FabSwingers.com
 

FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > Free Speech

Free Speech

Jump to: Newest in thread

 

By *an For You OP   Man  over a year ago

belfast/holywood

The police response to an ex-officer's allegedly transphobic tweets was unlawful, the High Court has ruled.

Harry Miller was visited by Humberside Police at work in January last year after a complaint about his tweets.

He was told he had not committed a crime, but it would be recorded as a non-crime "hate incident".

The court found the force's actions were a "disproportionate interference" with his right to freedom of expression.

Some common sense from the courts at last .

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"The police response to an ex-officer's allegedly transphobic tweets was unlawful, the High Court has ruled.

Harry Miller was visited by Humberside Police at work in January last year after a complaint about his tweets.

He was told he had not committed a crime, but it would be recorded as a non-crime "hate incident".

The court found the force's actions were a "disproportionate interference" with his right to freedom of expression.

Some common sense from the courts at last .

"

Do you know what he tweeted?

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By *ethnmelvCouple  over a year ago

Chudleigh

& just because he can say horrible things, it doesn’t mean he should. Nor should it mean that we can’t call him out for saying it

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"The police response to an ex-officer's allegedly transphobic tweets was unlawful, the High Court has ruled.

Harry Miller was visited by Humberside Police at work in January last year after a complaint about his tweets.

He was told he had not committed a crime, but it would be recorded as a non-crime "hate incident".

The court found the force's actions were a "disproportionate interference" with his right to freedom of expression.

Some common sense from the courts at last .

"

Indeed

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"& just because he can say horrible things, it doesn’t mean he should. Nor should it mean that we can’t call him out for saying it

"

That's totally different though.

The police should not get involved in anything where a law HAS NOT been breached.

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By *an For You OP   Man  over a year ago

belfast/holywood


"& just because he can say horrible things, it doesn’t mean he should. Nor should it mean that we can’t call him out for saying it

That's totally different though.

The police should not get involved in anything where a law HAS NOT been breached. "

Exactly. Just because he allegedly said “horrid things “ or stuff you don’t agree with does not make it an offence for the courts to pursue and convict. I have heard far far far worse vitriol and abuse and witnessed harassment and physical attacks by pro life activists against women by women. They can say and do whatever they want without the police hounding them. Even if they have accused women of murder

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By *ethnmelvCouple  over a year ago

Chudleigh


"& just because he can say horrible things, it doesn’t mean he should. Nor should it mean that we can’t call him out for saying it

That's totally different though.

The police should not get involved in anything where a law HAS NOT been breached.

Exactly. Just because he allegedly said “horrid things “ or stuff you don’t agree with does not make it an offence for the courts to pursue and convict. I have heard far far far worse vitriol and abuse and witnessed harassment and physical attacks by pro life activists against women by women. They can say and do whatever they want without the police hounding them. Even if they have accused women of murder"

Well I hope you intervene on this as well. I agree Hull Police overstepped the mark by the way, but just saying the Courts are right for once does not reflect the whole story.

The man was in the wrong, but the Courts flagged that the Police were also. Two wrongs do not make a right

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By *wisted999Man  over a year ago

North Bucks

Be interesting to see the next stage of his appeal.

It wasn’t about what he said he can carry on saying that all he likes.

It was the ridiculous recording of a hate crime non crime that was recorded against his name and had the potential to damage his career.

If it’s a hate crime it should be recorded as such on its merits. If it’s not a crime then that should be it.

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By *mmabluTV/TS  over a year ago

upton wirral


"The police response to an ex-officer's allegedly transphobic tweets was unlawful, the High Court has ruled.

Harry Miller was visited by Humberside Police at work in January last year after a complaint about his tweets.

He was told he had not committed a crime, but it would be recorded as a non-crime "hate incident".

The court found the force's actions were a "disproportionate interference" with his right to freedom of expression.

Some common sense from the courts at last .

"

I agree free speech is being eroded by political correctness as a T/V if someone once to slag me off that is there right to show there ignorance.

We are told it is good not to supress things and get them out into the open but if you say something offensive it becomes a crime nonsense.Good to see the courts apply common sense for a change

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By *an For You OP   Man  over a year ago

belfast/holywood


"The police response to an ex-officer's allegedly transphobic tweets was unlawful, the High Court has ruled.

Harry Miller was visited by Humberside Police at work in January last year after a complaint about his tweets.

He was told he had not committed a crime, but it would be recorded as a non-crime "hate incident".

The court found the force's actions were a "disproportionate interference" with his right to freedom of expression.

Some common sense from the courts at last .

I agree free speech is being eroded by political correctness as a T/V if someone once to slag me off that is there right to show there ignorance.

We are told it is good not to supress things and get them out into the open but if you say something offensive it becomes a crime nonsense.Good to see the courts apply common sense for a change"

Well said

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"The police response to an ex-officer's allegedly transphobic tweets was unlawful, the High Court has ruled.

Harry Miller was visited by Humberside Police at work in January last year after a complaint about his tweets.

He was told he had not committed a crime, but it would be recorded as a non-crime "hate incident".

The court found the force's actions were a "disproportionate interference" with his right to freedom of expression.

