3 ms·
Ridiculous. no one should be jailed for words. No matter how much we hate those words. Justice is in correcting the world so we never think like this. But t
by freddealmeida 5y ago
Ridiculous. no one should be jailed for words. No matter how much we hate those words. Justice is in correcting the world so we never think like this. But that would be impossible with these kind of thoughts.
- breakyerself 5y agoThe UK has it's own standards for speech. They don't need to adhere to the free speech absolutism of the United States. This would be unacceptable in the United States, but many places do not protect racist speech. Theres good arguments on both sides. We'll see which works out better in the long run.
- sokoloff 5y agoI’m a staunch advocate of free speech, but I think that a specific and credible threat of violence should be considered a crime (assault) and subject to prosecution, even though it’s “just words”.
- burntoutfire 5y agoSimilarly, fraud is "just words". This point of view seems to assume that words carry very little weight, while our civilization is based on them.
- cato_the_elder 5y ago> a specific and credible threat of violence But that doesn't seem to be the case here at all.
- sokoloff 5y agoCorrect. It is responsive to “no one should be jailed for words” not to “this guy should/shouldn’t be jailed for his specific words”.
- conradludgate 5y agoWords can be extremely damaging. The US has libel and slander laws. What's so different about hate speech? It's harmful, almost as harmful as some forms of physical abuse. Don't forget that most domestic abuse and physical abuse starts as verbal abuse, so criminalising that is not unreasonable
- guilhas 5y agoEspecially words against willing public figures, living above average lives