Reply With QuoteOpinion based on facts, even if they are contrary, are fine. Opinions based on prejudice, hatred etc that can be proven as a load of bollocks by facts should not be given an airing.Originally Posted by Organ Morgan.
| + Visit Cardiff FC for Latest News, Transfer Gossip, Fixtures and Match Results |
Of course it's broad. Have a think at what a specific one would look like and how often it would be useless.
You very often express opinions contrary to prevailing attitudes. Are you fearful? Of course you aren't.
Opinion based on facts, even if they are contrary, are fine. Opinions based on prejudice, hatred etc that can be proven as a load of bollocks by facts should not be given an airing.
I haven't time to check to provide you with a link. But I'm quite sure that if the police receive an official complaint from someone alleging a hate crime has been committed then they are compelled to investigate that complaint.
Are you happy with this? Should we be able to sweep a potential hate crime under the carpet?
Surely that would be slander?
I popped over to the website hoping to find a confession, but I just see endless arguments about free speech. So could you point out the incrimnating bit where Morrissey declares that he is a racist.it's funny how everything seems to be fine as long as it's legal, most stuff going on with Mexican children at the moment is legal as was most of the horrific things that went on in Germant in the 30s and 40s.
I don't know why anyone is discussing libel and "facts" when everything he's being called out for was written on Morrissey's own website by the man himself.
https://www.morrissey-solo.com
Is it me, or do most perceived threats against freedom of speech nowadays arise where the speech could be perceived as hateful or racist, and happens against people supposedly "saying it as it is"?
It’s mascarades under the guise of wanting freedom of speech, it’s always been a tactic of the far right when it comes to racism. Often under the guise of things being too “politically correct” as well.
Freedom of speech in the U.K. is as free as ever you can call the queen a c*nt, you could call the prune minister a useless tosser and there are no consequences. The only thing you can’t do is be an outright racist, but as long as you aren’t outright with it you can get away with it too.
Who’s been charged with a hate crime though in the context of this thread? Morrissey hasn’t committed a hate crime, he’s just aired some bigoted views. He’s not been charged with anything, he’s not in trouble with the police, all that’s happened is capitalism at its finest, people don’t like someone’s personality so they don’t buy anything from them.
I would imagine motives come into it as well. Given your examples, if a robber targets Chinese supermarkets out of an irrational dislike of Chinese people, then that's a hate crime. If it's because he doesn't want to pay for his soy sauce, then it's hardly a hate crime. Similarly with the transexual who only burgles homes of homosexuals - surely the tranny is targetting a specific group for a particular reason.
As for Diane Abbott, she'd be best off miles away from public service, but to answer the point, once you start generalising about an entire race/religion etc of people, then you leave yourself open to being called racist. One I hear from time to time is that "all Muslims are terrorists (or rapists)" etc. It's a load of absolute bollocks, but suggesting all implies a feeling of hate towards all people of a particular religion.
Frankie Boyle had it spot on when he was talking about the stereotype in America that black people are thieves. His response was to correctly say that America had stolen all the black people in the first place!
So are you now downgrading Morrissey from a racist to being a bigot? You said we could find his racism in his own words on his own website, but I couldn't. Are you playing fast and loose in order to get away with as much as you can, and only pulling back when challenged? Still, we have numerous people repeating the Morrissey is a racist mantra, so you have had some success. I'd still be interested in referencing Morrissey's own words, where he admits to being a racist, so let me know if you ever come across them!
I think hate crimes are only really ever violent crimes aren't they? Whether they should be treated differently is another matter, I assume they are punished more harshly due to the history of people being attacked for being in a certain group. Like those 2 polish lads who were murdered just after the brexit vote.
This article appears to be the source material for those who claim Morrissey is a racist.
https://www.tremr.com/Fiona-Dodwell/...y-an-interview
A Hearts fan was once done for a racially-aggravated public order offence against Celtic player Craig Bellamy. His heinous crime was to refer to him as a "wee Welsh bastard." The linked article has that and other examples of how wide-ranging the law is.
An angry man insults you by calling you Scottish. Is that a race crime? Leading lawyers fear freedom of speech is being eroded by the interpretation of new hate laws, writes Calum Macdonald: http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/1...lum_Macdonald/
It was a joke. Probably a sick joke. It's something comedians do, they tell jokes. It may have been very ill-advised depending on one's opinion, but hate? No idea what you've been smoking to think that.
Best way of not offending someone is to not be offensive to them.
But stupid jobsworth nonsense like that isn’t common though is it? The laws were brought in to try and stop actual issues a lot of minority groups have suffered and which are now thankfully much less common in the U.K.
Unfortunately you’re always going to get instances of laws being ridiculously applied you just have to hope that it doesn’t become a common occurrence, which it isn’t.
I completely agree with the guy in that article he makes exactly the same points
You just hope it’s applied sensibly which as he says it usually is. We all know what’s racist and what isn’t, people trying to get away with obvious dog whistle racism are the ones who are causing the most trouble at the moment.The act was a good idea.
There is no doubt ethnic minorities were being abused and the penalties were not fitting the crime.
"There is no problem with the legislation - the problem is that, in the current climate, if you add certain banned adjectives in front of an insult you are branded a racist.
He wasn't offended; he didn't hear the remarks. But a copper did. As I implied in an earlier message re watch your p's and q's, be bland with everything you say.
But that’s paranoid bollocks though, that isn’t happening anywhere really. You’ve highlighted one instance. Just don’t be a racist or a bigot and no one will get in trouble.
These laws were brought in with equality and safety of everyone in mind. Certain sections of the media will try and spin this in a negative light but as a country with regards to treatment of minorities we’ve improved no end in the last 30 years.
A bellend artist makes bellend art.
Remember when there was nothing ...... good old nothing.......the good old days when there was nothing.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6KVO...&frags=pl%2Cwn
I think this still sentence still works with that small amendment.
There's several examples in that article I linked. I could find examples of Cardiff fans being done for similar against supporters of English clubs and Plymouth fans for insulting Cardiff fans. Those incidents would be dismissed as banter by most I would contend. The point I've been trying to make is it's illegal when someone cares to apply the letter of the law.
When was the time a cardiff fan was done for calling someone an English bastard? I honestly cannot ever remember one instance of that.
This thread is absolutely mental.
Posting Permissions