Some common sense from the courts at last .

I agree free speech is being eroded by political correctness as a T/V if someone once to slag me off that is there right to show there ignorance.

We are told it is good not to supress things and get them out into the open but if you say something offensive it becomes a crime nonsense.Good to see the courts apply common sense for a change

Well said"

There is no such thing as ‘free speech’ in the U.K.

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"

There is no such thing as ‘free speech’ in the U.K."

Yes there is, free speech as long as it does not break the law

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago

Ok. For what it's worth, my opinion is as follows.

It is difficult to fairly judge the rights and wrong without being told exactly what the wrong is.

The police if called have a duty to investigate. Maybe a snowflake type reports a non incident as a major crime or, what he said was strong enough to warrant police action. We don't know.

In regards to freedom of speech. Our rights are simple to understand but there are those that will fight for the right to be abusive. So using an American quote.

You have the right to swing or fists right up to the point where my nose begins. Simple isn't it. We all have the right to say what we like right up to the point where you cause harassment alarm or offence.

Simples. Or am I wrong?

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By *obka3Couple  over a year ago

bournemouth


"Ok. For what it's worth, my opinion is as follows.

It is difficult to fairly judge the rights and wrong without being told exactly what the wrong is.

The police if called have a duty to investigate. Maybe a snowflake type reports a non incident as a major crime or, what he said was strong enough to warrant police action. We don't know.

In regards to freedom of speech. Our rights are simple to understand but there are those that will fight for the right to be abusive. So using an American quote.

You have the right to swing or fists right up to the point where my nose begins. Simple isn't it. We all have the right to say what we like right up to the point where you cause harassment alarm or offence.

Simples. Or am I wrong?

"

No you can certainly offend someone and cause alarm using free speech without either being an offence

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"Ok. For what it's worth, my opinion is as follows.

It is difficult to fairly judge the rights and wrong without being told exactly what the wrong is.

The police if called have a duty to investigate. Maybe a snowflake type reports a non incident as a major crime or, what he said was strong enough to warrant police action. We don't know.

In regards to freedom of speech. Our rights are simple to understand but there are those that will fight for the right to be abusive. So using an American quote.

You have the right to swing or fists right up to the point where my nose begins. Simple isn't it. We all have the right to say what we like right up to the point where you cause harassment alarm or offence.

Simples. Or am I wrong?

"

Not really that simple. Different people find different things offensive. The biggest challenge with freedom of speech has been to decide where to draw the line.

IMO, people have the right to say anything as long as the person who hears it has the ability to not hear what the other person says. Also when a person has the freedom to tell something offensive, he should realise that others have the freedom to call it out and even offend back this person.

But there should not be legal actions taken for words spoken.

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"Ok. For what it's worth, my opinion is as follows.

It is difficult to fairly judge the rights and wrong without being told exactly what the wrong is.

The police if called have a duty to investigate. Maybe a snowflake type reports a non incident as a major crime or, what he said was strong enough to warrant police action. We don't know.

In regards to freedom of speech. Our rights are simple to understand but there are those that will fight for the right to be abusive. So using an American quote.

You have the right to swing or fists right up to the point where my nose begins. Simple isn't it. We all have the right to say what we like right up to the point where you cause harassment alarm or offence.

Simples. Or am I wrong?

Not really that simple. Different people find different things offensive. The biggest challenge with freedom of speech has been to decide where to draw the line.

IMO, people have the right to say anything as long as the person who hears it has the ability to not hear what the other person says. Also when a person has the freedom to tell something offensive, he should realise that others have the freedom to call it out and even offend back this person.

But there should not be legal actions taken for words spoken."

No legal action for any words spoken?

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By *V-AliceTV/TS  over a year ago

Ayr

He was told he had not committed a crime, but it would be recorded as a non-crime "hate incident".

That's quite worrying. Even if you haven't broken the law, the police will log your actions because someone finds you offensive?

Slippery slope, that.

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By *candiumWoman  over a year ago

oban


"

But there should not be legal actions taken for words spoken.

No legal action for any words spoken? "

Nope. I don't understand how hate speech is a thing now.

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"

But there should not be legal actions taken for words spoken.

No legal action for any words spoken?

Nope. I don't understand how hate speech is a thing now. "

Again really!

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By *candiumWoman  over a year ago

oban

Offence is taken not given. I have no way of knowing what someone else might find offensive.

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"Offence is taken not given. I have no way of knowing what someone else might find offensive."

There are certain things any decent person should find offensive.

I'm not going to list them as they are against forum rules.

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By *candiumWoman  over a year ago

oban


"Offence is taken not given. I have no way of knowing what someone else might find offensive.

There are certain things any decent person should find offensive.

I'm not going to list them as they are against forum rules. "

Fair enough. Not going to ask you to list them.

One person's Saturday BBCone is another's offensive. There are so many things that people these days seem to be offended by and I don't think an individual should have to 2nd guess the foibles of everyone in earshot when ever they tell a joke.

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"Offence is taken not given. I have no way of knowing what someone else might find offensive.

There are certain things any decent person should find offensive.

