18 ms·
The more worrying underlying problem is that western governments feel increasingly emboldened to pick and enforce ideologies again- and that's a problem regardl
by wolframhempel 4y ago
The more worrying underlying problem is that western governments feel increasingly emboldened to pick and enforce ideologies again- and that's a problem regardless of the ideology. The 20st century is filled with examples of what happens when governments extend beyond their administrative mandates.
- WilTimSon 4y agoI'm more worried about how easily media spins stories that have a smidge of sense into a scandal by cutting out details and making the headline sensational. While the police overstepped in this case, the article clearly wanted this specific take to be posted to spur discussion and clicks. And we all keep falling for it.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- itsoktocry 4y ago>While the police overstepped in this case, the article clearly wanted this specific take to be posted to spur discussion and clicks. Good to know some people are more concerned about the reporting on overstepping than the overstepping itself.
- WilTimSon 4y agoThat's not what I said. The overstepping should be dealt with, decisively. But that doesn't excuse the fact that The Mirror is a deplorable rag and absolutely does not belong on HN, considering how paltry their journalistic standards are.
- yibg 4y agoWhat is the non spun version and what details were cut out?
- notavalleyman 4y agoI don't agree that that's what's happening. A law exists in the UK about using public communications networks to send grossly offensive or indecent communications. Somebody complained to the police that this chap had maybe broken that law, and from the embedded video, it sounds like he wasn't willing to come voluntarily to the interview room. So what do the police do? Tell the complainant, sorry, you feel like you're a victim of crime but the alleged offender wasn't willing to be arrested? Nobody is picking ideologies to enforce. I don't see how the content of the supposed offensive tweet, is relevant to the decision to interview this chap under caution.
- pdonis 4y ago> A law exists in the UK about using public communications networks to send grossly offensive or indecent communications. Why? Why is this any of the government's business?
- notavalleyman 4y agoOne purpose of government in the UK is law writing, so the Communications Act 2003 is absolutely their business. As to why the behaviour needs legislating: because the British social contract required it, because in British society they're willing to trade the right to say grossly offensive things to people, for protection against hearing grossly offensive things. Lots of reasons, it's fine for them, you don't often hear clamour to repeal the law, they don't have the same issue with it that you do. So who are you to tell Brits that they shouldn't have a law?
- pessimizer 4y ago> it's fine for them, you don't often hear clamour to repeal the law, they don't have the same issue with it that you do. Why make all of this up? Just so you can call someone a meddling busybody for having an opinion in a thread that you're also posting an opinion in?
- notavalleyman 4y ago
- proffeatur8 4y agoThe even more worrying underlying problem is that the ones applauding, encouraging, and continuing to vote for this madness aren’t even aware that they belong to an extreme ideology. Most would probably consider themselves sane, rational, and educated. Governments and voters in the west have locked themselves into a positive feedback loop of midwittery. See the other replies to this comment for examples of this.
- LatteLazy 4y agoI think it's unfair to blame this on governments. They do it because PEOPLE want it. For every MP pushing this nonsense, there are 100k idiots who think anyone who disagrees with them should be arrested...