Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
baltec1
41
|
Posted - 2011.09.18 07:14:00 -
[31] - Quote
Sidus Isaacs wrote:
Sure about that? ;)
We dont block a semi religious building because of terrorist attacks. |
Jada Maroo
Mysterium Astrometrics BRABODEN
156
|
Posted - 2011.09.18 07:44:00 -
[32] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Sidus Isaacs wrote:
Sure about that? ;)
We dont block a semi religious building because of terrorist attacks.
You do arrest people for internet trolling, have draconian libel laws, have no right to a modern means of self defense, and live in the world's poster child for a surveillance socieity.
And the state hasn't blocked the 911 Victory Mosque. Quite the opposite, much to the disgust of many concerned citizens who have rightfully protested, and construction workers don't want to build it.
But hey, I know the Brits are eager to hand their country over and build as many mosques as possible. More power to you - have fun with that.
Lemme know how it's going for you in 20-30 years. |
baltec1
41
|
Posted - 2011.09.18 07:56:00 -
[33] - Quote
Jada Maroo wrote:baltec1 wrote:Sidus Isaacs wrote:
Sure about that? ;)
We dont block a semi religious building because of terrorist attacks. You do arrest people for internet trolling, have draconian libel laws, have no right to a modern means of self defense, and live in the world's poster child for a surveillance socieity. And the state hasn't blocked the 911 Victory Mosque. Quite the opposite, much to the disgust of many concerned citizens who have rightfully protested, and construction workers don't want to build it. But hey, I know the Brits are eager to hand their country over and build as many mosques as possible. More power to you - have fun with that. Lemme know how it's going for you in 20-30 years.
Acctually we do have the right of self defence, we just dont need guns to do it. As for CCTV, nothing wrong with itunless you are breaking the law.
Also, I do laugh at the states that are trying to ban teaching evolution in classrooms |
Pr1ncess Alia
Perkone Caldari State
7
|
Posted - 2011.09.18 08:53:00 -
[34] - Quote
VKhaun Vex wrote: Bitter with the sweet is a ridiculous analogy. The law is complicated for exactly this reason, to become specific when it needs to be. It's purely your choice to link the two together, and nothing stops a law from separating them or giving a judge the tools to do so.
The way it works here is by leaving the law open to the judge to decide if intent was malicious. Specifically, an attempt to harm people (Criminal) rather than an attempt to exercise their first amendment rights which resulted in people being distressed by what they had to say (Not criminal.). Your arguments assume the latter and circumvent the system you think you're defending.
You're doing your sleight of keyboard stuff again. My opinion was regarding the decision not the law as I stated above. I'll draw this thought out all the way, since I guess I need the disclaimer.
I disagree with the judge's decision that they were purely speaking on a political subject which is protected. I feel their protests are organized and carried out with the intent to cause harm. The locations they choose, language and conduct they use... it doesn't make sense in the context of political motivation, it's clearly someone trying to berate someone else.
People shouldn' t be free to harm others by hiding behind anything, especially not the constitution and I feel that's what they're letting these guys do.
I'm going to do my best here with what you've dealt.
-I'm not sure you understand what an analogy is.
-laws are made more specific when the need arises. however they can never run counter to the founding documents with provide them their authority. No Judges actions can either. "Giving them the tools" to do so would be that circumventing you thought you identified.
-sleight of keyboard? Is this your automatic reaction when you run into a mental wall? Don't attempt to understand the logic, just think of it as a magic act?
-what is this disclaimer I don't even
-no they shouldn't. that's why one persons rights end exactly where another persons begin. No one is hiding behind the constitution, but we are careful we don't trample over it when we go to get the 'bad guys'.
baltec1 wrote:Acctually we do have the right of self defence, we just dont need guns to do it. As for CCTV, nothing wrong with itunless you are breaking the law. Also, I do laugh at the states that are trying to ban teaching evolution in classrooms
3 things
-do people that shouldn't have guns in your country have them? if so, you are severely hampered from defending yourself against them. No matter how strong your kung fu or cricket bat is.