I'm not going to list them as they are against forum rules.

Fair enough. Not going to ask you to list them.

One person's Saturday BBCone is another's offensive. There are so many things that people these days seem to be offended by and I don't think an individual should have to 2nd guess the foibles of everyone in earshot when ever they tell a joke.

"

I'm not disagreeing but certain things need to be handled sensibly.

Free speech does not give people the right to say whatever they like without being challenged.

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By *candiumWoman  over a year ago

oban


"Offence is taken not given. I have no way of knowing what someone else might find offensive.

There are certain things any decent person should find offensive.

I'm not going to list them as they are against forum rules.

Fair enough. Not going to ask you to list them.

One person's Saturday BBCone is another's offensive. There are so many things that people these days seem to be offended by and I don't think an individual should have to 2nd guess the foibles of everyone in earshot when ever they tell a joke.

I'm not disagreeing but certain things need to be handled sensibly.

Free speech does not give people the right to say whatever they like without being challenged. "

Challenged? absolutely. However the current climate is heading to simply not being able to say anything and simply being shut down.

I'm increasingly worried about policing of the internet and moderating of harmful content so for me free speech is wider than just comedy. Who decides what's harmful?

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"Offence is taken not given. I have no way of knowing what someone else might find offensive.

There are certain things any decent person should find offensive.

I'm not going to list them as they are against forum rules.

Fair enough. Not going to ask you to list them.

One person's Saturday BBCone is another's offensive. There are so many things that people these days seem to be offended by and I don't think an individual should have to 2nd guess the foibles of everyone in earshot when ever they tell a joke.

I'm not disagreeing but certain things need to be handled sensibly.

Free speech does not give people the right to say whatever they like without being challenged.

Challenged? absolutely. However the current climate is heading to simply not being able to say anything and simply being shut down.

I'm increasingly worried about policing of the internet and moderating of harmful content so for me free speech is wider than just comedy. Who decides what's harmful? "

Normally if most people feel its distasteful it's time to stop.

Some subjects are very obviously harmful.

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By *candiumWoman  over a year ago

oban

There are groups in society that would argue FAB was distasteful and want to block it.

There are sites that are harmful to some helpful to others.

I'm worried about the lowest common denominator being applied.

Some people will be hurt by this so no one can access it mentality

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"There are groups in society that would argue FAB was distasteful and want to block it.

There are sites that are harmful to some helpful to others.

I'm worried about the lowest common denominator being applied.

Some people will be hurt by this so no one can access it mentality "

You know exactly what I'm referring to.

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By *candiumWoman  over a year ago

oban


"There are groups in society that would argue FAB was distasteful and want to block it.

There are sites that are harmful to some helpful to others.

I'm worried about the lowest common denominator being applied.

Some people will be hurt by this so no one can access it mentality

You know exactly what I'm referring to. "

Error actually no I don't.

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"There are groups in society that would argue FAB was distasteful and want to block it.

There are sites that are harmful to some helpful to others.

I'm worried about the lowest common denominator being applied.

Some people will be hurt by this so no one can access it mentality

You know exactly what I'm referring to.

Error actually no I don't."

The other thread you have been commenting on.

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By *candiumWoman  over a year ago

oban

Oh ok. In that one I'm completely puzzled by people's reaction and was trying to understand it.

Here I'm talking more generally about the whole internet.

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"Offence is taken not given. I have no way of knowing what someone else might find offensive.

There are certain things any decent person should find offensive.

I'm not going to list them as they are against forum rules.

Fair enough. Not going to ask you to list them.

One person's Saturday BBCone is another's offensive. There are so many things that people these days seem to be offended by and I don't think an individual should have to 2nd guess the foibles of everyone in earshot when ever they tell a joke.

I'm not disagreeing but certain things need to be handled sensibly.

Free speech does not give people the right to say whatever they like without being challenged. "

Again. People can be challenged. If someone saya something that's considered wrong by others, others should be able to use their freedom of speech to challenge it. Censorship or legal action should not be a response to someone's speech.

When you say "certain things need to be handled sensibly", who decides what those certain things are? In your mind, you will have an idea about what is really bad. As the other poster suggested, fab is considered sin by many people. Religious people consider homosexuality as a sin and would want to censor anything that supports that. If we go down the route of censorship, there will be fringe groups trying to force the government to censor things which they don't like. Suppression of people's opinions, good or bad, is a bad thing.

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By *omaMan  over a year ago

Glasgow

If someone takes offence at anything that is'said to them that's their problem. Freedom to openly say what you want always should be a basic human right.

Offence is relative, different things offend different people.

To say otherwise is like saying the colour red should be a criminal offence to wear as it may offend someone.

The woke society at its best/worst

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"If someone takes offence at anything that is'said to them that's their problem. Freedom to openly say what you want always should be a basic human right.

Offence is relative, different things offend different people.

To say otherwise is like saying the colour red should be a criminal offence to wear as it may offend someone.

The woke society at its best/worst "

Are you suggesting people can say anything??

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By *omaMan  over a year ago

Glasgow


"If someone takes offence at anything that is'said to them that's their problem. Freedom to openly say what you want always should be a basic human right.

