3 ms·

Sadly, I doubt you even recognize your small contribution to, and complicity with, the normalization of an Orwellian, dystopian society. Look at how casually y

Sadly, I doubt you even recognize your small contribution to, and complicity with, the normalization of an Orwellian, dystopian society. Look at how casually you make these connections: speech -> noise -> sleeplessness -> damage ... therefore implying, purposefully or not, that speech = violence. No. Speech is NOT violence. I suggest you get a pair of earplugs.

monkeydreams 5y ago
> Sadly, I doubt you even recognize your small contribution to, and complicity with, the normalization of an Orwellian, dystopian society. Sadly, I doubt you even recognise your contribution to the polarisation of society and removal of nuance from social discourse. > No. Speech is NOT violence. I suggest you get a pair of earplugs. Threats. That's one form of violence. Yelling "Fire!" in a crowded theatre, that's another.
- rmbyrro 5y ago
  > Threats. That's one form of violence. Yelling "Fire!" in a crowded theatre, that's another. Threat is instigating fear of injury. Violence is causing injury. You can have your own personal definition, but from a legal perspective, threat is not a violent crime. Yelling "fire" in a crowded theatre isn't even illegal. Let alone a violence. Inciting panic is illegal. If you incite panic through yelling "fire" in a crowded theatre, you'll answer for inciting panic and will bear responsibility for the actual consequences, if any, not for the yelling.
  - tremon 5y ago
    Of course. https://dictionary.thelaw.com/violence/ https://dictionary.thelaw.com/violence/ this violence is not confined to an actual assault of the person, [..] whatever goes to intimidate or overawe, by the apprehension of personal violence, or by fear of life [..] equally falls within its limits
    - listenallyall 5y ago
      That's pretty creative editing there. Everything you quoted (and omitted via ellipse) is prefaced by "In cases of robbery". The part about intimidation only counts when it is "to compel the delivery of property." Since this isn't a discussion about a robbery or theft or possession of property, the entirety of your quote is irrelevant. Instead, read a little further: The term “violence” is synonymous with “physical force,” and the two are used interchangeably, in relation to assaults Speech is not physical force, and is not an assault, and is not violence.
odonnellryan 5y ago
I think you'd have a very different perspective if I were to sit outside your house with a horn blasting for a few weeks straight.
- jessaustin 5y ago
  Do you feel strongly enough about any particular issue to inspire that sort of protest?

monkeydreams 5y ago

> Sadly, I doubt you even recognize your small contribution to, and complicity with, the normalization of an Orwellian, dystopian society. Sadly, I doubt you even recognise your contribution to the polarisation of society and removal of nuance from social discourse. > No. Speech is NOT violence. I suggest you get a pair of earplugs. Threats. That's one form of violence. Yelling "Fire!" in a crowded theatre, that's another.

rmbyrro 5y ago
> Threats. That's one form of violence. Yelling "Fire!" in a crowded theatre, that's another. Threat is instigating fear of injury. Violence is causing injury. You can have your own personal definition, but from a legal perspective, threat is not a violent crime. Yelling "fire" in a crowded theatre isn't even illegal. Let alone a violence. Inciting panic is illegal. If you incite panic through yelling "fire" in a crowded theatre, you'll answer for inciting panic and will bear responsibility for the actual consequences, if any, not for the yelling.
- tremon 5y ago
  Of course. https://dictionary.thelaw.com/violence/ https://dictionary.thelaw.com/violence/ this violence is not confined to an actual assault of the person, [..] whatever goes to intimidate or overawe, by the apprehension of personal violence, or by fear of life [..] equally falls within its limits
  - listenallyall 5y ago
    That's pretty creative editing there. Everything you quoted (and omitted via ellipse) is prefaced by "In cases of robbery". The part about intimidation only counts when it is "to compel the delivery of property." Since this isn't a discussion about a robbery or theft or possession of property, the entirety of your quote is irrelevant. Instead, read a little further: The term “violence” is synonymous with “physical force,” and the two are used interchangeably, in relation to assaults Speech is not physical force, and is not an assault, and is not violence.

odonnellryan 5y ago

I think you'd have a very different perspective if I were to sit outside your house with a horn blasting for a few weeks straight.

jessaustin 5y ago
Do you feel strongly enough about any particular issue to inspire that sort of protest?