-If your innocent you have nothing to fear? Holy poo-poo if you think this is a smart statement there is no hope for you.
-No one is actually going to ban teaching evolution, it's just the rantings of a very stupid but very vocal minority. These ridiculous topics are only entertained by those who make the laws because those corrupt rotten SOBs love when their constituents occupy their time with distractions. If these morons got lathered up about making witchcraft illegal you'd find a Republican politician that would smile make that his platform. All that aside, please do continue laughing at them, the rest of us do!
Jada Maroo wrote: You do arrest people for internet trolling, have draconian libel laws, have no right to a modern means of self defense, and live in the world's poster child for a surveillance socieity.
And the state hasn't blocked the 911 Victory Mosque. Quite the opposite, much to the disgust of many concerned citizens who have rightfully protested, and construction workers don't want to build it.
But hey, I know the Brits are eager to hand their country over and build as many mosques as possible. More power to you - have fun with that.
Lemme know how it's going for you in 20-30 years.
So wait, first you taunt their principles of freedom, then you make a mockery of ours?
Pro tip: the mooselims aren't out to get you. An organization built by people we used as cannon fodder against the Russians and then turned our backs on in the 70's are. The only people that think we are in a religious war are idiots and people (consciously or unconsciously) itching for a religious war.
|
Jada Maroo
Mysterium Astrometrics BRABODEN
156
|
Posted - 2011.09.18 09:35:00 -
[35] - Quote
Pr1ncess Alia wrote:
So wait, first you taunt their principles of freedom, then you make a mockery of ours?
Criticizing that mosque's construction isn't making a mockery of freedom, it is the act of exercising it. They still have the right to build it. But they don't have the right to build it absent scrutiny and protest.
If they can't handle that, then maybe they should build it in Europe where self preservation is frowned upon and offending people is the greatest crime against humanity (unless you're a Muslim or some other protected class offending people). |
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
4
|
Posted - 2011.09.18 09:46:00 -
[36] - Quote
A common error that I can speak for in the USA regarding the "right to free speech" is that people often forget that everybody posses an equal right to ignore whatever is being said.
It only becomes dangerous when ignorance is applied to democracy, thus weaponizing it. And that's why people will get worked up over things like evolution and other non-issues while the banksters continue to rob the world blind.
|
Pr1ncess Alia
Perkone Caldari State
7
|
Posted - 2011.09.18 09:59:00 -
[37] - Quote
Jada Maroo wrote:Pr1ncess Alia wrote:
So wait, first you taunt their principles of freedom, then you make a mockery of ours?
Criticizing that mosque's construction isn't making a mockery of freedom, it is the act of exercising it. They still have the right to build it. But they don't have the right to build it absent scrutiny and protest. If they can't handle that, then maybe they should build it in Europe where self preservation is frowned upon and offending people is the greatest crime against humanity (unless you're a Muslim or some other protected class offending people).
Not what I was talking about, I should have been more clear. I agree people had a right to protest it. Workers had a right to not participate in the construction. But do you recognize that for freedom to be freedom, it goes both ways?
Jada Maroo wrote:But hey, I know the Brits are eager to hand their country over and build as many mosques as possible. More power to you - have fun with that.
Lemme know how it's going for you in 20-30 years.
It was that you lauded the freedoms of the people when the outcome is that a building isn't built, but then make a mockery of that principle when the outcome is that a building IS built. You seem to come to two different conclusions when they are really two sides of the same coin. That somehow when the outcome isn't anti-Muslim that it's wrong and they will live to regret it. I would label that somewhere between hypocritical and cognitive dissonance. |
SpaceSquirrels
Scordite Excavating Xenaphobe
2
|
Posted - 2011.09.18 14:32:00 -
[38] - Quote
With the westboro thing many states made laws so they have to protest a certain distance away instead of right up in their faces like before. ****** up thing about that case though was westboro counter sued the father, and won, and I believe the guy owes them money now...
