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.
Alrighty then. We shall agree to disagree. Good thing the law is on the side of sense, and not your fixation on offense (which, again, is nothing to do with it).
Re your edit: if you actually knew what hate speech is defined as in law, you’d know that’s not true.
It seems all the edgy teenagers are out in force today, so I’m outta here! Toodle-ooo!
If you’re not willing to talk about offense then why are you commenting on an article about someone arrested “on suspicion of using a public communication network to send offensive messages”
Because “offensive messages” defined in law is not the same as “being offended”. But like I said, I’m tired of dealing with edgy teenagers today so I’m not going to try and explain to you further, I lack the crayons. Laters.
Connotative meaning and denotative meaning of words are why the language used in laws is so specific. If you knew anything about the law or how it works, you’d know that.
Any more questions you want answered I’d suggest either Google or your teacher.
What has the difference between connotative and denotative meanings go to do with the word “offensive” in “offensive messages”. used in that context “offensive” requires someone to be offended, that is its main meaning… otherwise it has no meaning.
Anyway i thought you were checking out like three messages ago, why are you still here trying (and failing) to guess my age?
maybe you should look up the definition of free speech.
Free speech and hate speech laws are not compatible
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.
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
deleted by creator
Hahahaha
Alrighty then. We shall agree to disagree. Good thing the law is on the side of sense, and not your fixation on offense (which, again, is nothing to do with it).
Re your edit: if you actually knew what hate speech is defined as in law, you’d know that’s not true.
It seems all the edgy teenagers are out in force today, so I’m outta here! Toodle-ooo!
If you’re not willing to talk about offense then why are you commenting on an article about someone arrested “on suspicion of using a public communication network to send offensive messages”
Because “offensive messages” defined in law is not the same as “being offended”. But like I said, I’m tired of dealing with edgy teenagers today so I’m not going to try and explain to you further, I lack the crayons. Laters.
If something is to be considered offensive then it must by definition cause offense to someone. otherwise how do you tell if something is offensive?
Seriously, do you understand words or not?
Connotative meaning and denotative meaning of words are why the language used in laws is so specific. If you knew anything about the law or how it works, you’d know that.
Any more questions you want answered I’d suggest either Google or your teacher.
What has the difference between connotative and denotative meanings go to do with the word “offensive” in “offensive messages”. used in that context “offensive” requires someone to be offended, that is its main meaning… otherwise it has no meaning.
Anyway i thought you were checking out like three messages ago, why are you still here trying (and failing) to guess my age?