Offence is relative, different things offend different people.

To say otherwise is like saying the colour red should be a criminal offence to wear as it may offend someone.

The woke society at its best/worst

Are you suggesting people can say anything??"

I'm suggesting the right to freedom of speech, whether some regard it as offensive or not should be a basic human right. If what I say offends anyone then that's their problem and vice versa

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"If someone takes offence at anything that is'said to them that's their problem. Freedom to openly say what you want always should be a basic human right.

Offence is relative, different things offend different people.

To say otherwise is like saying the colour red should be a criminal offence to wear as it may offend someone.

The woke society at its best/worst

Are you suggesting people can say anything??

I'm suggesting the right to freedom of speech, whether some regard it as offensive or not should be a basic human right. If what I say offends anyone then that's their problem and vice versa "

It really isn’t ‘their problem ‘ . If you think you can literally say anything then you are out of touch with reality

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By *aughtyYorkGentMan  over a year ago

Yorkshire


"If someone takes offence at anything that is'said to them that's their problem. Freedom to openly say what you want always should be a basic human right.

Offence is relative, different things offend different people.

To say otherwise is like saying the colour red should be a criminal offence to wear as it may offend someone.

The woke society at its best/worst

Are you suggesting people can say anything??

I'm suggesting the right to freedom of speech, whether some regard it as offensive or not should be a basic human right. If what I say offends anyone then that's their problem and vice versa

It really isn’t ‘their problem ‘ . If you think you can literally say anything then you are out of touch with reality "

Exactly. I'm all for being able to voice an opinion without fear of reproach, but there HAS to be a balance between the right to freedom of speech and the right not to be subjected to the most extreme views, or what is essentially abuse.

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By *lem-H-FandangoMan  over a year ago

salisbury


"If someone takes offence at anything that is'said to them that's their problem. Freedom to openly say what you want always should be a basic human right.

Offence is relative, different things offend different people.

To say otherwise is like saying the colour red should be a criminal offence to wear as it may offend someone.

The woke society at its best/worst

Are you suggesting people can say anything??

I'm suggesting the right to freedom of speech, whether some regard it as offensive or not should be a basic human right. If what I say offends anyone then that's their problem and vice versa

It really isn’t ‘their problem ‘ . If you think you can literally say anything then you are out of touch with reality "

It's about time reality was banned. It's out of touch with today's more "woke" way of thinking.

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"If someone takes offence at anything that is'said to them that's their problem. Freedom to openly say what you want always should be a basic human right.

Offence is relative, different things offend different people.

To say otherwise is like saying the colour red should be a criminal offence to wear as it may offend someone.

The woke society at its best/worst

Are you suggesting people can say anything??

I'm suggesting the right to freedom of speech, whether some regard it as offensive or not should be a basic human right. If what I say offends anyone then that's their problem and vice versa

It really isn’t ‘their problem ‘ . If you think you can literally say anything then you are out of touch with reality

It's about time reality was banned. It's out of touch with today's more "woke" way of thinking. "

Do you think you can say ‘anything ‘ you like?

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By *lem-H-FandangoMan  over a year ago

salisbury


"If someone takes offence at anything that is'said to them that's their problem. Freedom to openly say what you want always should be a basic human right.

Offence is relative, different things offend different people.

To say otherwise is like saying the colour red should be a criminal offence to wear as it may offend someone.

The woke society at its best/worst

Are you suggesting people can say anything??

I'm suggesting the right to freedom of speech, whether some regard it as offensive or not should be a basic human right. If what I say offends anyone then that's their problem and vice versa

It really isn’t ‘their problem ‘ . If you think you can literally say anything then you are out of touch with reality

It's about time reality was banned. It's out of touch with today's more "woke" way of thinking.

Do you think you can say ‘anything ‘ you like? "

These days?! God no! Some snowflake will always melt.

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By *lem-H-FandangoMan  over a year ago

salisbury


"If someone takes offence at anything that is'said to them that's their problem. Freedom to openly say what you want always should be a basic human right.

Offence is relative, different things offend different people.

To say otherwise is like saying the colour red should be a criminal offence to wear as it may offend someone.

The woke society at its best/worst

Are you suggesting people can say anything??

I'm suggesting the right to freedom of speech, whether some regard it as offensive or not should be a basic human right. If what I say offends anyone then that's their problem and vice versa

It really isn’t ‘their problem ‘ . If you think you can literally say anything then you are out of touch with reality

It's about time reality was banned. It's out of touch with today's more "woke" way of thinking.

Do you think you can say ‘anything ‘ you like? "

Do you think free speech should be stopped?

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By *nicecoupleXCouple  over a year ago

Hitch


"The police response to an ex-officer's allegedly transphobic tweets was unlawful, the High Court has ruled.

Harry Miller was visited by Humberside Police at work in January last year after a complaint about his tweets.

He was told he had not committed a crime, but it would be recorded as a non-crime "hate incident".

The court found the force's actions were a "disproportionate interference" with his right to freedom of expression.

Some common sense from the courts at last .