Really one just needs to not give them attention. Protests only work when someone pays attention! Stop feeding them!
But thinking about it really trolling like this guy was doing is just a form of harassment/stalking. It just so happens its in a digital form.
Lesson from this is....dont be a jackass.
|
Dray
Euphoria Released HYDRA RELOADED
2
|
Posted - 2011.09.18 16:02:00 -
[39] - Quote
Is it too harsh? I don't know but if it was any of mine that suffered it I'd be happy to see him as a prison shower princess for 18 months.
Either way the first rule of making a c**t of yourself is not to get caught, he got caught.
|
Sidus Isaacs
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
5
|
Posted - 2011.09.18 16:34:00 -
[40] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Sidus Isaacs wrote:
Sure about that? ;)
We dont block a semi religious building because of terrorist attacks.
I do not think we have doen aything like that. |
|
Shmuel Astucius
Ramdon Industries corporation
0
|
Posted - 2011.09.18 17:07:00 -
[41] - Quote
slippery slope, but I don't agree with what he did. It's a shame that people can do these things and not feel any sort of remorse or common decency. Our society influenced this person to do these actions. I don't believe a custodial sentence is the key here, he needs to change from the inside out not the outside in. In times gone by people people would not of even thought about doing this but with the collapse of social morals on all fronts get used to this becoming the norm or rather get prepared for worse to come. |
SpaceSquirrels
Scordite Excavating Xenaphobe
3
|
Posted - 2011.09.18 18:05:00 -
[42] - Quote
^ Lol what are you talking about dude? Decline in morals? (I never really bought the "we're worse now than before." argument Look at history rather cylindrical I would say. ) People have harassed others throughout time. The only difference now is an added medium, and that medium has anonymity to it. Thus making it more apt for this kind of behavior.
I suppose a theory could be. "Did the internet create more assholes? Or does it just give us a means to be said *******?" |
VKhaun Vex
Viziam Amarr Empire
3
|
Posted - 2011.09.18 19:09:00 -
[43] - Quote
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:A common error that I can speak for in the USA regarding the "right to free speech" is that people often forget that everybody posses an equal right to ignore whatever is being said.
Logically backwards, and patently false. How would any of these topics even come up if others could just 'not listen'? Protests wouldn't work in the first place, much less be able to reach the point of this conversation. Harassment would be moot and no laws would be needed. Vandalism to write messages on things wouldn't happen because people would just 'ignore' their damage.
I'm sure if the WBC showed up at a family funeral with your kids there, you'd just tell them to walk around the nice people screaming at them because they're fags. Your kids start crying so you just tell them to 'ignore' the angry women chanting that they're going to hell and their dead relatives are being burned alive over and over while waiting for them.
If you reduced speech to only be allowed when others could 'not listen' this would be the most controlling country in the world, where almost nothing would ever be allowed to be expressed.
No. Sorry. You once again pop into the thread to make a statement that might sound okay at first, but goes no where and makes no sense in the context of the real world, like a comedian dropping one liners that aren't funny. |
Pr1ncess Alia
Perkone Caldari State
11
|
Posted - 2011.09.19 01:52:00 -
[44] - Quote
VKhaun Vex wrote:Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:A common error that I can speak for in the USA regarding the "right to free speech" is that people often forget that everybody posses an equal right to ignore whatever is being said. Logically backwards, and patently false. How would any of these topics even come up if others could just 'not listen'? Protests wouldn't work in the first place, much less be able to reach the point of this conversation. Harassment would be moot and no laws would be needed. Vandalism to write messages on things wouldn't happen because people would just 'ignore' their damage. I'm sure if the WBC showed up at a family funeral with your kids there, you'd just tell them to walk around the nice people screaming at them because they're fags. Your kids start crying so you just tell them to 'ignore' the angry women chanting that they're going to hell and their dead relatives are being burned alive over and over while waiting for them. If you reduced speech to only be allowed when others could 'not listen' this would be the most controlling country in the world, where almost nothing would ever be allowed to be expressed. No. Sorry. You once again pop into the thread to make a statement that might sound okay at first, but goes no where and makes no sense in the context of the real world, like a comedian dropping one liners that aren't funny.
