Slashdot Mirror
Germany Cracks Down On Illegal Speech On Social Media. (smh.com.au)
ArmoredDragon writes: German police have raided 36 homes of people accused of using illegal speech on Facebook and Twitter. Much of it was aimed at political speech. According to the article, "Most of the raids concerned politically motivated right-wing incitement, according to the Federal Criminal Police Office, whose officers conducted home searches and interrogations. But the raids also targeted two people accused of left-wing extremist content, as well as one person accused of making threats or harassment based on someone's sexual orientation."
This comes just as a new law is being debated that can fine social media platforms $53 million for not removing 70% of illegal speech (including political, defamatory, and hateful speech) within 24 hours of it being posted, which Facebook argues will make it obligatory for them to delete posts and ban users for speech that isn't clearly illegal.
This comes just as a new law is being debated that can fine social media platforms $53 million for not removing 70% of illegal speech (including political, defamatory, and hateful speech) within 24 hours of it being posted, which Facebook argues will make it obligatory for them to delete posts and ban users for speech that isn't clearly illegal.
You're doing it wrong!
With Thunderous Applause.
There should be no such thing as illegal speech.
"Ungewöhnliche Zeiten erfordern ungewöhnliche Maßnahmen" ...
The Fourth Reich will employ "Thought Police".
Threats aren't protected speech. Directly inciting riots and violence isn't protected speech, referring to someone actually trying to organize violent acts. However, a lot of this seems like censorship, for the purpose of suppressing some ridiculous opinions and political views. While those views might be repugnant, it is still censorship, and should not be tolerated. The state cannot be trusted to determine which political views are acceptable and which are not.
Authoritarian governments to the extreme since 1933.
Germany cracking down on Free Speech.
Nice to see their police state mentality still survives.
governments are scared of the internet... they are trying to slowly kill it
Social engineering + censorship. Global Socialism.
Thankfully, here in the US the Supreme Court unanimously disagrees with this "hate speech" BS. Letting governments censor any sort of political speech is just a bad idea. https://www.washingtonpost.com...
When you can't form a cohesive argument to counter content or speech you don't like.
I'm not saying "work within the system" the system is corrupt and does not represent it's people, any attempt to work with the system just creates more prisoners. The people have a duty to replace their government with a government that represents them.
The preceding post was not a Slashvertisement.
We narrowly avoided this crap in the last election, because one of the candidates was hell-bent to follow European models.
they are domesticating western culture by controlling speech
Germany must be abolished: it is another failed state left in the wake of the U.S. Playing world police.
This one has taken a little longer to implode than the others but the result is the same.
Time to line 'em up and hand out the shovels.
Of Governments doing whatever the hell they want to do the people and telling the people to stfu. You say Trump is the dictator, maybe you should look in the mirror first.
Coming soon to a country near you with all the snowflakes who will want legally mandated safe spaces.
1) Count how many posts are made each day.
2) "Arrange" for 2.5 as many illegal posts to be made.
3) Remove all the posts from step 2.
4) P- You know.
Disclaimer: Evolution comes with NO WARRANTY, except for the IMPLIED WARRANTY of FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
The need to go 1917 on their government.
Shouldn't this be under the censorship icon?
Too late; the government has taken the guns, taken the spirit, taken the freedom. Germany is a nation of children now, too dependent on the system to upset it. The duty of the German people is now to do as their masters command. Suggest otherwise... see headline.
Assresting [sic] people for speech you don't like is something Hitler would do.
So is metabolizing oxygen. Well, when he was alive. So is drinking water and eating food.
I don't agree with what is going on with regards to curtailing speech, but comparing everything to Hitler and Nazis is just stupid.
Eisenhower also got the idea for the interstate highway system from Hitler's Autobahn. Should we also remove those? How about jet engines and rockets?
So what your saying is the German people should just line up single file for the ovens.
white populist speech threatens multiculti/immigration, and that scares corp/gov/media
That's fucked up!
"Our free society must not allow a climate of fear, threat, criminal violence and violence either on the street or on the internet."
So we'll kick in your door if you make an internet post we don't like.
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
Absolute free speech is a great idea... until you add human emotion to the equation.
That's when it becomes an EVEN BETTER idea. Because otherwise, high emotions get in the way of what people can say.
It's when you stop letting people talking that they go on to more... vigorous activity.
There must be basic limitations on things such as death threats.
Speaking as someone who has had creepy death threats sent to them before, I would far rather someone vocalize and allow me to categorize the threat, rather than simply having them show up to kill me unwarned...
You do realize that meaningful death threats are illegal, right? That's the whole point of free speech; you are free to say anything but NOT free of consequences from what you say.
I'm just siding with common sense.
"Common Sense" in this case of course, meaning "Fascist Mob Rule" (and yes you are being the very definition of a fascist "a tendency toward or actual exercise of strong autocratic or dictatorial control").
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
It is, actually, a horrible example. Because the Supreme Court Justice, who used the analogy to reaffirm a lower court's conviction of a man, who advocated against draft, regretted the decision later in his life. And, obviously, Americans do not think, advocating against a war is a crime.
Maybe, the differences in our history are due to us having the First Amendment? That as long as someone limits himself to words, we usually let them be; and any would-be dictator would need to pass a major — indeed unpassable — hurdle to subdue the country's media?
Are they a free nation, if they can't express certain thoughts as words (not deeds)?
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
Facebook should just delete any post made by any politician advocating censorship.
If Facebook and other social media companies dont like these new laws they should shut down all their German operations and have no employees, no servers, no infrastructure and no business presence in Germany and then say "we no longer have a presence in Germany therefore German law doesn't apply to us"
Auntie Angie is bringing back the Stasi, but what Germans really seem to want is some kind of a Wall!
So people aren't supposed to have opinions anymore?
It's nice to see the return of Drittes Reich.
Heil Merkel.
The thing is the government itself if full of petty cowards. You ever seen what happens to a petty coward when they're legitimately threatened or challenged? Petty cowards show courage when they're walking around with a clipboard citing laws and regulations and they have you over a barrel with protocol. When protocol is gone and you're enacting the laws of nature they crack - quickly. If the people wanted an old fashioned rabble - the modern equivalent of showing up with pitchforks and torches, maybe a tar and feathering or two would take care of it.
I know here in the U.S. our law enforcement, especially the sheriffs departments, being decentralized and pretty much independent in each case were things as bad here as they are there would probably in many counties stand with the people. So would many of our veterans, which is just as good if not better in many cases.
Unfortunately I'm afraid your description of Germany is probably what's accurate, the Germans are famous for keeping excellent records and making sure their systems work smoothly meaning it's unlikely anyone in the power structure would side with the people and the people are too whipped into believing delegated power is supreme.
I constantly preach to stay off the dole, be responsible for yourself, vote against ANY regulation or increase in authority for government and take care of your own - however you define that - and encourage them to do the same. It's the people I know and other like them that are keeping things in check and prevented us from going over the edge like Germany has. We're dangerously close to that edge, most metropolitan areas in the U.S. have already slipped over and are being held back from actually falling by more rural areas.
The preceding post was not a Slashvertisement.
It's free speech if you are a fucking hollywood flavoured libtard. (http://edition.cnn.com/2017/06/23/opinions/johnny-depp-crude-remark-cevallos/index.html). Or if you are a fucking goat fucker muslim. (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3240295/Imam-tells-Muslim-migrants-breed-children-Europeans-conquer-countries-vows-trample-underfoot-Allah-willing.html). It's free speech if you are an ugly bat-shit crazy feminist. (https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/5gkkj5/is-reducing-the-male-population-by-90-percent-the-solution-to-all-our-problems).
It's hate speech if you are a sane white male of clear european descent worried about the future of your own race.
This post is protected by free speech. If you don't agree you are a Nazi (tm).
Genocide is nothing new. It's roots are like most things economic. The Germans needed money to lift their economy despite of the sanctions and fuel a war machine suitable for empire building. The Jews happen to have enough money for that and being an insular people were easy enough to put to the sword for the purpose of taking their wealth.
Take any awful thing that's been done in history and it's always about money when all's said and done. If you want to stop Genocide, oppression and everything else that's bad it's simple really: take care of your poor, don't screw them over. Otherwise somebody's gonna come along and mobilize them.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
The idea is more individual liberty, not oppressive tyranny with millions of their own people murdered and starved to death. But hey, can I interest you in a free helicopter ride?
I agree but the individual risks are enourmous.
The world should recognize the genocides of the European peoples, the lack of democracy and demand and help pus through change and repatriations.
Germany is now stuck with very powerful laws that should have only been used to protect democracy from communists or fascists taking over.
Laws that should have protected from communist and fascist parties, their meetings, fund raising and publishing.
Such laws are now been used to stop any and all comments on the policies of todays German political policy.
Report on local issues, how local services are been used, what governments are doing, the results of illegal immigration and risk a police interview.
Social media hands over the ip so the brand can keep selling in Germany.
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
"Illegal speech" is only one tiny step away from "illegal thought". You can stuff these laws in your keester.
The next step is to make radial right/left wing thoughts illegal too.
Everyone has to confirm to the thoughts favoured by the majority.
Germans have been reporting on each other since the 1920's.
Before WW2, during WW2.
After WW2 the Stasi had files on a lot of people. In the West the groups like the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... ensured the new West German democracy stayed really safe.
Germany kept its powerful laws and political comments start interviews and investigations.
People report comments. Social media report people. Freedom after speech is a legal matter.
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
Merkel only seeks to silence opposition under the banner of political correctness.
Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
It's not like they have a history of overreacting. :D
But not enough. People must understand that they must think, speak and act as the Government tells them to. There cannot be any room for dissension. Malcontents and dissenters must be silenced and punished. If the great dream of one Europe, united from the Atlantic to the Urals, who will decide alone over the destinies of the world, as the great De Gaulle said, all Europeans must think one thing, speak one think and do one think. Those who disagree are Nazis and must be hunted down like vermin and killed. End of debate. Those who do not agree with me are breaking the law.
Try making a photo like painted picture of child porn : in many state this is forbidden and is taken akin to spreading illegal child porn. Then there is the classical threat to president, or yelling threats in a crowd to induce panic.
The foundational cornerstone of American democracy are the first and second amendments to the U.S. Constitution. The guarantee against government interference of free speech and the right of citizens to arm themselves. Everything else, all the other rights and amendments laid out in that document flow from and depend on the first two.
If you look at Europe today, that is exactly what European "democracies" lack, real U.S. strength 1st and 2nd amendments. What they lack are real free speech rights and the ability to defend themselves from their governments or the thug migrants that rape, murder and steal en masse in Europe. This is why they don't really have democracy in Europe. The EU is made up of a bunch of watered down, pseudo-democracies essentially run by Merkel via Brussels. Granted governments have tanks, etc, but there's no question that intimidating an armed people is a hella lot harder than an unarmed people.
What needs to happen is for a U.S. citizen(s) to set up a social media / discussion board hosted in the U.S. for the sole purpose of giving the people of Europe actual free speech. Give them the ability to say political things that their governments or Merkel doesn't like, without repercussion. The site/app, having no actual presence in Europe and based in the U.S., would be immune from any European country trying to obtain user info / ip addresses. People could use whatever user name they want and not worry about Germany, England or Sweden forcing the host site to give up any info, "we are Americans, piss off".
It might be blacklisted in Europe, there are ways around that. I realize that there is Tor, etc but that is too hard for most end users right now. And there are various U.S. based sites that could sort of do this now, but it really needs to be focused on Europe and advertise itself as a site for repressed Europeans to enjoy U.S. strength free speech. If they don't have the ability to speak freely, they have no hope.
Political Correctness is fascism pretending to be Manners. -- George Carlin
Unless you can provide proof that your definitions of free speech (and remember, since the German government is not the US federal government, exactly like the state government is not the federal government, your constitution allows them to do this) that trump their version of free speech (which you can see in the EU Declaration of Human Rights, which most of these RWNJ retards are dead set against anyway, making their complaints about their rights moot), your can not say it's wrong, just that you don't agree with it.
Go ahead, don't agree with it.
The people have a duty to replace their government with a government that represents them.
What makes you think the government doesn't represent them?
SJW n. One who posts facts.
k.
Because they don't. Gun control is not telling YOU you can't sit at home oiling your blue penis replacement every night unless you are a risk to have a gun due to, for example, mental instability.
Are you admitting that you should not have a gun?
Nor do they want you to stop smoking. Just stop making others have to breathe your smoke, they didn't choose it, you chose for them. You should be against that too: they never buy smokes back, but they do get the "benefit" of secondhand smoking.
Nor do they tell you not to drink sugary soda. They just tell businesses trying to make you buy their stuff in a controlled area (you can't take your own soda into a cinema) what they can sell you outside your home for consumption in their premises.
Neither do they make any claim about fatty meat.
So precisely zero claims actually exist and are all fabrications, indicating the mental instability that make you unsafe to have a firearm that kills easily.
Now so much for all the thought-safe kitty & dancing babies videos. Yawn...
Such laws are now been used to stop any and all comments on the policies of todays German political policy.
That is wrong. The government has no legal way to suppress your free speech.
Report on local issues, how local services are been used, what governments are doing, the results of illegal immigration and risk a police interview.
