4 ms·

This is exactly why "hate speech" laws are so dangerous. It gives carte blanche to the government to go after anyone who says anything any one person (or the go

This is exactly why "hate speech" laws are so dangerous. It gives carte blanche to the government to go after anyone who says anything any one person (or the government itself) might find offensive.

oliwarner 5y ago
And we have a judiciary who can —still, for the moment— make and break statue based on their rulings via appeals and the Supreme Court. The government does not have carte blanche any more than a government already does. The last 2 years has shown us they're pretty much a law unto themselves. I hope this case is appealled, and the law thoroughly weighed against human rights.
- autoexec 5y ago
  > And we have a judiciary who can —still, for the moment— make and break statue based on their rulings via appeals and the Supreme Court. One of the nice things about being able to ask for a trial by jury is that jury nullification can help ensure that laws aren't abused even when judges are perfectly willing to "make examples" of people
iotku 5y ago
Add the idea that has been floated over the years into making law enforcement officers a protected class as well and it's not a large leap to see how such seemingly well-intentioned things can be abused by the state.
- hcnews 5y ago
  Isn't that the US model? And yes, it's a disaster.
Beldin 5y ago
> This is exactly why "hate speech" laws are so dangerous. If you think any single example of a law being applied in a manner that is technically defensible but (arguably) morally wrong should rule out an entire category of laws - you'd have no laws left. My guess is that most laws are occasionally abused. The trick is to distinguish between those laws that invite it and those that don't.
- hackernewsblows 5y ago
- rglover 5y ago
  This one is a special case because it's 100% subjective (and ripe for political misuse). Laws are (and should be) objective.

4 ms·

This is exactly why "hate speech" laws are so dangerous. It gives carte blanche to the government to go after anyone who says anything any one person (or the go

by rglover 5y ago

This is exactly why "hate speech" laws are so dangerous. It gives carte blanche to the government to go after anyone who says anything any one person (or the government itself) might find offensive.

oliwarner 5y ago
And we have a judiciary who can —still, for the moment— make and break statue based on their rulings via appeals and the Supreme Court. The government does not have carte blanche any more than a government already does. The last 2 years has shown us they're pretty much a law unto themselves. I hope this case is appealled, and the law thoroughly weighed against human rights.
- autoexec 5y ago
  > And we have a judiciary who can —still, for the moment— make and break statue based on their rulings via appeals and the Supreme Court. One of the nice things about being able to ask for a trial by jury is that jury nullification can help ensure that laws aren't abused even when judges are perfectly willing to "make examples" of people
iotku 5y ago
Add the idea that has been floated over the years into making law enforcement officers a protected class as well and it's not a large leap to see how such seemingly well-intentioned things can be abused by the state.
- hcnews 5y ago
  Isn't that the US model? And yes, it's a disaster.
Beldin 5y ago
> This is exactly why "hate speech" laws are so dangerous. If you think any single example of a law being applied in a manner that is technically defensible but (arguably) morally wrong should rule out an entire category of laws - you'd have no laws left. My guess is that most laws are occasionally abused. The trick is to distinguish between those laws that invite it and those that don't.
- hackernewsblows 5y ago
- rglover 5y ago
  This one is a special case because it's 100% subjective (and ripe for political misuse). Laws are (and should be) objective.