Gareth Thomas Documentary – Alfie v Homophobia – T
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In | RSS Feed
 Stirlingsays  11 Aug 17 7.50pm |
   |
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by legaleagle
The President of Uganda has described gays as "disgusting". Robert Mugabe has spoken of gays as: "... no to homosexuality. John and John, no; Maria and Maria, no. They are worse than dogs and pigs. I keep pigs and the male pig knows the female one.” Plainly neither an "incitement to violence" Hard to argue either do not help legitimise and stir up violence against gays in those countries. Same in history.Multiple speeches by Hitler early on using "words are violence" about jews but not any specific "incitement to violence" Those are very extreme examples.But IMHO,its as plain as night follows day that there can be a very meaningful link between "words are violence" and "incitement to violence".Hard to see how it can't be appropriate to try to nip racist or homophobic or similar "words are violence" in the bud. Edited by legaleagle (10 Aug 2017 11.28pm) If your argument is to say that a person can't say that they don't like a group then I massively disagree with you. What Hitler said about Jews did incite..because there were attacks in the early thirties .....today we could do something about it. I'm not aware what he said about Jews in public speeches. However, unlike today there were no voices to criticise back. The laws he passed meant something. The orders given to the brown shirts meant something. You get nutty feminists talking all kinds of sh1t about men all the time....'All men are rapists' for example. They aren't being arrested and frankly I don't support those nuts being arrested either. The idiots talking about killing Trump, should they be in jail? Isn't that incitement to violence? In America they know the difference between a nut talking sh1t and a real threat. I dispute the idea that some nut saying gays are this or gays or that is 'stirring up violence' anymore than saying 'all men are rapists' is stirring up violence against men. Words are not violence. Words are intent. If someone says something that can be argued and proved to be an 'incitement to violence' against a group or individual then if its reasonable then I'm fully in support of it. However, your interpretation is something I would happy fight against. You views are the step into what Orwell warned against. Edited by Stirlingsays (11 Aug 2017 8.03pm)
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
 Alert a moderator to this post |
  |
| Stirlingsays 11 Aug 17 8.00pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Kermit8
Using words to threaten to kill someone and meaning it 100% is non-physical but still violence. Why do you think Johnny Adair got the hell out of Belfast? Words are intent Kermit. They are not violence....they can threaten the physical or incite it against you. If you threaten physical harm to someone the law has means to protect you...or means to for a very very long time. However, the Police frequently won't do anything....because 'intent'. If the law believed, 'words are violence' we would need many many more prisons than we need already because they would be full every weekend. Edited by Stirlingsays (11 Aug 2017 8.00pm)
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Kermit8  Hevon 11 Aug 17 8.12pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Stirlingsays
Words are intent Kermit. They are not violence....they can threaten the physical or incite it against you. If you threaten physical harm to someone the law has means to protect you...or means to for a very very long time. However, the Police frequently won't do anything....because 'intent'. If the law believed, 'words are violence' we would need many many more prisons than we need already because they would be full every weekend. Edited by Stirlingsays (11 Aug 2017 8.00pm) As I said earlier 'words' can make someone sh1t themselves and make them fraught with severe fear for days, weeks and months after. If that is not violence through words what the hell is it?
Big chest and massive boobs |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Stirlingsays 11 Aug 17 8.25pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Kermit8
As I said earlier 'words' can make someone sh1t themselves and make them fraught with severe fear for days, weeks and months after. If that is not violence through words what the hell is it? Depends upon the actual situation. The way someone reacts to words doesn't mean that the person who issued them is responsible for how they react. It depends upon the situation....that's why we have actual laws about it....It's like you are deaf to this. What you are pushing is like saying that the person who cries is abused....because what you said made them cry. Yet this leaves out the reality of whether that crying was a reasonable reaction. It leaves out the reality that offence isn't violence.....Someone upsetting you is not violence. If someone threatens violence to someone or incites it, then if the services view it as serious then they might act on it. The law understand this....You apparently do not.
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Kermit8 Hevon 11 Aug 17 8.42pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Stirlingsays
Depends upon the actual situation. The way someone reacts to words doesn't mean that the person who issued them is responsible for how they react. It depends upon the situation....that's why we have actual laws about it....It's like you are deaf to this. What you are pushing is like saying that the person who cries is abused....because what you said made them cry. Yet this leaves out the reality of whether that crying was a reasonable reaction. It leaves out the reality that offence isn't violence.....Someone upsetting you is not violence. If someone threatens violence to someone or incites it, then if the services view it as serious then they might act on it. The law understand this....You apparently do not. And what if the crying (and sh1tting themselves) was a totally reasonable reaction? Some rapists like a good natter telling their victims what they are about to go through. How would you categorise their pre-rape words if they they can't come under the banner of violence in Stirlingworld as it's more than intimidation.
