• PrettyFlyForAFatGuyOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    11 months ago

    using a public communication network to send offensive messages and other offences.

    This is often used to prosecute “Offensive” social media posts. I think they got count dankula using something similar to that

    • Arrakis@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      11 months ago

      People often forget that their right to free speech ends where it impacts the rights of others.

      • PrettyFlyForAFatGuyOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        11 months ago

        I don’t think there is a “right not be offended” and i also don’t think there should be. if only for the fact that offense is entirely subjective.

        • Arrakis@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          I didn’t say anything about offense…

          You can’t call someone a racial slur and claim it was free speech, for example.

          Edit

          Is it really that controversial that hate speech isn’t the same as free speech? Really?

          • PrettyFlyForAFatGuyOP
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            11 months ago

            if calling someone a racial slur is not about offense then what is it about?

            • Arrakis@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              11 months ago

              Maybe you should look up the definition of hate speech.

              I’m not saying it’s what happened here, but the idea it’s about “offense” is something worthy of the Daily Mail. The law doesn’t deal with opinion in reality, only headlines.

              • PrettyFlyForAFatGuyOP
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                5
                ·
                11 months ago

                maybe you should look up the definition of free speech.

                Free speech and hate speech laws are not compatible

                • Arrakis@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  11 months ago

                  Yes… That’s exactly what I’ve been saying, your right to free speech ends when it becomes hate speech. I’m not really sure what point you’re trying to make.

                  Re: your edit. Are you trying to say that hate speech should be allowed? I’m genuinely baffled.

                  • PrettyFlyForAFatGuyOP
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    arrow-down
                    3
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    11 months ago

                    if i am not free to speak hate then i do not have free speech

                    your argument can be turned around, your “right” not to be offended ends where it infringes on my right to free speech.

                    What is considered “Hate” speech is essentially a line arbitrarily drawn in the sand

          • PrettyFlyForAFatGuyOP
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            11 months ago

            if you are not free to speak certain things then by definition you do not have free speech.