"

A "non crime - hate crime"

#ClownWorld honk honk

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By *ony 2016Man  over a year ago

Huddersfield /derby cinemas

With free speech comes responsibility

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"With free speech comes responsibility "

That sums it up pretty well.

Yes, we all want free speech. No, free speech shouldn't be stopped.

But if somebody says vile things, they shouldn't be surprised at being called out on it.

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"If someone takes offence at anything that is'said to them that's their problem. Freedom to openly say what you want always should be a basic human right.

Offence is relative, different things offend different people.

To say otherwise is like saying the colour red should be a criminal offence to wear as it may offend someone.

The woke society at its best/worst

Are you suggesting people can say anything??

I'm suggesting the right to freedom of speech, whether some regard it as offensive or not should be a basic human right. If what I say offends anyone then that's their problem and vice versa

It really isn’t ‘their problem ‘ . If you think you can literally say anything then you are out of touch with reality

It's about time reality was banned. It's out of touch with today's more "woke" way of thinking.

Do you think you can say ‘anything ‘ you like?

Do you think free speech should be stopped?"

There is no such thing as ‘free’ speech

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"If someone takes offence at anything that is'said to them that's their problem. Freedom to openly say what you want always should be a basic human right.

Offence is relative, different things offend different people.

To say otherwise is like saying the colour red should be a criminal offence to wear as it may offend someone.

The woke society at its best/worst

Are you suggesting people can say anything??

I'm suggesting the right to freedom of speech, whether some regard it as offensive or not should be a basic human right. If what I say offends anyone then that's their problem and vice versa

It really isn’t ‘their problem ‘ . If you think you can literally say anything then you are out of touch with reality

It's about time reality was banned. It's out of touch with today's more "woke" way of thinking.

Do you think you can say ‘anything ‘ you like?

Do you think free speech should be stopped?"

Do you think that Abu Hamza was right to say what he wanted??

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By *hMyGawdCouple  over a year ago

Midlands

It's a triumph for free speech. A sign of the way things are going

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"It's a triumph for free speech. A sign of the way things are going "

Free speech doesn’t exist.

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By *hMyGawdCouple  over a year ago

Midlands


"Free speech doesn’t exist. "

Then why did the court outline it as a reason for the ruling?

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By *lem-H-FandangoMan  over a year ago

salisbury


"If someone takes offence at anything that is'said to them that's their problem. Freedom to openly say what you want always should be a basic human right.

Offence is relative, different things offend different people.

To say otherwise is like saying the colour red should be a criminal offence to wear as it may offend someone.

The woke society at its best/worst

Are you suggesting people can say anything??

I'm suggesting the right to freedom of speech, whether some regard it as offensive or not should be a basic human right. If what I say offends anyone then that's their problem and vice versa

It really isn’t ‘their problem ‘ . If you think you can literally say anything then you are out of touch with reality

It's about time reality was banned. It's out of touch with today's more "woke" way of thinking.

Do you think you can say ‘anything ‘ you like?

Do you think free speech should be stopped?

Do you think that Abu Hamza was right to say what he wanted?? "

Absolutely.

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By *hetalkingstoveMan  over a year ago

London

The people who are weirdly passionate about 'free speech' remind me of those kids at school who would react to being told to be nice to their peers with 'you can't tell me what to do!'

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"If someone takes offence at anything that is'said to them that's their problem. Freedom to openly say what you want always should be a basic human right.

Offence is relative, different things offend different people.

To say otherwise is like saying the colour red should be a criminal offence to wear as it may offend someone.

The woke society at its best/worst

Are you suggesting people can say anything??

I'm suggesting the right to freedom of speech, whether some regard it as offensive or not should be a basic human right. If what I say offends anyone then that's their problem and vice versa

It really isn’t ‘their problem ‘ . If you think you can literally say anything then you are out of touch with reality

It's about time reality was banned. It's out of touch with today's more "woke" way of thinking.

Do you think you can say ‘anything ‘ you like?

Do you think free speech should be stopped?

Do you think that Abu Hamza was right to say what he wanted??

Absolutely.

"

Then why did he get put into prison? Face facts, you can’t say what you want when you want , have you heard of slander ??

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"Free speech doesn’t exist.

Then why did the court outline it as a reason for the ruling?"

Then why did Abu Hamza get put into prison?

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By *lem-H-FandangoMan  over a year ago

salisbury


"If someone takes offence at anything that is'said to them that's their problem. Freedom to openly say what you want always should be a basic human right.

Offence is relative, different things offend different people.

To say otherwise is like saying the colour red should be a criminal offence to wear as it may offend someone.

The woke society at its best/worst

Are you suggesting people can say anything??

I'm suggesting the right to freedom of speech, whether some regard it as offensive or not should be a basic human right. If what I say offends anyone then that's their problem and vice versa

It really isn’t ‘their problem ‘ . If you think you can literally say anything then you are out of touch with reality

It's about time reality was banned. It's out of touch with today's more "woke" way of thinking.

Do you think you can say ‘anything ‘ you like?

Do you think free speech should be stopped?

Do you think that Abu Hamza was right to say what he wanted??

Absolutely.

"Then why did he get put into prison? Face facts, you can’t say what you want when you want , have you heard of slander ?? "

In 2004, Hamza was arrested by British police after the United States requested he be extradited to face charges. He was later charged by British authorities with sixteen offences for inciting violence and racial hatred.[3] In 2006, a British court found him guilty of inciting violence, and sentenced him to seven years' imprisonment. On 5 October 2012, after an eight-year legal battle, he was extradited from the UK to the United States to face terrorism charges[4][5] and on 14 April 2014 his trial began in New York.[6] On 19 May 2014, Hamza was found guilty of eleven terrorism charges by a jury in Manhattan. On 9 January 2015, he was sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole."

Happy to help

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By *lem-H-FandangoMan  over a year ago

salisbury

I see Sefton council are in trouble for flying a flag with the dictionary definition of what a woman is, in support of international women's day. Vile hate speak at its worst... for shame!

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By *hMyGawdCouple  over a year ago

Midlands


"Then why did Abu Hamza get put into prison? "

To take a Labour voter off the streets?

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"Then why did Abu Hamza get put into prison?

To take a Labour voter off the streets?"

Knuckle dragging comment of the lowest type....again

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By *tace 309TV/TS  over a year ago

durham


"If someone takes offence at anything that is'said to them that's their problem. Freedom to openly say what you want always should be a basic human right.

Offence is relative, different things offend different people.

To say otherwise is like saying the colour red should be a criminal offence to wear as it may offend someone.

The woke society at its best/worst

Are you suggesting people can say anything??"

well if someone had a, real go against you... You wouldn't take offence... I bet you wouldn't.

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"If someone takes offence at anything that is'said to them that's their problem. Freedom to openly say what you want always should be a basic human right.

Offence is relative, different things offend different people.

To say otherwise is like saying the colour red should be a criminal offence to wear as it may offend someone.

The woke society at its best/worst

Are you suggesting people can say anything??well if someone had a, real go against you... You wouldn't take offence... I bet you wouldn't. "

That made literally no sense whatsoever . You don’t have the right to call anyone ‘anything’ you want ?

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"Then why did Abu Hamza get put into prison?

To take a Labour voter off the streets?

Knuckle dragging comment of the lowest type....again "

To be expected,

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By *lem-H-FandangoMan  over a year ago

salisbury


"Then why did Abu Hamza get put into prison?

To take a Labour voter off the streets?

Knuckle dragging comment of the lowest type....again

To be expected, "

Sounds like he was prejudged by you there...

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By *wisted999Man  over a year ago

North Bucks


"I see Sefton council are in trouble for flying a flag with the dictionary definition of what a woman is, in support of international women's day. Vile hate speak at its worst... for shame! "

Just googled that wow!!!!

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By *lem-H-FandangoMan  over a year ago

salisbury


"I see Sefton council are in trouble for flying a flag with the dictionary definition of what a woman is, in support of international women's day. Vile hate speak at its worst... for shame!

Just googled that wow!!!! "

How dare they!

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By *wisted999Man  over a year ago

North Bucks


"I see Sefton council are in trouble for flying a flag with the dictionary definition of what a woman is, in support of international women's day. Vile hate speak at its worst... for shame!

Just googled that wow!!!!

How dare they!"

Probably the same losers who went after Yorkshire tea.

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By *omaMan  over a year ago

Glasgow

So who thinks that free speech should be curtailed? By this I mean giving an opinion on subjects, topics and debates. Today's society seems to think that censoring subjects is the way to go.

They think that anyone with an opinion that differs from theirs is racist, homophobic, and xenophobic, and therefore should be shouted down.

Free speech is where ALL TOPICS and All VIEW POINTS on those topics can be voiced and discussed.

People who get "offended" in discussions and then shout Racist etc are the ones that should be called out. They are the destroyers of freedom of speech

Safe spaces? Don't make me laugh. . . Grow up . . The world is a harsh place, no one is there to pander to your needs.

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By *mmabluTV/TS  over a year ago

upton wirral


"So who thinks that free speech should be curtailed? By this I mean giving an opinion on subjects, topics and debates. Today's society seems to think that censoring subjects is the way to go.

They think that anyone with an opinion that differs from theirs is racist, homophobic, and xenophobic, and therefore should be shouted down.

Free speech is where ALL TOPICS and All VIEW POINTS on those topics can be voiced and discussed.

People who get "offended" in discussions and then shout Racist etc are the ones that should be called out. They are the destroyers of freedom of speech

Safe spaces? Don't make me laugh. . . Grow up . . The world is a harsh place, no one is there to pander to your needs.

"

Great post well said

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"Then why did Abu Hamza get put into prison?

To take a Labour voter off the streets?

Knuckle dragging comment of the lowest type....again

To be expected,

Sounds like he was prejudged by you there..."

Nah, it’s free speech, innit ?

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"Then why did Abu Hamza get put into prison?

To take a Labour voter off the streets?

Knuckle dragging comment of the lowest type....again "

Quite a good joke though

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By *an For You OP   Man  over a year ago

belfast/holywood

Left wing Mantra. Defend the terrorists. Attack the victims . Maybe that will change if his lordship takes the reins . But not of RWB carries on the legacy

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"Left wing Mantra. Defend the terrorists. Attack the victims . Maybe that will change if his lordship takes the reins . But not of RWB carries on the legacy"

I hear they chant those words at every secret meeting. It's true! I read it on some graffiti on a toilet door!

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By *asyukMan  over a year ago

West London


"So who thinks that free speech should be curtailed? By this I mean giving an opinion on subjects, topics and debates. Today's society seems to think that censoring subjects is the way to go.

They think that anyone with an opinion that differs from theirs is racist, homophobic, and xenophobic, and therefore should be shouted down.

Free speech is where ALL TOPICS and All VIEW POINTS on those topics can be voiced and discussed.

People who get "offended" in discussions and then shout Racist etc are the ones that should be called out. They are the destroyers of freedom of speech

Safe spaces? Don't make me laugh. . . Grow up . . The world is a harsh place, no one is there to pander to your needs.

"

So if someone, in exercising their right to free speech exhorts people to attack others. Assault them. Their families. For the reason of their religion, ethnicity or sexuality. That's alright with you?

Because of free speech?

It's alright to "debate" that someone is inferior due to their skin colour or religion or sexuality?

Any "offence" that people feel as a result of this is imaginary? They are overreacting? They should "debate" these assertions with equanimity?

There is a difference between debate and abuse. There is a difference between debate and normalising extreme views.

Has anyone ever asserted that you are inferior to them? Once? Twice? Regularly?

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By *asyukMan  over a year ago

West London


"The police response to an ex-officer's allegedly transphobic tweets was unlawful, the High Court has ruled.

Harry Miller was visited by Humberside Police at work in January last year after a complaint about his tweets.

He was told he had not committed a crime, but it would be recorded as a non-crime "hate incident".

The court found the force's actions were a "disproportionate interference" with his right to freedom of expression.

Some common sense from the courts at last .

"

The courts apply the law.

The police did not act lawfully.

I always find it interesting how outraged people seem to get at the judicial system functioning as it is supposed to

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By *lem-H-FandangoMan  over a year ago

salisbury


"The police response to an ex-officer's allegedly transphobic tweets was unlawful, the High Court has ruled.

Harry Miller was visited by Humberside Police at work in January last year after a complaint about his tweets.

He was told he had not committed a crime, but it would be recorded as a non-crime "hate incident".

The court found the force's actions were a "disproportionate interference" with his right to freedom of expression.

Some common sense from the courts at last .

"

In the past five years, UK police have recorded 120,000 “non-crime hate incidents”.

This kind of police action is essential. For too long, people have been not breaking the law and getting away with it.

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"So who thinks that free speech should be curtailed? By this I mean giving an opinion on subjects, topics and debates. Today's society seems to think that censoring subjects is the way to go.

They think that anyone with an opinion that differs from theirs is racist, homophobic, and xenophobic, and therefore should be shouted down.

Free speech is where ALL TOPICS and All VIEW POINTS on those topics can be voiced and discussed.

People who get "offended" in discussions and then shout Racist etc are the ones that should be called out. They are the destroyers of freedom of speech

Safe spaces? Don't make me laugh. . . Grow up . . The world is a harsh place, no one is there to pander to your needs.

"

-********************

The most sensible contribution yet to this thread.

(My opinion, in case anyone feels 'offended')

Eva X

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By *wisted999Man  over a year ago

North Bucks

I still can’t think of anything I want to say that I can’t?

When has somebody actually been effectively silenced?

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By *omaMan  over a year ago

Glasgow


"So who thinks that free speech should be curtailed? By this I mean giving an opinion on subjects, topics and debates. Today's society seems to think that censoring subjects is the way to go.

They think that anyone with an opinion that differs from theirs is racist, homophobic, and xenophobic, and therefore should be shouted down.

Free speech is where ALL TOPICS and All VIEW POINTS on those topics can be voiced and discussed.

People who get "offended" in discussions and then shout Racist etc are the ones that should be called out. They are the destroyers of freedom of speech

Safe spaces? Don't make me laugh. . . Grow up . . The world is a harsh place, no one is there to pander to your needs.

So if someone, in exercising their right to free speech exhorts people to attack others. Assault them. Their families. For the reason of their religion, ethnicity or sexuality. That's alright with you?

Because of free speech?

It's alright to "debate" that someone is inferior due to their skin colour or religion or sexuality?

Any "offence" that people feel as a result of this is imaginary? They are overreacting? They should "debate" these assertions with equanimity?

There is a difference between debate and abuse. There is a difference between debate and normalising extreme views.

Has anyone ever asserted that you are inferior to them? Once? Twice? Regularly?"

Where the hell did I mention abuse? There you go. . Assuming something that isn't there, get a grip and re read.

I talked about freedom to Express one's view in topics and debates. Without being shouted down because my views may differ from yours on many subjects. I should have the same rights of free speech as you have.

University campuses banning invited guests all because their views don't match some students views? What's that all about?

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago

Having free speech is important both for the public and the police within reason . I have noticed the lack of it especially when you hear about terrorism of who have done it as the police have to work through red tape if they can say who have done it or not this is so true in sweden there you cant say it.