Herzog is correct on this one.
The very concept of harassment is that it removes any reasonable ability for you to ignore what would otherwise be the free speech of another person.
This is the very reason the WBC is still doing what it's doing and not rotting in a jail somewhere. Again, as I said earlier, they have a right to protest the funerals, but not to outright disrupt said funerals. |
VKhaun Vex
Viziam Amarr Empire
3
|
Posted - 2011.09.19 02:11:00 -
[45] - Quote
Pr1ncess Alia wrote: Herzog is correct on this one.
The very concept of harassment is that it removes any reasonable ability for you to ignore what would otherwise be the free speech of another person.
That's not what he said... he doesn't even think the topic poster should have been sent to jail. You and I seem to differ on where the line is, but it seems he thinks there is no line at all and anyone can say anything to anyone regardless of what harm it causes.
At least that's how I read it, I won't put words in his mouth if that's not what he meant I'm sure he'll clear it up. |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
206
|
Posted - 2011.09.19 07:59:00 -
[46] - Quote
Jada Maroo wrote:baltec1 wrote:Sidus Isaacs wrote:
Sure about that? ;)
We dont block a semi religious building because of terrorist attacks. You do arrest people for internet trolling...
This has happened in the US as well. Last year, IIRC.
Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
baltec1
51
|
Posted - 2011.09.19 08:28:00 -
[47] - Quote
Pr1ncess Alia wrote:
Herzog is correct on this one.
The very concept of harassment is that it removes any reasonable ability for you to ignore what would otherwise be the free speech of another person.
This is the very reason the WBC is still doing what it's doing and not rotting in a jail somewhere. Again, as I said earlier, they have a right to protest the funerals, but not to outright disrupt said funerals.
In the uk we have the right to not be harrased by arsewipes, over here they would have been arrested and fined every single time under the public order act. |
VKhaun Vex
Viziam Amarr Empire
3
|
Posted - 2011.09.19 08:44:00 -
[48] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:In the uk we have the right to not be harrased by arsewipes, over here they would have been arrested and fined every single time under the public order act.
Actually IIRC they didn't even let them enter the U.K. to begin with...
Totalitarian police state: 1 Free speech utopia: 0 |
baltec1
51
|
Posted - 2011.09.19 08:50:00 -
[49] - Quote
VKhaun Vex wrote:
Actually IIRC they didn't even let them enter the U.K. to begin with...
Why would we want to, you can keep them |
VKhaun Vex
Viziam Amarr Empire
3
|
Posted - 2011.09.19 09:05:00 -
[50] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:VKhaun Vex wrote:
Actually IIRC they didn't even let them enter the U.K. to begin with...
Why would we want to, you can keep them
I like cool weather, tough laws, and the sound of rain.
London is probably too expensive for me, but I suddenly feel I belong over there.
|
|
Froz3nEcho Sarain
Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire
85
|
Posted - 2011.09.19 14:11:00 -
[51] - Quote
Why is everyone talking about trolling here? Everything this guy has said/done has nothing to do with trolling or freedom of speech for that matter. I am for freedom of speech...to some degree at least. Some things just shouldn't be said because it is just verbal violence which in some cases can be more severe than a punch to the teeth.
But apparently the internet brings up the worst of humanity and another douche-bag thought his life would be less empty by saying and making these horrible things. If I was the father of this poor girl I would have shot him in the head but you can't have everything. This is just plain Darwinism, scum like this are at the bottom of the human ladder and it is just a matter of time until they fall down. ~ When everything fades away, an echo is the only sound that will remain ~ -á-á~ Chaos is a name for any order that produces confusion in our minds ~ |
Sidus Isaacs
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
6
|
Posted - 2011.09.19 14:58:00 -
[52] - Quote
Froz3nEcho Sarain wrote: If I was the father of this poor girl I would have shot him in the head .
