Hate Crime.

[Lt. Aldo Raine]

4 minutes ago, BobyBrno said:

How does it not?

Well, for one, whistleblowers might find it easier to blow the whistle under an anonymous soudnym 

[Lt. Aldo Raine]

But I'm curious to know what restrictive effect it has

[Zico]

18 minutes ago, BobyBrno said:

Free speech is being able to say whatever you want in public and on social media platforms. 

It's not, or, at least it's being able say what you what you want but understand there are consequences 

You can't just go online and abuse folk and expect to get away with it in the same way you couldn't stand in the street and expect to get away with it 

No problem with the bill in theory, will be in interesting to see how it's applied

[BobyBrno]

3 minutes ago, Zico said:

 it's being able say what you what 

 

Well said. 👍

[mickbrown]

16 minutes ago, BobyBrno said:

Well said. 👍

Is editing other people’s posts to suit your view free speech?😉

Edited April 1, 2024 by mickbrown

[Jol_BWFC]

35 minutes ago, Zico said:

It's not, or, at least it's being able say what you what you want but understand there are consequences 

You can't just go online and abuse folk and expect to get away with it in the same way you couldn't stand in the street and expect to get away with it 

No problem with the bill in theory, will be in interesting to see how it's applied

Indeed, people can’t expect to roll out “free speech” as a defence to everything ever said or written.

For example, if someone wants to call someone else a sex offender / rapist / animal shagger / fistmaster 3000 lover, then be prepared that it could have legal consequences if it’s not true. Generally civil (slander and libel) but it could also be criminal in nature depending on what you say.

You can’t just say “yeah, but free speech means I can say what I like”.

Edited April 1, 2024 by Jol_BWFC

[bolty58]

6 hours ago, BobyBrno said:

Scotland’s controversial new law. 
For or against?

The Hate Crime and Public Order (Scotland) Act 2021 creates a new crime of "stirring up hatred" relating to age, disability, religion, sexual orientation, transgender identity or being intersex.

If everyone contributing to any social media platform was required to declare their true identity, would things improve? 
 

Against. Softcocks upset by name calling. Wouldn't have lasted five minutes in Castle Hill Primary playground.

There's an old adage - "Hard times produce hard men, good times produce soft ones". Never has this been more evident. A shame any future wars will probably be fought on computer monitors. Proper wars remind people of what is truly important.

How long before the Police force is overwhelmed by complaints; many purely vexatious or spurious.

The stupid, stupid cunts.

[Zico]

3 hours ago, BobyBrno said:

Well said. 👍

So you're against it then?

[Cheese]

2 hours ago, bolty58 said:

Against. Softcocks upset by name calling. Wouldn't have lasted five minutes in Castle Hill Primary playground.

There's an old adage - "Hard times produce hard men, good times produce soft ones". Never has this been more evident. A shame any future wars will probably be fought on computer monitors. Proper wars remind people of what is truly important.

How long before the Police force is overwhelmed by complaints; many purely vexatious or spurious.

The stupid, stupid cunts.

Which war did you fight in again?

[FrancisFogarty]

7 hours ago, only1swanny said:

So online, if someone outside Scotland posts something to stir up hatred in Scotland?? 

 

So can we not call them 'sweaties ' now?

[Zico]

27 minutes ago, Cheese said:

Which war did you fight in again?

The Great Culture War of the Early 2020s

[mickbrown]

2 hours ago, Zico said:

The Great Culture War of the Early 2020s

From behind his computer screen from another hemisphere, funnily enough

[mickbrown]

5 hours ago, bolty58 said:

Against. Softcocks upset by name calling. Wouldn't have lasted five minutes in Castle Hill Primary playground.

There's an old adage - "Hard times produce hard men, good times produce soft ones". Never has this been more evident. A shame any future wars will probably be fought on computer monitors. Proper wars remind people of what is truly important.

How long before the Police force is overwhelmed by complaints; many purely vexatious or spurious.

The stupid, stupid cunts.

The hard man defender of free speech (with half the board on ignore you massive soft twat) 😁

[only1swanny]

6 hours ago, bolty58 said:

Against. Softcocks upset by name calling. Wouldn't have lasted five minutes in Castle Hill Primary playground.

There's an old adage - "Hard times produce hard men, good times produce soft ones". Never has this been more evident. A shame any future wars will probably be fought on computer monitors. Proper wars remind people of what is truly important.

How long before the Police force is overwhelmed by complaints; many purely vexatious or spurious.

The stupid, stupid cunts.

to be fair, a lot of Police are already struggling due to the massive amounts of red tape, new laws and the fact that the media are waiting to rip them apart at any given opportunity. 

They're not all bad the but media is portraying it that way atm. 

[BobyBrno]

9 hours ago, mickbrown said:

Is editing other people’s posts to suit your view free speech?😉

He edited mine, I edited his.🤷‍♂️

[Zico]

7 minutes ago, BobyBrno said:

He edited mine, I edited his.🤷‍♂️

No I didn't

Where has this idea come from?

[BobyBrno]

12 minutes ago, Zico said:

No I didn't

Where has this idea come from?

The post before mine. You edited out the part about anonymity which was my main point.

[Lt. Aldo Raine]

24 minutes ago, Zico said:

No I didn't

Where has this idea come from?

He means in your reply his post but he's wording it as if you've edited his actual post

Although, all you've really done is highlight a specific section

[London Wanderer]

11 hours ago, BobyBrno said:

Free speech is being able to say whatever you want in public and on social media platforms. 
 

You can’t honestly believe that’s what free speech is? 
 

Edit: Sorry I highlighted the key bit of your post. It was quite the definition. 

Edited April 2, 2024 by London Wanderer

[DazBob]

12 hours ago, BobyBrno said:

Why not?

Strange that you highlight something, as if to make a point, but then refuse to answer why you did so.

[BobyBrno]

1 minute ago, DazBob said:

Strange that you highlight something, as if to make a point, but then refuse to answer why you did so.

It was plainly obvious what I did. It was a tongue in cheek response to his edit. It’s been done many times before. Not sure what the fuss is about. 🤷‍♂️

[London Wanderer]

 

1 minute ago, BobyBrno said:

It was plainly obvious what I did. It was a tongue in cheek response to his edit. It’s been done many times before. Not sure what the fuss is about. 🤷‍♂️

I wouldn’t say fuss 

Guess it’s that you changed his words, he only highlighted a key bit of yours.

But you’re right, it has been done before, mostly as a joke.

[BobyBrno]

2 minutes ago, London Wanderer said:

 

I wouldn’t say fuss 

Guess it’s that you changed his words, he only highlighted a key bit of yours.

But you’re right, it has been done before, mostly as a joke.

I didn’t change his words. I deleted words before and after a sentence. Just as he deleted words after the first paragraph of mine. Normally to highlight a part of a post, I would put it in bold.

[Lt. Aldo Raine]

This is a very odd thread

[DazBob]

13 minutes ago, BobyBrno said:

It was plainly obvious what I did. It was a tongue in cheek response to his edit. It’s been done many times before. Not sure what the fuss is about. 🤷‍♂️

I have no idea what you're talking about.  Are you suggesting someone is editing your posts?