6 ms·

I don't really understand the concern. The UK objects to suicide forums and American operators of suicide forums are protected by the First Amendment of extradi

by beejiu 11mo ago

I don't really understand the concern. The UK objects to suicide forums and American operators of suicide forums are protected by the First Amendment of extradition to the UK. So if you want to operate a suicide forum from America, just don't travel to the UK and you're okay.

x3n0ph3n3 11mo ago
It's not clear to me that the UK even has a mechanism to discover the operators of such sites. If I found myself in such a position, I imagine I wouldn't even bother trying to block UK IPs and let them sort out their own internet blocking.
mcny 11mo ago
First of all, I anal and also this is more of a question than a statement but a us person could travel to a country x and that x could send this us person to a UK prison? I don't know if doing so would be legal but when the rubber hits the road, each country x is technically sovereign and does not have to honor the first amendment of the US constitution. So even if it might be frowned upon to extradite foreign (US) nationals in country X (such as Canada or India) to the UK, they could do it anyway to send a message?
- beejiu 11mo ago
  Your First Amendment rights only apply within the United States, this should be obvious. Nonetheless, extradition treaties generally require that a crime be considered a crime within both jurisdictions.
  - holowoodman 11mo ago
    Most of Europe does have similar thought-crime and censorship laws as the UK now have. Also, the crime of "hindering an official investigation" could be interpreted into this, and this exists practically anywhere. The only further question would be if the country is friendly enough with the UK to extradite.
    - hsuduebc2 11mo ago
      Can you show me the "most of the Europe"? This seems as a false statement. It seems incomparable to the UK for me.
- zdragnar 11mo ago
  Extradition of a foreign citizen to a third country is not a simple matter, diplomatically speaking. The US might not have the hegemony it enjoyed 20-30 years ago, but it certainly has plenty of sway. When it's a matter of drug charges or other obviously criminal activity, the US embassy and diplomats don't normally raise a fuss, but for something like this where the person made first amendment protected speech in the US? That'd definitely raise all kinds of hell.
  - qball 11mo ago
    Why would it? Plenty of US citizens would actively cheer the notion of having a foreign government arrest their political opponents as an end-run around the fact they're not allowed to do it at home. After all, 1A/"freeze peach" laws should only protect you from your government, right?
    - nozzlegear 11mo ago
      > Plenty of US citizens would actively cheer the notion of having a foreign government arrest their political opponents as an end-run around the fact they're not allowed to do it at home. I'm not convinced that plenty of US citizens would celebrate a foreign government arresting an American for what would be protected by the 1A in the US. There will always be trolls, of course. > After all, 1A/"freeze peach" laws should only protect you from your government, right? If my government has the longest dick of all governments in the world, and knows how to swing it, I'm not so sure.
      - qball 11mo ago
        Plenty of US citizens openly celebrated the murder of an American for what was protected by the 1A in the US. So no, I don't think that the people who celebrated that would care, and said people would actively support an administration that actively encouraged the UK in this manner for the same reason.
    - Danjoe4 11mo ago
      Nope. US law is international law (because we have all the guns). The UK government would never defy us; they know their place.
- rpdillon 11mo ago
  I traveled to a lot of countries during my time in the military. I was also a legal officer that had to deal with legal issues in foreign countries. Traveling is no joke. Americans often act like the world is their playground, but you are subject to the laws of the jurisdiction you're standing in. Traveller beware.
flumpcakes 11mo ago
> suicide forums are protected by the First Amendment Are they? Is all speech protected? If so, how do you prosecute people who leak secrets?
- alexford1987 11mo ago
  > Are they? Yes > Is all speech protected? No > how do you prosecute people who leak secrets? See above
- mcmcmc 11mo ago
  It depends, and no obviously not. Having a forum to discuss suicide/suicidal ideation is fine, outright telling someone to kill themselves is illegal. The Michelle Carter case is an example of this
sys_64738 11mo ago
> just don't travel to the UK and you're okay. Pretty much avoid entering Britain or its dependencies or you'll be nabbed on a Commonwealth Warrant and extradited to England.
- anonymousDan 11mo ago
  Yes the US does this shit all the time. Suck it up.
  - Hizonner 11mo ago
    So you like it when the US does it, and want to encourage more of it worldwide?
  - BriggyDwiggs42 11mo ago
    “Suck it up” like you stubbed your toe and not like you got shoved in a cage by a foreign government.
    - cindyllm 11mo ago
      [dead]
- beejiu 11mo ago
  Seems reasonable. If I committed what is considered a crime on American soil, I wouldn't expect to be able to enter the US without arrest.
  - consp 11mo ago
    Many countries have extradition treaties with both the UK and the US. Be careful to check those as well.
    - avadodin 11mo ago
      Usually, countries only respect extradition treaties when there is an equivalent law on their books (the workaround would be to charge someone with bullshit charges for the extradition) The main issue is that few countries respect freedom of speech on principle and even that group has edge cases.
throw7 11mo ago
First they came for the suicide forums...
qball 11mo ago
Extraordinary rendition is still a thing, though; the US has done this several times. Now, granted, the US is a freer country than the UK is so that doesn't usually matter all that much, but all the US would need to do to nullify its 1A would be to simply permit the UK to enforce its claims of extraterritoriality in US-friendly airspace. What speech they might be permitted to prosecute would naturally change based on administration.
deleted 11mo ago
[deleted]
hsuduebc2 11mo ago
Exactly. Honestly after the how article was ended by the nonsensical nationalistic chest beating which I absolutely didn't understand why author felt the urge to do that, I got the feeling that it was more about some sense of authors nationalistic pride. I do not even slightly support these UK's regulations and even an possiblity of ban of VPN services seems bizzare to me but as you said. He is already protected.
morshu9001 11mo ago
I was reading anout attacks on the 1A and thought this was about the UK extrading US citizens. If this is just that you'd get arrested in the UK, then yeah this isn't a 1A concern. Though the US govt should still do something about it imo.