Big chest and massive boobs |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Stirlingsays 11 Aug 17 8.52pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Kermit8
And what if the crying (and sh1tting themselves) was a totally reasonable reaction? Some rapists like a good natter telling their victims what they are about to go through. How would you categorise their pre-rape words if they they can't come under the banner of violence in Stirlingworld as it's more than intimidation. If it qualifies for 'incitement' then like I've said....the law can get involved....This is what the law actually is Kermit. Show me where in the law, it says 'words are violence'. It isn't there......Intent....incitement....god sake how many fcuking times. If it qualifies for 'incitement' then the law gets involved. However, there involvement is rarely anything like as serious as if violence actually took place...they have to make a judgement to that actual intent. Say the word slowly to yourself Kermit...come on....exercise that one brain cell....i n t e n t.....slowly now...you can do it. The only 's***ting' going on is me reading your posts and s***ting myself laughing.....But this will be my last word on this with you....I'm frigging bored repeating myself. Edited by Stirlingsays (11 Aug 2017 9.02pm)
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| kevlee born Wandsworth emigrated to Lanc... 11 Aug 17 9.08pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Stirlingsays
If it qualifies for 'incitement' then like I've said....the law can get involved....This is what the law actually is Kermit. Show me where in the law, it says 'words are violence'. It isn't there......Intent....incitement....god sake how many fcuking times. If it qualifies for 'incitement' then the law gets involved. However, there involvement is rarely anything like as serious as if violence actually took place...they have to make a judgement to that actual intent. Say the word slowly to yourself Kermit...come on....exercise that one brain cell....i n t e n t.....slowly now...you can do it. The only 's***ting' going on is me reading your posts and s***ting myself laughing.....But this will be my last word on this with you....I'm frigging bored repeating myself. Edited by Stirlingsays (11 Aug 2017 9.02pm) While this isn't my area of the law,I don't think your right actually. For s.5 Public Order Act offences intent isn't a factor.it is the effect on the recipient
Following Palace since 25 Feb 1978 |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Stirlingsays 11 Aug 17 9.32pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by kevlee
While this isn't my area of the law,I don't think your right actually. For s.5 Public Order Act offences intent isn't a factor.it is the effect on the recipient Explain to me how that is not subjective? What the intent is seems to be exactly the measure. If it is the 'effect on the recipient' and 'alarm or distress' then explain to me why people aren't arrested for making people cry. If what you are saying is true, then how is Katie Hopkins not in jail, Mr Lawyer? Edited by Stirlingsays (11 Aug 2017 9.35pm)
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| kevlee born Wandsworth emigrated to Lanc... 11 Aug 17 9.44pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Stirlingsays
Explain to me how that is not subjective? What the intent is seems to be exactly the measure. If it is the 'effect on the recipient' and 'alarm or distress' then explain to me why people aren't arrested for making people cry. If what you are saying is true, then how is Katie Hopkins not in jail, Mr Lawyer?
what I am saying about what the law is, is true. The decision to prosecute is one for the CPS, but the law is what it is. The decision to prosecute is a matter of judgement for the CPS and one they balance with resources, seriousness etc. I imagine that they have more important things to do than prosecute verbal abuse, but that doesn't mean its not against the law. you might find the attached interesting. And your post don't have to be so aggressive.
Following Palace since 25 Feb 1978 |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Stirlingsays 11 Aug 17 9.46pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Article 10 of the Human Rights Act safeguards the right to free expression, which includes the freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without State interference. According to Liberty, there have been very few prosecutions under the offence Mr Lawyer cited.
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| legaleagle 11 Aug 17 9.48pm |
|
|---|---|
|
But,Mr nonlawyer,he is correct about what the law is.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Stirlingsays 11 Aug 17 9.49pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by kevlee
what I am saying about what the law is, is true. The decision to prosecute is one for the CPS, but the law is what it is. The decision to prosecute is a matter of judgement for the CPS and one they balance with resources, seriousness etc. I imagine that they have more important things to do than prosecute verbal abuse, but that doesn't mean its not against the law. you might find the attached interesting. And your post don't have to be so aggressive. And guess what mate, intent will play its part in that decision.....that's common sense. You describe yourself as a lawyer yet you ignore what the human rights act has to say on these matters and instead cite a public order act. I do tend to be miffed if I feel someone is misleading as too the actual reality of a situation....so sorry about that....I'm sure being a 'lawyer' you can get over it.
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Login / Register
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2023 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.