|
|
Post by ProVeritas on Oct 13, 2024 23:56:08 GMT
Your so called answer was not an answer, it was deviation. Oh dear does PV need your help now he has lost the arguement? It was NOT an attempted deviaton FFS... Do you think it's OK for a man to be jailed for 2 years for a remark he made on arsebook whilst those who attacked police officers at Manchester Airport are ignored by the lefty dictators we now have in power? Surely that would depend on the specifics of that remark. For example "The gunners are useless wankers" is very different to "I am going to plant a bomb on the Arsenal team coach". All The Best |
|
|
|
Post by jonksy on Oct 14, 2024 0:44:36 GMT
Oh dear does PV need your help now he has lost the arguement? It was NOT an attempted deviaton FFS... Do you think it's OK for a man to be jailed for 2 years for a remark he made on arsebook whilst those who attacked police officers at Manchester Airport are ignored by the lefty dictators we now have in power? Surely that would depend on the specifics of that remark. For example "The gunners are useless wankers" is very different to "I am going to plant a bomb on the Arsenal team coach". All The Best Saying and doing are two different things, its when the threats are carried out it becomes specific... |
|
|
|
Post by ProVeritas on Oct 14, 2024 1:12:11 GMT
Surely that would depend on the specifics of that remark. For example "The gunners are useless wankers" is very different to "I am going to plant a bomb on the Arsenal team coach". All The Best Saying and doing are two different things, its when the threats are carried out it becomes specific... I agree with you. However, even just verbalising, or writing, some kinds of threats is - quite justifiably - against the law. If someone doesn't want to go to jail, don't commit crime. All The Best |
|
|
|
Post by jonksy on Oct 14, 2024 6:36:27 GMT
Saying and doing are two different things, its when the threats are carried out it becomes specific... I agree with you. However, even just verbalising, or writing, some kinds of threats is - quite justifiably - against the law. If someone doesn't want to go to jail, don't commit crime. All The Best Do you think it is a crime if someone makes a casual remark on arsebook? I don't BTW.... |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Oct 14, 2024 6:43:45 GMT
Saying and doing are two different things, its when the threats are carried out it becomes specific... I agree with you. However, even just verbalising, or writing, some kinds of threats is - quite justifiably - against the law. If someone doesn't want to go to jail, don't commit crime. All The Best Whatever we decide is law the important part is to apply the law in an even handed manner and therein lies the problem. Much depends on who says it and to whom the comment is directed and that is not even handed. |
|
|
|
Post by ProVeritas on Oct 14, 2024 15:31:21 GMT
I agree with you. However, even just verbalising, or writing, some kinds of threats is - quite justifiably - against the law. If someone doesn't want to go to jail, don't commit crime. All The Best Do you think it is a crime if someone makes a casual remark on arsebook? I don't BTW.... As I said, it depends on the remark. Some remarks are illegal no matter how, or where you say them. Like I said: If someone doesn't want to go to jail, don't commit crime... ...simples. All The Best |
|
|
|
Post by andrewbrown on Oct 14, 2024 15:33:11 GMT
I agree with you. However, even just verbalising, or writing, some kinds of threats is - quite justifiably - against the law. If someone doesn't want to go to jail, don't commit crime. All The Best Do you think it is a crime if someone makes a casual remark on arsebook? I don't BTW.... Yes, it can be. |
|
|
|
Post by jonksy on Oct 14, 2024 15:35:40 GMT
Do you think it is a crime if someone makes a casual remark on arsebook? I don't BTW.... As I said, it depends on the remark. Some remarks are illegal no matter how, or where you say them.
Like I said: If someone doesn't want to go to jail, don't commit crime... ...simples. All The Best So yet again you are still avoiding the question... |
|
|
|
Post by jonksy on Oct 14, 2024 15:39:29 GMT
Do you think it is a crime if someone makes a casual remark on arsebook? I don't BTW.... Yes, it can be. How so andrea? Speakers corner used to be used for free speech. But those days are long gone as the lady who mentioned muslims a few weeks ago for instance can verify the fact... |
|
|
|
Post by Rebirth on Oct 14, 2024 15:41:36 GMT
I agree with you. However, even just verbalising, or writing, some kinds of threats is - quite justifiably - against the law. If someone doesn't want to go to jail, don't commit crime. All The Best Whatever we decide is law the important part is to apply the law in an even handed manner and therein lies the problem. Much depends on who says it and to whom the comment is directed and that is not even handed. They're making up laws to oppress the natives on the fly. As we can see from the Hamas supporters on here they're insisting that laws that shut down the natives should be enforced, whilst they're running around backing terrorist organisations on the streets. We also have Obama screaming that black people must only support his candidate, and we all know if a white person said anything like that about a white candidate then they'd be arrested.
Obviously the Islamists have corrupted the UK and with the support of the rabid self-loathing traitors. When it's this obvious that the justice system in unworthy of any respect then it can only fall apart. The issue with that is that it will not let go easily and will use every means available to crush all dissent.
|
|
|
|
Post by andrewbrown on Oct 14, 2024 15:42:19 GMT
Free speech doesn't mean you can break the law. Hoping you knew that (although judging by your previous post you didn't.)
|
|
|
|
Post by Rebirth on Oct 14, 2024 15:45:25 GMT
Free speech doesn't mean you can break the law. Hoping you knew that (although judging by your previous post you didn't.) Laws that are designed to destroy free-speech are bad oppressive laws designed to hurt civilisation. People like you are the sort of people who submit to cults and insist on killing everyone who doesn't submit to your oppressive backward dogma. |
|
|
|
Post by Vinny on Oct 14, 2024 15:46:53 GMT
Good law project? Meaning Jolyon Maugham a remoaner loser who once clubbed a fox to death with a baseball bat whilst wearing a kimono and boasted about it on twitter.
The man has a chip on his shoulder the size of a sumo wrestler's bum.
Everyone is free to reject cookies from Reform's website.
Reform have done nothing illegal.
|
|
|
|
Post by jonksy on Oct 14, 2024 15:48:12 GMT
Free speech doesn't mean you can break the law. Hoping you knew that (although judging by your previous post you didn't.) So what law was broken FFS andrea? |
|
|
|
Post by jonksy on Oct 14, 2024 16:01:29 GMT
Free speech doesn't mean you can break the law. Hoping you knew that (although judging by your previous post you didn't.) So you think this is against the law then andrea? And we all know how a slice of cake is dangerous Boris was booted out by the usual lefty woke arseholes for taking a bite...
Fury as London Mayor approves ads featuring Islamic hate preacher—but bans cake promotions..  Fury has erupted over Transport for London (TfL) and Mayor Sadiq Khan’s decision to allow advertisements featuring controversial figures, including an Islamic preacher Musa Menk, known as “Mufti Menk” known for “spreading hate,” and a Russian fighter, Khabib Nurmagomedov, to appear on the city’s tubes and buses, while maintaining a ban on ads featuring foods deemed “unhealthy,” such as a simple slice of cake.
|
|