That is wrong. See above.
You are an idiot.
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
Unlike the USA, Germany has a (somewhat) working democracy.
So what is your point? The AC you answered to is an idiot.
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
And during WWII america found concentration camps a super good idea and put all american citizens of Japanese ancestry they could get their hands on into camps. Many died as health care was (nearly) non existing.
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
Very, very true...
Good idea!
Please, cite the source(s) you found, that support this statement.
You can't. Because you are wrong — fantastically, spectacularly wrong. "Fascism" means just this:
See? Not a mention of "health care". But if we search the more elaborate Wikipedia article, we'll find, that it was the Fascists, who were worrying about "health of the nation". Hitler — the most famous among Fascists — even put that on his Programme
And, upon coming to power, followed up on that by expanding Bismark's "Reich Insurance Act" to cover all Germans at the government's expense (single-payer much?). It sucked — because folks (volks) started going to a doctor for the slightest of reasons, greatly increasing their workloads and lines. (And, of course, there were "Death Panels".)
Whether "Universal" — a dog-whistle for government-provided — health care is a good thing or not, it is not Fascist to be against it. Quite the opposite, indeed.
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
Posting this anonymously, since as a German this might technically not legal for me to say: Limiting speech in the constitution was a mistake.
After the horrors of the Nazi regime, people recognized that Germans were susceptible to certain ideologies, and so to prevent them from cropping up again, key points of Nazi rhetoric were banned outright. This was a mistake even at that time, because it drove Nazis underground where they were well-protected instead of having them exposed for all to see. Now, years later, "Germany" as a concept is fighting against the racist and totalitarian undercurrents. I'd rather know that my neighbor is a straight-up Nazi at heart, everybody would be better off knowing who everybody else really is.
Now years later, we're radically expanding those initial restrictions on free speech beyond their originally intended purpose. The reason why the public is still cheering while jackboots are ransacking people's houses is that the people being raided are reprehensible. While this is easy to sympathize with on an emotional level right now, it's clearly a very bad sign in any democracy when people are being loaded into unmarked vans simply because they said something.
Shouting "fire" in a crowded theatre is a popular example that is incorrectly understood. What makes this illegal, by any standard and independent of any free speech laws, is the intent and effect behind it. The means by which you caused a mass panic are secondary to the act of actually causing a mass panic, which by itself is already illegal.
The most important lessons about the dictatorship years is now, and maybe always was, lost on Germans and many other nations. We're somehow still okay with the basic methods of authoritarianism, we just superficially reject some of beliefs it came with at the time.
Re The government has no legal way to .....
Germany to pour cash into mass surveillance (08.09.2016)
http://www.dw.com/en/germany-t...
"particularly decrypting what the report calls "non-standardized telecommunications," meaning widely-used messaging services"
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
Cretins who seek to defame free speech use false examples like 'shouting fire in a crowded theatre'. However the law has always drawn a distinction between free speech, and 'speech' that is intened to be an immediate part of a continuum of illegal ACTION.
So one robber telling another robber to shoot a cop is never ever ever seen as part of a 'free speech' equation. If your 'speech' is a direct command or conspiracy plot specifically intended to directly drive obviously illegal activity, it never even enters the domain of speech considered as 'free speech'.
So the girl who told the boy to kill himslef was not tried for the words, but the belief that the words would certainly cause the boy to do so when he otherwise would not. And as such this would be no different from a doctor using his 'position' to 'persuade' a patient to unplug him/herself from a life-supprt machine for no other reason than the doctor wanted to see the patient die. No 'free speech' issue involved.
Where the water is muddied- so to speak- is by devious anti-free-speech advocates who try to extend the definition of 'criminal' speech to speech that may have nebulous down-the-road 'criminal' 'consequences'. So, for instance. pointing out that the Torah/Old Testament was used to justify slavery because it states that dark-skinned Humans are 'lesser' becomes 'criminal' speech because it might make people prone to think judaism is fundamentally a negative influence on Humanity. Likewise pointing out that islam is effectively Judaism re-skinned.
The slippery slope- always encouraged by 'friends of Israel'- always leads to the death of free speech. This is why the American approach- unique on the planet- and one of the few reasons to admire America- is that free speech is an absolute concept to be always protected from inevitable death from a thousand cuts.
America understands speech is not passive action- so when a person does use words in the way we understand actions, the words are treated as actions- and thus in criminal cases easily separated from free speech. So a direct command like "lock that door" is never 'free speech' even if the command is harmless. It's verbal nature doesn't matter. And then if the command is criminal in intent, arguments about 'free speech' never come into it.
