We are seeing threats of extradition for negative social media post from the UK, should the US government come out and say our citizens have freedom of speech within our borders?
Should the white house respond to the UK?
- Thread starter Whiskeydeltadeltatango
- Start date
When in Rome, do as the Romans do…..that would be my advise to any American overseas. You cant break laws on foreign soil just because you’re an American. That is really gauche thinking. You wouldn’t expect a foreigner to do this in America, would you?
I'm not talking about what we are doing while there.
So, are you saying….Brits are going to arrest Americans for first amendment rights in America? I think you are chasing an argument that is a big nothing burger….why worry about it?
So some White House grandstanding?
Can we just wear a ribbon and do nothing like we do with global warming ?
Are you referring to a statement by a single police commissioner? You know kind of like Vance going after cat ladies and non child bearing individuals. People say stupid shit. Doesn't mean anything will come of it.
The current administration would never issue a statement like that. Many democrats openly support restrictions on free speech.
Except when it incites riots. You know the things that are not protected in free speech. Or are you insisting individuals have the right to lie, try to incite the public and try to cause harm?
Jesus. How is it possible to not understand what the issue is TWICE?
I leave for London this weekend. I’ll be sure and keep my mouth shut except to say God Save The King. 🤐
Serious question: What new restrictions on free speech do democrats openly favor? I haven’t seen a proposal to restrict currently allowed free speech in the US.
" how come all your men are small and your buildings were built in 1946? "
😃
Will I get a toothless smile in return? 😂
His first interpretation was that this was regarding speech that might occur in the UK, we were told that is not the issue; his second interpretation was that it was regarding speech that might be expressed by Americans in America—so it’s not that either?
Believe it or not, some of us often lack the paranoid context to decode the endless hand-wringing of the right wing.
While such a sentiment has become disturbingly popular with some Americans and policy-makers like Governor Walz, it is incorrect. The First Amendment does guarantee free speech when it comes to both misinformation and hate speech. Individuals and public officials may detest and condemn such speech, and platforms may choose not to carry it, but to insert the government into regulation of such expression would both set a troubling precedent and undermine our current First Amendment principles in ways that should concern Americans across the political spectrum.
Actually, Tim Walz, the First Amendment Does Protect Misinformation and ‘Hate Speech’ | National Review
Kamala Harris’s running mate is wrong: Free speech, including potentially misleading or offensive speech, isn’t a threat to democracy.
www.nationalreview.com
Not surprised you think free speech means free from consequence or that you get to say whatever you want whenever you want wherever you want
Simple mind.
If you think it stopped with them firing this lady you’re naive.
Any specific proposals out there you can point to?
Anything wrong with government fighting disinformation? Can the government point out that people are posting the wrong election date for example?
London’s Metropolitan Police chief warned that officials will not only be cracking down on British citizens for commentary on the riots in the UK, but on American citizens as well.
“We will throw the full force of the law at people. And whether you’re in this country committing crimes on the streets or committing crimes from further afield online, we will come after you,” Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir Mark Rowley told Sky News.
I believe extradition only comes into play if the accusation is a crime in both countries.
We can keep calling biscuits cookies and these bastards are helpless to do anything about it.
How would you feel about the FBI contacting Facebook and telling them to deplatform people spreading the malinformation that Iraq doesn’t have any WMD?
While such a sentiment has become disturbingly popular with some Americans and policy-makers like Governor Walz, it is incorrect. The First Amendment does guarantee free speech when it comes to both misinformation and hate speech. Individuals and public officials may detest and condemn such speech, and platforms may choose not to carry it, but to insert the government into regulation of such expression would both set a troubling precedent and undermine our current First Amendment principles in ways that should concern Americans across the political spectrum.
Actually, Tim Walz, the First Amendment Does Protect Misinformation and ‘Hate Speech’ | National Review
Kamala Harris’s running mate is wrong: Free speech, including potentially misleading or offensive speech, isn’t a threat to democracy.
Paywall. Pepsi.
Walz States He is Anti-Free Speech, Anti-First Amendment
This should be immediately disqualifying for Vice President of the United States.
iowa.forums.rivals.com
People are here from the UK tweeting things that would be illegal in their own country. But when the police show up to their houses to arrest them in the UK, they are learning that the person is in America tweeting the "illegal" stuff. The question becomes "Should the USA allow for extradition of these "mean people" back to the UK so they can be arrested for their speech crimes?"
What do you mean by “telling them”?
Social media platforms have the contractual and First Amendment right to remove or edit content. As long as it’s a request and not an order, and the information is false, I’m okay with it.
What say you to my voting date hypo? You’re not okay with the government asking FB to take down posts providing the wrong election date?
Do you believe that folks who knowingly lie and spread untruths under the cover of “free speech” should be held harmless because if the 1st Amendment. Don’t you think such persons are abusing the intent of The First?While such a sentiment has become disturbingly popular with some Americans and policy-makers like Governor Walz, it is incorrect. The First Amendment does guarantee free speech when it comes to both misinformation and hate speech. Individuals and public officials may detest and condemn such speech, and platforms may choose not to carry it, but to insert the government into regulation of such expression would both set a troubling precedent and undermine our current First Amendment principles in ways that should concern Americans across the political spectrum.
Actually, Tim Walz, the First Amendment Does Protect Misinformation and ‘Hate Speech’ | National Review
Kamala Harris’s running mate is wrong: Free speech, including potentially misleading or offensive speech, isn’t a threat to democracy.
Do you place any filters of “free speech”…. Because the SC has.
They're a little ridiculous
www.bbc.com
Man guilty of hate crime for filming pug's 'Nazi salutes'
Mark Meechan recorded the dog reacting to statements such as "Sieg Heil" by raising its paw.
www.bbc.com
I think the confusion is "from the UK". I meant that to mean they have posted such claims, not that the hate speech is happening there.
Hope this helps.
Is biden even back from the beach yet? Is he even working? Only sign of activity I've seen from him is his one interview where he confirmed Nancy and other Democrat "leaders" ousted him. Doubt he even knows this is happening.
There was another mass stabbing today in London. The police refused to release any details on the attacker and has locked comments. I don't think any government should be allowed to turn off comments on their social media posts.
There was another mass stabbing today in London. The police refused to release any details on the attacker and has locked comments. I don't think any government should be allowed to turn off comments on their social media posts.
Paywall. Pepsi.
Walz States He is Anti-Free Speech, Anti-First Amendment
This should be immediately disqualifying for Vice President of the United States.
I'm well aware it's been posted before, but not in this thread. And it wasn't paywall on my end.
