ADVERTISEMENT

Should the white house respond to the UK?

I’m still confused. That isn’t what OP said.
"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?"

Not sure what else that could mean. Someone shit posting from USA and the UK wanting to arrest them but can't because they're doing it from here.
 
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?
Do you place any filters of “free speech”…. Because the SC has.

HORT would be a ghost town if we cracked down on that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: joelbc1
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.
Thanks for this. As I scrolled down I kept looking for context or background so I could understand the issue, and I finally found it on the 27th post.

Pretty sure that London's Metropolitan Police Chief won't have much luck coming after Joe from Chicago for tweeting "That's some good rioting lads - keep up the good work and stick it to the Man!"
 
  • Like
Reactions: joelbc1
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?"

Why would the U.S. allow extradition to another country for an act that isn’t unlawful in this country?
 
"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?"

Not sure what else that could mean. Someone shit posting from USA and the UK wanting to arrest them but can't because they're doing it from here.
Ok, but your first attempt at an explanation referenced UK citizens posting from the U.S., while Whiskey is talking about US citizens.
That’s why I was asking for clarification.

Also, all of this seems to be coming from a FOXNews.com article where the only one who mentions extradition is the reporter. Is there a better source for the UK government “threatening” US citizens with extradition?

https://www.foxnews.com/media/uk-po...zens-over-social-media-posts-we-come-afte.amp
 
Ok, but your first attempt at an explanation referenced UK citizens posting from the U.S., while Whiskey is talking about US citizens.
That’s why I was asking for clarification.

Also, all of this seems to be coming from a FOXNews.com article where the only one who mentions extradition is the reporter. Is there a better source for the UK government “threatening” US citizens with extradition?

https://www.foxnews.com/media/uk-po...zens-over-social-media-posts-we-come-afte.amp
if conservatives are scared of something and you don't understand what they're talking about...you know where to look
 
Ok, but your first attempt at an explanation referenced UK citizens posting from the U.S., while Whiskey is talking about US citizens.
That’s why I was asking for clarification.

Also, all of this seems to be coming from a FOXNews.com article where the only one who mentions extradition is the reporter. Is there a better source for the UK government “threatening” US citizens with extradition?

https://www.foxnews.com/media/uk-po...zens-over-social-media-posts-we-come-afte.amp


 

Thanks?

All from the same source
 

A single individual, thanks for clarifying what we have already stated.
 
It was pertaining to the post I quoted.
Well then I stand by not all speech is protected when it is intended to incite or produce imment lawless action. Supreme Court 1969 Brandenburg vs Ohio. It still wouldn't allow for someone to be extradited though. Although that other country could block that speech in that country.
 
Last edited:
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT