The world needs a giant armored-mammary technonanny state ready to tan our little bottoms for being pottymouthed?
Fornicate that!
Racist lady on Brit tram.
- Thread starter aaqucnaona
- Start date
The world needs a giant armored-mammary technonanny state ready to tan our little bottoms for being pottymouthed?
Fornicate that!
Pincho, I think we ought to do that when to do so does not (EDIT!) compromise our own sense of ethics.
But we aren't required to be nice to anybody.
With S.A.M. on both points, nietzche on his...
I believe people have a right to say the most inane things in public...and those of us who disagree can respond appropriately.
http://www.turkpipkin.com/mag/fun/klan.htm
(I was with the Black Bloc...missed the mooning moment though...but still...good times
Well, you need to just hope Earth isn't what I think it is, else you are in trouble.
I think the freedom of speech should be void only for incidents of racism or inciting violence/civil distrubance. A simple word like fuck should not be banned though. I agree with PnT when they daid on their BS episode on sensitivity:
"People dont have a right to not be offended."
"People dont have a right to not be offended."
Charges are nothing without an actual conviction.... which would not stick for this scenario.
Enmos
Valued Senior Member
Who decides what's an appropriate response?
Also, it will mean that big-mouths will have the upper-hand.
Well I think the way of nonviolently dealing with the KKK as was done in Austin was excellent...
Christian of them, even...they turned the other cheek en mASSe...
Too, S.A.M.'s example...
I think very few people like Westboro Baptist Church / the Fred Phelps family...When the WBC protested a comics convention...
I supposefor all practical purpose laws and law enforcement decide the answer to your question.
Such as they are wherever the act(s) are committed...and the psycho tram lady broke the laws of her country.
My own value system is for allowing people to say repugnant things...disagreeing with them in no uncertain terms, but not silencing them.
Enmos
Valued Senior Member
It looks like you were promoting anarchism..
People do not have the right to say anything they want. Hate-speech for one.
As for appropriate responses, I don't think trying to debate or angering a mouthy racist will do much good. And using force to quiet them is not an appropriate response.
The only appropriate response, imo, is to ignore them and/or go to the authorities.
People do not have the right to say anything they want. Hate-speech for one.
As for appropriate responses, I don't think trying to debate or angering a mouthy racist will do much good. And using force to quiet them is not an appropriate response.
The only appropriate response, imo, is to ignore them and/or go to the authorities.
But we do (with some restrictions) allow that here.
We have neo-Nazi and KKK rallies. With official permits and police protection.
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57319321/neo-nazis-rally-in-s-california/
http://www.kkkknights.com/public_march_2011
We allow these people to do whatever obnoxious thing they've decided to do now:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westboro_Baptist_Church
(I didn't realize they were anti-semitic too...figures.)
It does depend on context...the woman on the tram could be charged in the USA for "Creating a public disturbance." As I said before, if she did not have her kid with her I think she would have been beaten up...and that would have tied many officers up for many hours, getting all the eyewitness accounts...
Do note this applies to public property.
On private property you can say pretty much what the owner says you can, and if that owner orders you to leave you have to go.
:shrug:
You are possibly right then, but it could have been denied for the reason I suggested. She didn't look as though she was threatening anyone with physical harm.
This is the report from The Daily Mail about the incident.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...man-tram-spend-Christmas-bars-protection.html
They should have headlined it "Heroic Woman on Asylum seeker Tram",
and put it on their front page.
@Chimpkin
I believe people have a right to say the most inane things in public...and those of us who disagree can respond appropriately.
Yes, true. But you have to weigh that Freedom against the right of other Tram passengers to have a peaceful journey, and not to be forced to listen to inarticulate regurgitations of racist newspaper articles.
If a policeman had been there, he would have asked her very early on to be quiet or face arrest.
Unfortunately all the police were back at the station watching Youtube at the time and eating fish and chips.
It is quite likely they have taken her child into care.
Last edited:
Who against who?
We had a revolution. We abolished slavery, and gave everybody equal rights, and now have laws to enforce that.
An example of British Freedom:
The hit squad had prepared their raid long in advance.
At 10am eight police officers, some in anti-stab vests, joined three council employees on the doorstep of the Bamboo Joint takeaway.
Their mission? To stamp out the practice of selling jerk chicken within 400 metres of a secondary school.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...osed-opening-close-schools.html#ixzz1fwhsJMIr
The hit squad had prepared their raid long in advance.
At 10am eight police officers, some in anti-stab vests, joined three council employees on the doorstep of the Bamboo Joint takeaway.
Their mission? To stamp out the practice of selling jerk chicken within 400 metres of a secondary school.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...osed-opening-close-schools.html#ixzz1fwhsJMIr
In Red: It's cause and effect though. If she gets beaten up she caused it to happen. The people beating her up get sentenced, and that's the effect. People shouldn't have to retaliate to the cause. But without laws to punish the cause, you end up punishing the effect. Which isn't fair. It's like punishing a rock for being thrown through a window. Punish the cause, not the effect.
Last edited:
Two wrongs don't make a right.
If someone beats her up, they also commit an offence.
Your philosophy is very like that of Chairman Mao,
who told his police not to arrest people who attacked and killed "Bad People"
ie dissidents.
Tens of thousand of political dissidents, and many others who were simply suspected of being so, were as a result murdered.
Is that want you want Pincho?
Maoist mayhem on British Trams?
If someone beats her up, they also commit an offence.
Your philosophy is very like that of Chairman Mao,
who told his police not to arrest people who attacked and killed "Bad People"
ie dissidents.
Tens of thousand of political dissidents, and many others who were simply suspected of being so, were as a result murdered.
Is that want you want Pincho?
Maoist mayhem on British Trams?
Last edited:
Hey Pincho, go fuck yerself sal.
No I want what we got, the woman (cause) was arrested.
You deny being a Maoist then?
Choices are liquid, and you hand me 1 option. So you deny being Chinese then?
I might be