Arrowgigantic
Member
Trump's first domestic emergency
Ehhhhhhhh....
Trump's first domestic emergency
I originally heard it was 3 dead, but then all sources were sayingn it was 1. Strange.
If folks like you had their way and we picked and chose which speech was defensible and which wasn't then we'd currently be seeing our president censoring liberal media and jailing people like us. The pendulum always swings back.
Holy shit.
GAF and My Home aren't public spaces.
Europe has plenty of ultra nationalist extremists too and many are rising in popularity.
When I see the rise of groups like the FN and Golden Dawn in Europe, their anti-hate laws don't exactly seem to be doing that great a job either.
There's an uprising of people like this going on across the globe right now.
Why did a helicopter crash ?1 has died from the car crashing into the crowd, 2 officers died in the helicopter crash.
Okay, and if that happens, us wanting Nazis not to have speech rights means jack shit.
If he gets 3-4 figures on the SC, that's happening regardless of what anyone else pushes (see: current presidency). So I'm not sure how that's a good counter argument?
Btw no one is putting us Swedes in jail for protesting racists even though we have very rigid hate speech laws. Fuck your slippery slope coward argument.
Why did a helicopter crash ?
I originally heard it was 3 dead, but then all sources were sayingn it was 1. Strange.
Because with free speech open to all they can't block anyone using the Constitution as a shield. If the Constitution was outlawed to ban hate speech, they could then twist it to ban words from our side.
You're right, we're all suffering way too much over this debate compared to these people being killed in real-time by literal nazis.
Sure, but can you guarantee that eventually a shitheel won't come into power who can find a way to turn those laws to their advantage and use it to suppress legitimate causes? I'm not arguing that hate speech laws can't be done, I'm arguing that they can create an opening if the wrong people get into power.
https://www.facebook.com/fordf/posts/10212921759740919
https://imgur.com/a/ahWgr
I'm having trouble making that an image on mobile. Interesting post sent to me by a friend. This is a former colleague of his who was at the rally recording.
Also had a livestream from when it happened that is apparently very graphic. Haven't seen this stuff elsewhere.
https://www.facebook.com/N2Sreports/videos/1490419907732560/
The moment one of these fuckers pulls out a torch or a weapon they no longer have the right to congregate. Period.
In every reasonable democratic society hate speech is not protected speech. Nazis do not assemble peacefully. Nazism isn't defeated in debate. It cannot be given oxygen. This is so fucking basic I'm shocked many Americans, including the ACLU, do not understand this very basic principle
The moment one of these fuckers pulls out a torch or a weapon they no longer have the right to congregate. Period.
Sure, but can you guarantee that eventually a shitheel won't come into power who can find a way to turn those laws to their advantage and use it to suppress legitimate causes? I'm not arguing that hate speech laws can't be done, I'm arguing that they can create an opening if the wrong people get into power.
Ultra right groups have repeatedly come and gone in Europe for decades, there's no real evidence to suggest they're on the cusp of taking power across the EU barring the occasional upset, like when Le Pen reached the run-off stage in the French pres. vote and the FPO entering govt in Austria in 2000. It seems it's left to Europe in fighting the far right scourge.
Your intentions are noble but woefully naive. I'm all for free speech but I draw the line at Holocaust deniers, racists and fucking Nazis.
Maybe take a step back here. Neither side is pro-nazi. Free speech is a complicated issue where different people come to different conclusions. Save the hate for the nazis.
Btw no one is putting us Swedes in jail for protesting racists even though we have very rigid hate speech laws. Fuck your slippery slope coward argument.
Nah, the problem isn't protecting free speech, the problem is that your country is being run by white supremacy.
You can keep your Free Speech Lite. The First Amendment is clear, and chipping away at it sets a dangerous precedent.
? germany seems to be handling it just fine
I'm not sure a large group of black people with rifles would have it so good
Which is exactly why it makes no sense to give the white supremacists more tools to oppress minorities.
If the wrong people get to power then they can create those laws anyway or brute force themselves to only apply laws to where they want it to be applied. What strict hate laws can do though is stop hate groups from rising in power and putting those people in power.
Genuinely read what you just typed and see if you can spot the contradiction. There's nothing peaceful about nazis or the KKK. Holy fuck!!! People straight up died today. 😡😡😡This most certainly should have been shut down from the get go. The intent was clear when they're out there in full on riot gear.
But there have been numerous peaceful Nazi and KKK rallies in the past and they should be allowed.
This isn't Germany.
It's very much possible to ban hate speech and retain freedom, but only so long as the people in charge are decent and don't want to abuse or corrupt those laws. It can be done, but there's always the risk because ultimately a human will always be the one making the call and if that human is evil...
This isn't Germany.
Of course, but that doesn't mean you can't make it easier for them.
I'm also not convinced hate speech laws can stop hate groups from rising in power, especially not in the modern internet era where it's easier than ever to communicate anonymously.
If you're still under some pretence that the other side can be reasoned with, remember:
They Want You Dead.
You mean like this link?
Banning hate speech against minorities will somehow oppress minorities.
Maybe take a step back here. Neither side is pro-nazi. Free speech is a complicated issue where different people come to different conclusions. Save the hate for the nazis.
Fighting words aren't covered by 1A. Simply classify Nazi/White Supremacist language as fighting words. I mean, they essentially are.You can keep your Free Speech Lite. The First Amendment is clear, and chipping away at it sets a dangerous precedent.
Sure, but can you guarantee that eventually a shitheel won't come into power who can find a way to turn those laws to their advantage and use it to suppress legitimate causes? I'm not arguing that hate speech laws can't be done, I'm arguing that they can create an opening if the wrong people get into power.
You're preaching to the choir. I can't even remember now how many times I've gotten dogpiled in threads on this forum for suggesting that the 1st Amendment needs revising to stop protecting these groups and hate speech in general. The harm that they cause is too longstanding to continue to ignore in my opinion.
Do you even know what Jim Crow is?
Yeah the fucking Nazi rally tipped me off thanks