6 ms·

Wow, someone has not been keeping up with the news coming out of the UK. Lots and lots of people been arrested and charged for saying, not actually hate speech,

Wow, someone has not been keeping up with the news coming out of the UK. Lots and lots of people been arrested and charged for saying, not actually hate speech, just "mean things" on Twitter. Usually it's just obvious jokes, perhaps of bad taste, that someone decided to take literally and then claim they felt "harassed and intimidated" (the magic phrase which causes the police to investigate). https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10668005/Man-avoids-prison-offensive-tweet-Captain-Sir-Tom-Moore.html https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10668005/Man-avoids... https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-43864133 https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-43864133 https://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/politics/john-scriven-plaid-cymru-gun-24829307 https://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/politics/john-scriven-pla... https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11066477/Veteran-arrested-causing-anxiety-retweeting-meme-swastika-Pride-flags.html https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11066477/Veteran-ar... - literally arrested for a tweet that "caused anxiety". If you want more, check out count dankula's (mark meechan) second YouTube channel, he covers pretty much all these high profile "offensive tweet" cases. Most of them are ridiculous.

throwawaysleep 4y ago
The third one is standing around with a gun claiming to be acting as law enforcement. That’s a crystal clear threat of violence.
- valdiorn 4y ago
  It's an air rifle. It's also clearly a joke.
userbinator 4y ago
The UK has always seemed to be going down the path of 1984.
reset-password 4y ago
The UK seems to have gone off the deep end here. I hope that this kind of behavior by law enforcement is not something that the public will find acceptable, and that it will be rejected and ridiculed as it should be.
- api 4y ago
  From a distance it seems like the UK has gone off the deep end in general.
  - dang 4y ago
    If you keep posting flamebait to HN we are going to have to ban you.
- zasdffaa 4y ago
  Brit here. Some of this stuff makes me uncomfortable about where to draw the line here. I, frankly, don't know. What makes me even more uncomfortable is not that the USA draws the line differently (better? worse? Just right? I don't know) but that so many USA'ians are so utterly cocksure that their way is right and everywhere else must be wrong if they do it differently (Edit: extensively in online posts such as here; in american's I've known I've very rarely found it). There seems no possibility in that mindset for any self-reflection or questioning, and that's dangerous. Just my tuppence ha'penny.
  - nine_k 4y ago
    It's nice to be reminded sometimes how 1776 was not just a religious or economic, but also a cultural split.
  - cortesoft 4y ago
    As an American, the importance of free speech is ingrained in us from a very early age. It is thought of as a foundation of free society, and it is a VERY high bar to justify using the law to prevent speech. It is a Central American value.
    - zasdffaa 4y ago
      Yes. I know that and you've just presented it again without asking yourself if it's right or if others should be judged by your standards. You've kind of made my point.
zhxshen 4y ago
Oi, you gotta loicense for that guv'nah? https://preview.redd.it/mmksakh888t21.jpg?auto=webp&s=f4dc90f785fa450d726127024c7c240bbaacebd4 https://preview.redd.it/mmksakh888t21.jpg?auto=webp&s=f4dc90...
mmaunder 4y ago
“Hate Speech” is going to become a catchall for authoritarian regimes, just as “terrorism” did post 9/11. It’s instructive to examine how the USA’s use of terrorism to pursue, first the perpetrators of 9/11, and then whoever we felt like, gave permission for the world to do the same. Note how Putin describes Ukraine as filled with terrorists.
- akira2501 4y ago
  "Terrorism" was the justification to allow US forces to torture detainees. It's not just the people they go after, it's the structural changes they justify.
- EarlKing 4y ago
  I hate to interrupt your regularly scheduled dose of anti-Americanism, but "Hate Speech" was being punished across Europe long before the "War on Terror" began in the United States. Europeans did not, and do not, need prompting from the United States to act like fascists. All tyrants invariably seize upon whatever pretext is available to them to engage in plausibly-deniable acts of tyranny.
peoplefromibiza 4y ago
there's a subtle difference between saying what you want and publishing what you want on a global platform that potentially can show it to billions of people. Say it in a bar with your friends if you wanna make a stance or a joke, avoid global social networks. Maybe UK is simply showing its true face, but exposing in public your ingenuity has never ended well. There's a reason why McDonalds writes "Caution: Contents Hot" on their hot beverages. Long story short: if you know sth can happen, you should try to prevent it, or you'll be considered part of the problem, even if only partially, the consequences could be bad. EDIT: as explained here[1], the true story is a story of underestimating the risks. Free speech on social private networks is not the same thing as free speech in person and it's absolutely not risk free. People know that, but keep thinking "it won't happen to me" despite the fact TOS say very clearly what can and cannot be said and that a big "report" button is there for anyone to use. nobody has ever been arrested for saying horrible things at the pub with their friends. Nobody would have ever said the same things on national TV. But suddenly we started thinking social networks are like the pub while they are more ubiquitous than the TV. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33145066 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33145066
- ummonk 4y ago
  McDonalds caused a woman severe skin burns by providing dangerously hot coffee to try to keep customers from immediately drinking it and getting refills.
  - peoplefromibiza 4y ago
    That's not the reason why. The woman was deemed partially responsible for the burns, because she was, the real reason is that McDonalds knew that people burnt themselves before, but did nothing to inform to customers of the risks. People know that stunts on social networks have been punished, but keep making them anyway. Which is not exactly a smart move and doesn't limit anyone's free speech, I am still free to say the same things, just not in front of a WorldWide audience. Social networks will report immediately any "not conforming" opinion to avoid being the next McDonalds, but on a global scale (billions in fines instead of the 640k dollars MD paid) https://www.enjuris.com/blog/resources/mcdonalds-hot-coffee-lawsuit/ https://www.enjuris.com/blog/resources/mcdonalds-hot-coffee-...
snovv_crash 4y ago
I find myself absolutely perplexed that there is available policing capacity for this, but not for solving things like scooter phone thief gangs and stolen motorcycles.
- userbinator 4y ago
  It's easier and less risky to go after thoughtcrime.
  - hsbauauvhabzb 4y ago
    Going after hate speech also has a better long term outcome, as opposed to growth of radicalisation.
codpoo 4y ago
The police harrassment of Caroline Farrow for expressing opinions on Twitter is another example of a heavy-handed authoritarian injustice.
valdiorn 4y ago
The latest one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tmRrT_vhUG8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tmRrT_vhUG8

throwawaysleep 4y ago

The third one is standing around with a gun claiming to be acting as law enforcement. That’s a crystal clear threat of violence.

valdiorn 4y ago
It's an air rifle. It's also clearly a joke.

userbinator 4y ago

The UK has always seemed to be going down the path of 1984.

reset-password 4y ago

The UK seems to have gone off the deep end here. I hope that this kind of behavior by law enforcement is not something that the public will find acceptable, and that it will be rejected and ridiculed as it should be.

api 4y ago
From a distance it seems like the UK has gone off the deep end in general.
- dang 4y ago
  If you keep posting flamebait to HN we are going to have to ban you.
zasdffaa 4y ago
Brit here. Some of this stuff makes me uncomfortable about where to draw the line here. I, frankly, don't know. What makes me even more uncomfortable is not that the USA draws the line differently (better? worse? Just right? I don't know) but that so many USA'ians are so utterly cocksure that their way is right and everywhere else must be wrong if they do it differently (Edit: extensively in online posts such as here; in american's I've known I've very rarely found it). There seems no possibility in that mindset for any self-reflection or questioning, and that's dangerous. Just my tuppence ha'penny.
- nine_k 4y ago
  It's nice to be reminded sometimes how 1776 was not just a religious or economic, but also a cultural split.
- cortesoft 4y ago
  As an American, the importance of free speech is ingrained in us from a very early age. It is thought of as a foundation of free society, and it is a VERY high bar to justify using the law to prevent speech. It is a Central American value.
  - zasdffaa 4y ago
    Yes. I know that and you've just presented it again without asking yourself if it's right or if others should be judged by your standards. You've kind of made my point.

zhxshen 4y ago

Oi, you gotta loicense for that guv'nah? https://preview.redd.it/mmksakh888t21.jpg?auto=webp&s=f4dc90f785fa450d726127024c7c240bbaacebd4 https://preview.redd.it/mmksakh888t21.jpg?auto=webp&s=f4dc90...

mmaunder 4y ago

“Hate Speech” is going to become a catchall for authoritarian regimes, just as “terrorism” did post 9/11. It’s instructive to examine how the USA’s use of terrorism to pursue, first the perpetrators of 9/11, and then whoever we felt like, gave permission for the world to do the same. Note how Putin describes Ukraine as filled with terrorists.

akira2501 4y ago
"Terrorism" was the justification to allow US forces to torture detainees. It's not just the people they go after, it's the structural changes they justify.
EarlKing 4y ago
I hate to interrupt your regularly scheduled dose of anti-Americanism, but "Hate Speech" was being punished across Europe long before the "War on Terror" began in the United States. Europeans did not, and do not, need prompting from the United States to act like fascists. All tyrants invariably seize upon whatever pretext is available to them to engage in plausibly-deniable acts of tyranny.

peoplefromibiza 4y ago

there's a subtle difference between saying what you want and publishing what you want on a global platform that potentially can show it to billions of people. Say it in a bar with your friends if you wanna make a stance or a joke, avoid global social networks. Maybe UK is simply showing its true face, but exposing in public your ingenuity has never ended well. There's a reason why McDonalds writes "Caution: Contents Hot" on their hot beverages. Long story short: if you know sth can happen, you should try to prevent it, or you'll be considered part of the problem, even if only partially, the consequences could be bad. EDIT: as explained here[1], the true story is a story of underestimating the risks. Free speech on social private networks is not the same thing as free speech in person and it's absolutely not risk free. People know that, but keep thinking "it won't happen to me" despite the fact TOS say very clearly what can and cannot be said and that a big "report" button is there for anyone to use. nobody has ever been arrested for saying horrible things at the pub with their friends. Nobody would have ever said the same things on national TV. But suddenly we started thinking social networks are like the pub while they are more ubiquitous than the TV. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33145066 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33145066

ummonk 4y ago
McDonalds caused a woman severe skin burns by providing dangerously hot coffee to try to keep customers from immediately drinking it and getting refills.
- peoplefromibiza 4y ago
  That's not the reason why. The woman was deemed partially responsible for the burns, because she was, the real reason is that McDonalds knew that people burnt themselves before, but did nothing to inform to customers of the risks. People know that stunts on social networks have been punished, but keep making them anyway. Which is not exactly a smart move and doesn't limit anyone's free speech, I am still free to say the same things, just not in front of a WorldWide audience. Social networks will report immediately any "not conforming" opinion to avoid being the next McDonalds, but on a global scale (billions in fines instead of the 640k dollars MD paid) https://www.enjuris.com/blog/resources/mcdonalds-hot-coffee-lawsuit/ https://www.enjuris.com/blog/resources/mcdonalds-hot-coffee-...

snovv_crash 4y ago

I find myself absolutely perplexed that there is available policing capacity for this, but not for solving things like scooter phone thief gangs and stolen motorcycles.

userbinator 4y ago
It's easier and less risky to go after thoughtcrime.
- hsbauauvhabzb 4y ago
  Going after hate speech also has a better long term outcome, as opposed to growth of radicalisation.

codpoo 4y ago

The police harrassment of Caroline Farrow for expressing opinions on Twitter is another example of a heavy-handed authoritarian injustice.

valdiorn 4y ago

The latest one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tmRrT_vhUG8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tmRrT_vhUG8