3 ms·
What I didn't see mentioned in this article is what "harm" means in this context. My pessimistic view is that the govt will define harm as they see fit.
by TriangleEdge 3y ago
What I didn't see mentioned in this article is what "harm" means in this context. My pessimistic view is that the govt will define harm as they see fit.
- neom 3y agoHarmful speech has been fought and settled over a long period of time in Canada, and there is a lot of case law around in it, it's governed by Canada's criminal code. https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/c-46/section-319.html https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/c-46/section-319.ht... It's expected the new bill will be based on this, we won't really know the implications till case law is settled.
- cperciva 3y agoHate speech has a lot of case law around it. The fact they're inventing a new term "harmful speech" makes me think they're trying to avoid that case law.
- AlexandrB 3y agoIt does sound like a weasel word, like "assault weapon".
- faeriechangling 3y agoHis plan to me doesn't read as narrowly focused on hate speech.