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By *asyukMan  over a year ago

West London


"So who thinks that free speech should be curtailed? By this I mean giving an opinion on subjects, topics and debates. Today's society seems to think that censoring subjects is the way to go.

They think that anyone with an opinion that differs from theirs is racist, homophobic, and xenophobic, and therefore should be shouted down.

Free speech is where ALL TOPICS and All VIEW POINTS on those topics can be voiced and discussed.

People who get "offended" in discussions and then shout Racist etc are the ones that should be called out. They are the destroyers of freedom of speech

Safe spaces? Don't make me laugh. . . Grow up . . The world is a harsh place, no one is there to pander to your needs.

So if someone, in exercising their right to free speech exhorts people to attack others. Assault them. Their families. For the reason of their religion, ethnicity or sexuality. That's alright with you?

Because of free speech?

It's alright to "debate" that someone is inferior due to their skin colour or religion or sexuality?

Any "offence" that people feel as a result of this is imaginary? They are overreacting? They should "debate" these assertions with equanimity?

There is a difference between debate and abuse. There is a difference between debate and normalising extreme views.

Has anyone ever asserted that you are inferior to them? Once? Twice? Regularly?

Where the hell did I mention abuse? There you go. . Assuming something that isn't there, get a grip and re read.

I talked about freedom to Express one's view in topics and debates. Without being shouted down because my views may differ from yours on many subjects. I should have the same rights of free speech as you have.

University campuses banning invited guests all because their views don't match some students views? What's that all about?

"

People have those views and express them.

Should "debating" a group of people being inferior die to their ethnicity, sexuality or gender be acceptable then?

Perhaps you are saying that they cannot "debate" certain subjects which you find unacceptable?

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago

So what you seem to be saying is that universities should invite people of all political colours and creeds to speak in the interests of free speech - would you extend that invitation to members of isis, the kkk, the taliban!? Or do you believe as more sensitive people do, that such an invitation would cause more harm than good? It may sound like I am picking on extreme examples but the reality is that there are an awful lot of crackpots in the world whose pursuit of their own dangerous vision makes them impossible to communicate rationally with and leads them on to commit horrendous acts of cruelty and brutality and some people (not all of them ignorant) are drawn into these ideologies which is why personally I think they should not be given the legitimacy that an airing at a university would possibly imply.

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"So what you seem to be saying is that universities should invite people of all political colours and creeds to speak in the interests of free speech - would you extend that invitation to members of isis, the kkk, the taliban!? Or do you believe as more sensitive people do, that such an invitation would cause more harm than good? It may sound like I am picking on extreme examples but the reality is that there are an awful lot of crackpots in the world whose pursuit of their own dangerous vision makes them impossible to communicate rationally with and leads them on to commit horrendous acts of cruelty and brutality and some people (not all of them ignorant) are drawn into these ideologies which is why personally I think they should not be given the legitimacy that an airing at a university would possibly imply."

********************

There are an '"awful lot of crackpots" on here as well, Dear....!!

Eva

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By *lem-H-FandangoMan  over a year ago

salisbury

We're moving towards idiocrasy.

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By *obka3Couple  over a year ago

bournemouth


"So what you seem to be saying is that universities should invite people of all political colours and creeds to speak in the interests of free speech - would you extend that invitation to members of isis, the kkk, the taliban!? Or do you believe as more sensitive people do, that such an invitation would cause more harm than good? It may sound like I am picking on extreme examples but the reality is that there are an awful lot of crackpots in the world whose pursuit of their own dangerous vision makes them impossible to communicate rationally with and leads them on to commit horrendous acts of cruelty and brutality and some people (not all of them ignorant) are drawn into these ideologies which is why personally I think they should not be given the legitimacy that an airing at a university would possibly imply."

While I dont think those who promote killing others should be given space to promote their hate it's a very difficult line to draw, who decides who can and cant speak? It can be a short cut to censorship and as we have seen in several universities small pressure groups well organised can push their ideas and stop others having a debate

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"So what you seem to be saying is that universities should invite people of all political colours and creeds to speak in the interests of free speech - would you extend that invitation to members of isis, the kkk, the taliban!? Or do you believe as more sensitive people do, that such an invitation would cause more harm than good? It may sound like I am picking on extreme examples but the reality is that there are an awful lot of crackpots in the world whose pursuit of their own dangerous vision makes them impossible to communicate rationally with and leads them on to commit horrendous acts of cruelty and brutality and some people (not all of them ignorant) are drawn into these ideologies which is why personally I think they should not be given the legitimacy that an airing at a university would possibly imply.

********************

There are an '"awful lot of crackpots" on here as well, Dear....!!

Eva "

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

  

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago

Then it's a question of intent then.

I recall a young lady asking if I played the bongo drums?

Did to she ask with the intention of causing offence or was she asking a genuine question.

I had the good grace to assume the latter. Others may have chosen differently.

The trouble is veiled insults and intent disguised as innocent. Ie. It's not racist homophobic bullying it's work banter.

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

» Add a new message to this topic

0.1093

0