How mature of you... |
Froz3nEcho Sarain
Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire
85
|
Posted - 2011.09.19 15:30:00 -
[53] - Quote
Sidus Isaacs wrote:Froz3nEcho Sarain wrote: If I was the father of this poor girl I would have shot him in the head . How mature of you...
Call it freedom of speech like everyone else in this thread. ^^ ~ When everything fades away, an echo is the only sound that will remain ~ -á-á~ Chaos is a name for any order that produces confusion in our minds ~ |
Marwood Ford
Pink Sunshine Inc.
7
|
Posted - 2011.09.20 03:04:00 -
[54] - Quote
I'm entirely happy that the sentencing in this case was appropriate. While "trolling" is the sort of neologism that the media love to cram into a headline, it's a word that doesn't really cover the malicious psychological abuse of a dead girl's family. I'm actually quite shocked, VKhaun, that you can read that story and come to the conclusion that the man didn't "do" anything. |
Mudkest
Adventurers Matari Visionary Coalition
1
|
Posted - 2011.09.20 08:38:00 -
[55] - Quote
Pr1ncess Alia wrote:
Yes and no. I think there is a gray area where we should leave room for people to voice opinions that others may not agree with or want. In the states we have these assholes called the Westboro Baptist Church that like to protest military funerals.
true, but did he only made a comment once on their facebook or w/e he did it, or did he spam post them? there's a difference between leaving a single post saying "I'm glad she's dead"(still tasteless btw) or spamming the page with messages like that. one is voicing an opinion, the other is harrassing.
Off course if he would do this face-to-face or hang banners in the street and such he'd probably get a restraining order but doing that for the internet is almost impossible to enforce(if not completely) |
baltec1
51
|
Posted - 2011.09.20 09:11:00 -
[56] - Quote
Mudkest wrote:
true, but did he only made a comment once on their facebook or w/e he did it, or did he spam post them? there's a difference between leaving a single post saying "I'm glad she's dead"(still tasteless btw) or spamming the page with messages like that. one is voicing an opinion, the other is harrassing.
Off course if he would do this face-to-face or hang banners in the street and such he'd probably get an, hmr, don't go near them again or face jail thing(cant remember the name) but doing something like that for the internet is almost impossible to enforce(if not completely)
Not only did he spam but he also took the time to make a facebook page and several vids he put up on youtube. |
Marwood Ford
Pink Sunshine Inc.
7
|
Posted - 2011.09.20 11:10:00 -
[57] - Quote
Mudkest wrote:true, but did he only made a comment once on their facebook or w/e he did it, or did he spam post them?
Er... you could try reading the article linked in the OP.
|
Bane Necran
49
|
Posted - 2011.09.20 17:52:00 -
[58] - Quote
Jada Maroo wrote:the 911 Victory Mosque.
Isn't that the mosque which is in fact several blocks away from the WTC site, but the media keeps distorting facts to troll you? |
baltec1
51
|
Posted - 2011.09.20 18:44:00 -
[59] - Quote
Bane Necran wrote:Jada Maroo wrote:the 911 Victory Mosque. Isn't that the mosque which is in fact several blocks away from the WTC site, but the media keeps distorting facts to troll you?
Its not even really a mosque. The vast bulk of the building was going to be a community center open to everyone with a prayer room on one of the lower floors. |
Sidus Isaacs
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
6
|
Posted - 2011.09.20 22:15:00 -
[60] - Quote
Froz3nEcho Sarain wrote:Sidus Isaacs wrote:Froz3nEcho Sarain wrote: If I was the father of this poor girl I would have shot him in the head . How mature of you... Call it freedom of speech like everyone else in this thread. ^^
I am all for free speech, but does not mean I have to repect you or what you say in any way :) |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |