14 ms·

Yep, western Europe and Canada do not allow free speech. I just read a story about UK police showing up and arresting an autistic teenager because she commented

Yep, western Europe and Canada do not allow free speech. I just read a story about UK police showing up and arresting an autistic teenager because she commented online that one of their officers looked like a lesbian. You have Michigan passing laws that people can face 5 years in prison for "offending" someone.

daveguy 3y ago
Would you mind providing references for these stories?
- DrThunder 3y ago
  https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/autistic-teenage-girl-police-tiktok-b2391163.html https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/autistic-teenage... https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/michigan-can-now-censor-you-if-you-hurt-someones-feelings/ar-AA1cWTir https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/michigan-can-now-censor-yo...
  - daveguy 3y ago
    Here is the text of the Michigan law from the article you cited: "...willful course of conduct, involving repeated or continuing harassment of another individual that would cause a reasonable individual to feel terrorized, frightened, intimidated, threatened, harassed, or molested, and that actually causes the victim to feel terrorized, frightened, or threatened." I'm not sure how that is twisted to being "offended". News flash: intimidating, threatening, and harassing someone is illegal in the US and has been for a long time.
    - DrThunder 3y ago
      Next time just man up and say you don't like what's being said instead of pretending you want sources. Pay attention to this part - "individual to FEEL terrorized, frightened, or18 threatened" This is a subjective law based on the FEELING of the "victim". No one has a legal right to not FEEL threatened, what in the world are you talking about? Nothing is being "twisted". Don't gaslight me. If it has been illegal there would be no reason for new law . Either you're a moron or you have malicious reasons for pretending there's no implication to basing a law on how the victim feels due to things said to them. I'm guessing it's the latter. I have no idea how in the world a semi-intelligent person could not see that as a direct threat to the 1st amendment. I also like that you completely ignored the UK article which shows exactly what the Michigan law would result in. Have a nice day.
      - daveguy 3y ago
        I thought maybe you had sources. Of course your sources didn't support your point. Just a slippery slope mirage from a different country. I know you're the type that loves to point to how awful other people and countries are, so keep on whining. Have a great day!
        DrThunder 3y ago
        The source was literally the law. If you want to gaslight people into believing it doesn't say what it does maybe you need to look internally at why you're doing that. Why does it upset you that this law is being scrutinized? I have a feeling it's because you've been sucked into a cult like ideology that says a certain group should never be questioned.
        daveguy 3y ago
        The language of the law is what you twisted to fit your own delusion. Sorry buddy. Scrutinize all you want. It doesn't change the fact that your outrage depends on your own sad interpretations. Just because you think there is some nefarious big bad cult coming to get you, doesn't mean there is. I'm sorry you don't recognize that harassment very much depends on the person harassed FEELING harassed. I'm sorry you feel insecure about the word "feel". Feel free to take it to court. I'm tired of your bad faith and personal attacks. I will not be responding again.
        DrThunder 3y ago
        "depends on the person harassed FEELING harassed." That's my point bud. You don't believe in the 1st amendment, that's the problem, not the interpretation of the law. You cannot have free speech and have a law that bases prison time on subjective FEELINGS by the victim. You cannot be that dumb, therefore you're malicious in intent and gaslighting me. You're an authoritarian and anti-1st amendment and that's why this is hard for you to understand. There's no "twisting" going on other than your belief system. The irony here is you're just proving what I originally said every time you comment. Free speech rights are no longer respected and you're just living proof of the trend. If I might go to jail on the whim of how a person feels towards what I say on a specific day because they're in a bad mood then the 1st amendment doesn't exist.

daveguy 3y ago

Would you mind providing references for these stories?

DrThunder 3y ago
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/autistic-teenage-girl-police-tiktok-b2391163.html https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/autistic-teenage... https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/michigan-can-now-censor-you-if-you-hurt-someones-feelings/ar-AA1cWTir https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/michigan-can-now-censor-yo...
- daveguy 3y ago
  Here is the text of the Michigan law from the article you cited: "...willful course of conduct, involving repeated or continuing harassment of another individual that would cause a reasonable individual to feel terrorized, frightened, intimidated, threatened, harassed, or molested, and that actually causes the victim to feel terrorized, frightened, or threatened." I'm not sure how that is twisted to being "offended". News flash: intimidating, threatening, and harassing someone is illegal in the US and has been for a long time.
  - DrThunder 3y ago
    Next time just man up and say you don't like what's being said instead of pretending you want sources. Pay attention to this part - "individual to FEEL terrorized, frightened, or18 threatened" This is a subjective law based on the FEELING of the "victim". No one has a legal right to not FEEL threatened, what in the world are you talking about? Nothing is being "twisted". Don't gaslight me. If it has been illegal there would be no reason for new law . Either you're a moron or you have malicious reasons for pretending there's no implication to basing a law on how the victim feels due to things said to them. I'm guessing it's the latter. I have no idea how in the world a semi-intelligent person could not see that as a direct threat to the 1st amendment. I also like that you completely ignored the UK article which shows exactly what the Michigan law would result in. Have a nice day.
    - daveguy 3y ago
      I thought maybe you had sources. Of course your sources didn't support your point. Just a slippery slope mirage from a different country. I know you're the type that loves to point to how awful other people and countries are, so keep on whining. Have a great day!
      - DrThunder 3y ago
        The source was literally the law. If you want to gaslight people into believing it doesn't say what it does maybe you need to look internally at why you're doing that. Why does it upset you that this law is being scrutinized? I have a feeling it's because you've been sucked into a cult like ideology that says a certain group should never be questioned.
        daveguy 3y ago
        The language of the law is what you twisted to fit your own delusion. Sorry buddy. Scrutinize all you want. It doesn't change the fact that your outrage depends on your own sad interpretations. Just because you think there is some nefarious big bad cult coming to get you, doesn't mean there is. I'm sorry you don't recognize that harassment very much depends on the person harassed FEELING harassed. I'm sorry you feel insecure about the word "feel". Feel free to take it to court. I'm tired of your bad faith and personal attacks. I will not be responding again.
        DrThunder 3y ago
        "depends on the person harassed FEELING harassed." That's my point bud. You don't believe in the 1st amendment, that's the problem, not the interpretation of the law. You cannot have free speech and have a law that bases prison time on subjective FEELINGS by the victim. You cannot be that dumb, therefore you're malicious in intent and gaslighting me. You're an authoritarian and anti-1st amendment and that's why this is hard for you to understand. There's no "twisting" going on other than your belief system. The irony here is you're just proving what I originally said every time you comment. Free speech rights are no longer respected and you're just living proof of the trend. If I might go to jail on the whim of how a person feels towards what I say on a specific day because they're in a bad mood then the 1st amendment doesn't exist.