Most hate speech never has the form of an illegal command, so remains fully legal in the USA- as it should be. And the correct societal response to hate speech should be other speech designed to counter it.
You fail to explain what that has to do with the topic.
Instead of "buying data" from the NSA we do our own "recordings".
IMHO a good thing.
Perhaps you should read and grasp what "mass surveillance" actually is and how it works.
And then: please stand up and fight it in your country first. When you are successful we are all ears here to know how you do it and what you have achieved.
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
You're afraid to post that without fear of repercussion?
Go get a gun and fight back, you pussy. Be a man and take your country back.
Absolutely false claim that the Freedom of Speech is to protect against Governments! You simply have no clue what you are talking about! Read Locke, who predates the US Constitution which embodied Free Speech. How about Luther who predated Locke by about a century. Read Plato who predated Luther by a couple thousand years. The point of Free Speech is to be able to express ideas and thoughts that people may dislike.
Government is a single aspect, but any power structure can and does limit speech to maintain and extend power. Be it the Catholic Church of old, Islamic Religion today, or any Government that ever existed. In fact, Universities were also notorious for demonizing people who had different ideas. You may in fact remember something in history regarding that exact topic. Universities today (yes, right now) demonize speech on Political views that don't match the Administration's. Not to be outdone by the Politicians, they also demonize science in areas that they can relate to politics, like Biology and Climate.
Free Speech is UNIVERSAL! As should be accountability for your words.
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
... unless you donate today to the Trump 2020 re-election campaign. Let's defeat the mental disease that is liberalism once and for all!
I disagree, the people have a right to say what they want, the rest of us have the right to take no notice.
It is time to make a choice.
Either be European companies, and give up American notions of freedom.
Or be an American company, and pay American taxes.
This hybrid attempt to dodge taxes while complaining about restrictive regulations is just going to fail.
I would argue any time you can get arrested for expressing an opinion or belief you absolutely do not have democracy.
Democracy is built on the concept of debate, discussion, and trying to persuade others to your ideas. If you get arrested for attempting to debate, discuss, or persuade you are nowhere near a democracy.
The preceding post was not a Slashvertisement.
Well the fact the people are getting upset about some of their governments actions and if they same something about it they get thrown in jail.
If you're beating on my car with a bat and I ask you to stop and hit me with the bat I would argue you weren't representing my wishes even if I had already paid you to wash my car.
The preceding post was not a Slashvertisement.
Didn't we go through all the book burning about 80 years ago? Oh, but people will say it's "hate" speech they are going after. Yeah, this time, but what about tomorrow? As long as it is speech you don't like, but what happens if they go against something YOU like?
You dont get to change the facts of history buddy.
You're claiming a monopoly on that, yeah?
The redefinition that came afterwards ... the one that labeled the Nazi's as "right wing"
Yup, and we've always been at war with Eastasia ...
The NSDAP, despite it's name (by the time it came to power it was as "Socialist" as the German Democratic Republic was "democratic"), was clearly understood to be a party of the right, at the time. It is true that at it's inception the NSDAP did include Socialistic aspects, as their pre-Hitler era policy reveals. However, by the time Hitler rose to power the party was explicitly both anti-leftists and anti-semetic, in the extreme. Indeed it took most of it's votes from the old arch-conservative DNVP. Even more tellingly, the NSDAP was part of an ever changing, and often bitterly infighting, right-wing coalition united only by their common aim in the first place to undermine Mueller's Grand Coalition, and then post 1930 to keep the SPD, (still then the largest party in the Reichstag) out of power. Thus, aided and abetted by Hindenburg, the governments of minority party leaders came and (except for the last) went at a furious pace, slipping ever rightwards, from Bruening, von Pappen, von Schleicher and finally Hitler. In direct contradistinction to your Orwellian re-writing of history, it was unambiguous at the time that Hitler stood far to the right on the political spectrum.
Mussolini - Rose to power via PSI
While it is true that Mussolini rose to prominence in the PSI, it is a simple falsehood to claim that he rose to political power in it. Quite the opposite, he rose to political power in the PNF (The National Fascist Party), a party explicitly and very visibly opposed with the PSI. It's also true that the ambiguity of where Italian fascism stood on the political spectrum persisted for longer (even for Mussolini himself). It is fair to say, I think, that the PNF did begin as a pro-militarist, but none the less leftist offshoot (it was, for instance, strongly syndicalist). In the event the PNF was taken to the right, not so much by its founders as by a swelling membership of anti-Socialists. It was seen as the party actively taking the Socialists on, and thus attracted anti-Socialists looking for action. Thus when Mussolini attempted to call off the war with the PSI, the membership revolted, forcing Mussolini to relinquish for a short time the leadership of the PNF.
But again, by the time it came to power, as with the NSDAP, it's alignment was obvious. Unlike the luke-warm contemporary leftist, the aim of Socialists at the time was clear: remove the "means of production" from the "bourgeoisie" and hand them over the the "workers" (which is to say those socialists who control the state apparatus ... ahem). Both the NSDAP and the PNF were clearly on the side of industrialists who benefited greatly from their rule. Not only their ideology the, but their actions regarding this central question once in power, mark them out as being anti-left.
As to international appraisal of Italian Fascism at the time, the foreword the Mussolini's English language My Autobiography in the original 1928 edition, by the erstwhile US Ambassador to Italy, Richard Washburn Child, ought to disabuse you regarding your mistaken beliefs as to the political alignment of Fascism.
Better to be despised for too anxious apprehensions, than ruined by too confident a security. --Edmund Burke
What a joke. It's quite obvious to anybody with a brain that this is about silencing political dissent - right wingers being the 'dissenters' at the moment, as anybody who is right wing will know all too well...
"The denial of free speech is the first act of tyranny."
I'm really enjoying the butthurt of the Trumptard snowflakes in this thread. Please, do continue to rage against the idea that anyone anywhere should be held accountable for being a shitposting asshat.
Sheesh! To be really thorough they should add "thought crimes" to the mix. Force everyone to have a brain scan and if they see something suspicious lock 'em up and throw away the key. Heck, why stop there? Test for "future crimes" in fact,, test newborns, and if they're gonna be terrists or other criminal persuasions just hack their tiny heads off! Just *think* of all the money saved in the court and prison system. And if you don't get to test them while they're that young wait till they're toddlers, so they can stand up, and line them up against the wall and execute them military style. THIS is the kind of society you're going to be getting if you keep pushing for your "nanny state"that will fix all your problems. Who was it that said something al;ong the lines of "those who would sacrifice liberty and human rights for a little bit of protection deserve neither". MAybe somebody here knows the correct quote...
I would argue any time you can get arrested for expressing an opinion or belief you absolutely do not have democracy.
You seem not to grasp it.
You don't get arrested for expressing a believe or an opinion, facepalm.
If you get arrested for attempting to debate, discuss, or persuade you are nowhere near a democracy.
How can you be so dumb that you believe you can get arrested for "debate, discuss, or persuade"????
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
Give us a break!
WTF?!?!?!
We are seeing global governments migrate towards a "1984" "Big Brother" state!
We, the people, need to be sure that this does not happen.
And, we all know that it is corporations that are behind all of this!
Self-importance and self-indulgence is the root of ALL evil.
TOTAL insanity. TOTALITARIAN insanity!
See US Constitution "FIRST AMENDMENT" and note that the US Supreme Court just ruled UNANIMOUSLY against so-called "hate speech" laws.
What if your opinion is considered "Hate Speech" by those that have power? It doesn't matter what they declare hate speech or what your opinion is, if you go to jail for it it's shut down.
Looks like getting arrested for expressing your beliefs in Germany is quite common, especially if it's about migrants or the holocaust.
The preceding post was not a Slashvertisement.
What if your opinion is considered "Hate Speech" by those that have power?
Those "who have power" don't declare what is hate speech. A Judge does.
Looks like getting arrested for expressing your beliefs in Germany is quite common, especially if it's about migrants or the holocaust.
Erm, are you kidding me? Did you read any of the links your post gave?
In Germany on average one person per year gets arrested for "hate speech". Probably less. And those persons have good luck that they got not beaten up or worth by the mob first.
You are an idiot.
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
Our political system is full of neocons and neoliberals. Progressives haven't been up to bat as a political power in this country since WWII.
1. You're holding all libs accountable to something one of them said about gay men? 2. Are there any handicapped people in this thread? Was I addressing them? If the answer to both of these was "yes" you'd have a point, otherwise it's just fake outrage.
Well the fact the people are getting upset about some of their governments actions and if they same something about it they get thrown in jail. ... which is precisely not what is happening in Germany. So what on earth is your point?
SJW n. One who posts facts.
Explain why ordinary Germans cannot criticize her for fear of being smeared with the "hate crime" law, even if you're assaulted by someone in a "sexual emergency"?
Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.