What has been rejected is a proposal to fast-track the proposal with no debate. See https://juliareda.eu/eu-copyright-reform/ https://juliareda.eu/eu-copyright-reform/ "The Legal Affairs Committee narrowly approved the plans (with slight changes) – but in a surprise move, the Parliament then refused to rubber-stamp the Committee’s position, opening it up for further debate."

klmr 8y ago
We’re saying the same thing. The Legal Affairs Committee isn’t the Parliament, it’s merely a committee. The EP only had two options here: either vote in favour of the article (“rubber-stamping”) or rejecting it. That’s what they did. The procedure in this case is to revise the proposal, which is exactly what’s happening here. This is working as intended. Of course the fact that the defeat was rather narrow is cause for concern, don’t get me wrong.

hhjinks 8y ago

>The man was arrested for hate speech And the hate speech he was convicted for was training his dog to do a "Bellamy salute".

klmr 8y ago
This is simply wrong. The judgement clarifies explicitly that the hate speech in question was the antisemitic slogans that were used as cues, and which were audible on the video.