by beejiu 11mo ago

x3n0ph3n3 11mo ago

It's not clear to me that the UK even has a mechanism to discover the operators of such sites. If I found myself in such a position, I imagine I wouldn't even bother trying to block UK IPs and let them sort out their own internet blocking.

mcny 11mo ago

First of all, I anal and also this is more of a question than a statement but a us person could travel to a country x and that x could send this us person to a UK prison? I don't know if doing so would be legal but when the rubber hits the road, each country x is technically sovereign and does not have to honor the first amendment of the US constitution. So even if it might be frowned upon to extradite foreign (US) nationals in country X (such as Canada or India) to the UK, they could do it anyway to send a message?

beejiu 11mo ago
Your First Amendment rights only apply within the United States, this should be obvious. Nonetheless, extradition treaties generally require that a crime be considered a crime within both jurisdictions.
- holowoodman 11mo ago
  Most of Europe does have similar thought-crime and censorship laws as the UK now have. Also, the crime of "hindering an official investigation" could be interpreted into this, and this exists practically anywhere. The only further question would be if the country is friendly enough with the UK to extradite.
  - hsuduebc2 11mo ago
    Can you show me the "most of the Europe"? This seems as a false statement. It seems incomparable to the UK for me.
zdragnar 11mo ago
Extradition of a foreign citizen to a third country is not a simple matter, diplomatically speaking. The US might not have the hegemony it enjoyed 20-30 years ago, but it certainly has plenty of sway. When it's a matter of drug charges or other obviously criminal activity, the US embassy and diplomats don't normally raise a fuss, but for something like this where the person made first amendment protected speech in the US? That'd definitely raise all kinds of hell.
- qball 11mo ago
  Why would it? Plenty of US citizens would actively cheer the notion of having a foreign government arrest their political opponents as an end-run around the fact they're not allowed to do it at home. After all, 1A/"freeze peach" laws should only protect you from your government, right?
  - nozzlegear 11mo ago
    > Plenty of US citizens would actively cheer the notion of having a foreign government arrest their political opponents as an end-run around the fact they're not allowed to do it at home. I'm not convinced that plenty of US citizens would celebrate a foreign government arresting an American for what would be protected by the 1A in the US. There will always be trolls, of course. > After all, 1A/"freeze peach" laws should only protect you from your government, right? If my government has the longest dick of all governments in the world, and knows how to swing it, I'm not so sure.
    - qball 11mo ago
      Plenty of US citizens openly celebrated the murder of an American for what was protected by the 1A in the US. So no, I don't think that the people who celebrated that would care, and said people would actively support an administration that actively encouraged the UK in this manner for the same reason.
  - Danjoe4 11mo ago
    Nope. US law is international law (because we have all the guns). The UK government would never defy us; they know their place.
rpdillon 11mo ago
I traveled to a lot of countries during my time in the military. I was also a legal officer that had to deal with legal issues in foreign countries. Traveling is no joke. Americans often act like the world is their playground, but you are subject to the laws of the jurisdiction you're standing in. Traveller beware.

flumpcakes 11mo ago

> suicide forums are protected by the First Amendment Are they? Is all speech protected? If so, how do you prosecute people who leak secrets?

alexford1987 11mo ago
> Are they? Yes > Is all speech protected? No > how do you prosecute people who leak secrets? See above
mcmcmc 11mo ago
It depends, and no obviously not. Having a forum to discuss suicide/suicidal ideation is fine, outright telling someone to kill themselves is illegal. The Michelle Carter case is an example of this

sys_64738 11mo ago

> just don't travel to the UK and you're okay. Pretty much avoid entering Britain or its dependencies or you'll be nabbed on a Commonwealth Warrant and extradited to England.

anonymousDan 11mo ago
Yes the US does this shit all the time. Suck it up.
- Hizonner 11mo ago
  So you like it when the US does it, and want to encourage more of it worldwide?
- BriggyDwiggs42 11mo ago
  “Suck it up” like you stubbed your toe and not like you got shoved in a cage by a foreign government.
  - cindyllm 11mo ago
    [dead]
beejiu 11mo ago
Seems reasonable. If I committed what is considered a crime on American soil, I wouldn't expect to be able to enter the US without arrest.
- consp 11mo ago
  Many countries have extradition treaties with both the UK and the US. Be careful to check those as well.
  - avadodin 11mo ago
    Usually, countries only respect extradition treaties when there is an equivalent law on their books (the workaround would be to charge someone with bullshit charges for the extradition) The main issue is that few countries respect freedom of speech on principle and even that group has edge cases.

throw7 11mo ago

First they came for the suicide forums...

qball 11mo ago

Extraordinary rendition is still a thing, though; the US has done this several times. Now, granted, the US is a freer country than the UK is so that doesn't usually matter all that much, but all the US would need to do to nullify its 1A would be to simply permit the UK to enforce its claims of extraterritoriality in US-friendly airspace. What speech they might be permitted to prosecute would naturally change based on administration.

deleted 11mo ago

[deleted]

hsuduebc2 11mo ago

Exactly. Honestly after the how article was ended by the nonsensical nationalistic chest beating which I absolutely didn't understand why author felt the urge to do that, I got the feeling that it was more about some sense of authors nationalistic pride. I do not even slightly support these UK's regulations and even an possiblity of ban of VPN services seems bizzare to me but as you said. He is already protected.

morshu9001 11mo ago

I was reading anout attacks on the 1A and thought this was about the UK extrading US citizens. If this is just that you'd get arrested in the UK, then yeah this isn't a 1A concern. Though the US govt should still do something about it imo.