27 ms·

Because that’s not already the case in the US? Ask a Muslim friend to post a joke about blowing up JFK and see how long it is until their door is broken down

jaywalk 6y ago
Come on. Threatening to blow up an airport is not in the same ballpark as hurting someone's feelings.
- ceejayoz 6y ago
  Which European nations have rules against mere "hurting someone's feelings"?
  - kube-system 6y ago
    There are a number of examples of speech laws in the western world that have banned insults. From 1994-2014 the UK had a ban on speech that was "insulting" The UK's Communications Act 2003 section 127 also says: > (1) A person is guilty of an offence if he- > (a) sends by means of a public electronic communications network a message or other matter that is grossly offensive or of an indecent, obscene or menacing character; or > (b) causes any such message or matter to be so sent. > (2) A person is guilty of an offence if, for the purpose of causing annoyance, inconvenience or needless anxiety to another, he- > (a) sends by means of a public electronic communications network, a message that he knows to be false, > (b) causes such a message to be sent; or > (c) persistently makes use of a public electronic communications network.
    - ceejayoz 6y ago
      From Wikipedia on the act: > On 19 December 2012, to strike a balance between freedom of speech and criminality, the Director of Public Prosecutions issued interim guidelines, clarifying when social messaging is eligible for criminal prosecution under UK law. Only communications that are credible threats of violence, harassment, or stalking (such as aggressive Internet trolling) which specifically targets an individual or individuals, or breaches a court order designed to protect someone (such as those protecting the identity of a victim of a sexual offence) will be prosecuted.
      - kube-system 6y ago
        > interim guidelines Implying they already expect to reevaluate this decision? While this statement sounds reasonable at face value, these kind of important distinctions really need to be codified in law, not left up to prosecutorial discretion. Vague speech laws plus a great degree of prosecutorial discretion is exactly how a lot of brutal regimes oppress dissenters while justifying their actions.
        ceejayoz 6y ago
        > Vague speech laws plus a great degree of prosecutorial discretion is exactly how a lot of brutal regimes oppress dissenters while justifying their actions. Sure, but it's also how a lot of non-brutal regimes keep laws from growing out of control with silly edge cases. If you are harassing someone, law enforcement doesn't have to consult the legislated list of 23,784 actions that constitute harassment. That seems reasonable.
        kube-system 6y ago
        Harassment laws are common in the US and don't have to enumerate a large list of different actions that constitute harassment. The clarification that you just quoted above from the Director of Public Prosecutions is only one sentence in length but it would entirely change the meaning of the law, if a clarification like that were actually in it. US harassment laws are not a list of 23,784 actions that constitute harassment either. Here's an example of one state's law. It is clear and specific, something all laws should be: https://definitions.uslegal.com/h/harassment/ https://definitions.uslegal.com/h/harassment/
        DanBC 6y ago
        English law combines acts, statutes, statutory instruments, but also case law. The law is built to adjust to a changing society. You might be interested in this programme (from 2013, so there have been some changes since then) that explains how it works: https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01sn9cf https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01sn9cf
- marcosdumay 6y ago
  Hate speech is not "hurting someone's feelings".
plafl 6y ago
I doubt you can make a joke about blowing an airport on any country regardless of your religion and don't expect a visit of the police. It's a very clear exception to freedom of speech.
- namdnay 6y ago
  99% of panic stories about people being arrested for Twitter is this type of stuff
  - syshum 6y ago
    Or you know teaching your dog to raise it paw when you say a phrase, but that is the same as blowing up an airport right?

jaywalk 6y ago

Come on. Threatening to blow up an airport is not in the same ballpark as hurting someone's feelings.

ceejayoz 6y ago
Which European nations have rules against mere "hurting someone's feelings"?
- kube-system 6y ago
  There are a number of examples of speech laws in the western world that have banned insults. From 1994-2014 the UK had a ban on speech that was "insulting" The UK's Communications Act 2003 section 127 also says: > (1) A person is guilty of an offence if he- > (a) sends by means of a public electronic communications network a message or other matter that is grossly offensive or of an indecent, obscene or menacing character; or > (b) causes any such message or matter to be so sent. > (2) A person is guilty of an offence if, for the purpose of causing annoyance, inconvenience or needless anxiety to another, he- > (a) sends by means of a public electronic communications network, a message that he knows to be false, > (b) causes such a message to be sent; or > (c) persistently makes use of a public electronic communications network.
  - ceejayoz 6y ago
    From Wikipedia on the act: > On 19 December 2012, to strike a balance between freedom of speech and criminality, the Director of Public Prosecutions issued interim guidelines, clarifying when social messaging is eligible for criminal prosecution under UK law. Only communications that are credible threats of violence, harassment, or stalking (such as aggressive Internet trolling) which specifically targets an individual or individuals, or breaches a court order designed to protect someone (such as those protecting the identity of a victim of a sexual offence) will be prosecuted.
    - kube-system 6y ago
      > interim guidelines Implying they already expect to reevaluate this decision? While this statement sounds reasonable at face value, these kind of important distinctions really need to be codified in law, not left up to prosecutorial discretion. Vague speech laws plus a great degree of prosecutorial discretion is exactly how a lot of brutal regimes oppress dissenters while justifying their actions.
      - ceejayoz 6y ago
        > Vague speech laws plus a great degree of prosecutorial discretion is exactly how a lot of brutal regimes oppress dissenters while justifying their actions. Sure, but it's also how a lot of non-brutal regimes keep laws from growing out of control with silly edge cases. If you are harassing someone, law enforcement doesn't have to consult the legislated list of 23,784 actions that constitute harassment. That seems reasonable.
        kube-system 6y ago
        Harassment laws are common in the US and don't have to enumerate a large list of different actions that constitute harassment. The clarification that you just quoted above from the Director of Public Prosecutions is only one sentence in length but it would entirely change the meaning of the law, if a clarification like that were actually in it. US harassment laws are not a list of 23,784 actions that constitute harassment either. Here's an example of one state's law. It is clear and specific, something all laws should be: https://definitions.uslegal.com/h/harassment/ https://definitions.uslegal.com/h/harassment/
        DanBC 6y ago
        English law combines acts, statutes, statutory instruments, but also case law. The law is built to adjust to a changing society. You might be interested in this programme (from 2013, so there have been some changes since then) that explains how it works: https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01sn9cf https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01sn9cf
marcosdumay 6y ago
Hate speech is not "hurting someone's feelings".

plafl 6y ago

I doubt you can make a joke about blowing an airport on any country regardless of your religion and don't expect a visit of the police. It's a very clear exception to freedom of speech.

namdnay 6y ago
99% of panic stories about people being arrested for Twitter is this type of stuff
- syshum 6y ago
  Or you know teaching your dog to raise it paw when you say a phrase, but that is the same as blowing up an airport right?