5 ms·
Regardless of what you feel about the original upload, the article does in fact claim that she is barred from criticism: "Pawluck is also prohibited from posti
by ricree 11y ago
Regardless of what you feel about the original upload, the article does in fact claim that she is barred from criticism:
"Pawluck is also prohibited from posting anything about police or anyone associated with the judicial system."
- oh_sigh 11y agoRight, but isn't there precedent here wherein people guilty of a crime were forbidden from communicating with, or posting about their victim on social media? Just that in this case, the victim is the police force, and not some random individual.
- tptacek 11y agoNo, I literally just meant: this person was forbidden by the government of Canada from criticizing the police. Apparently in any direct fashion, violent or not. We don't even reach the question of whether the original imagery qualifies as "criticism".
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- oh_sigh 11y agoYes, and my point is that this is very similar to how, for example, convicted harassers aren't allowed to talk about their victims on social media, even if it isn't in a manner associated with their crime?