Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Debaser

Mass Shooting in New Zealand

Recommended Posts

34 minutes ago, King of Dick Mountain said:

The tests in the U.S, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and everywhere else that has laws largely based on British law are all remarkably similar. Every single one of those countries also has constitutional checks and balances that are specifically designed to moderate extremism.

You'd know both of those things if you actually bothered to look things up instead of JAQing off all over the place like the bellend you are. 

They're similar but not the same. And what about places not based on British Law?

And we are talking about social media.

These social media networks are global, not just one country.

Edited by Kulemin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well here's a thought, you could read about them when they become relevant? Meanwhile, while we continue to live in a Province that bases its law on Britain, in a country that's based 12/13 on British law and we're talking about another country that bases its law on Britain, perhaps you could look into the common law on the subject, the same common law you were allegedly so interested in over a year ago and still haven't bothered to even glance at.

You're blatantly not actually bothered or at all interested in the limits placed on expression by the legislature and the courts, you just want to stir the pot amongst your similarly uneducated and wilfully ignorant brethren.

Just bad faith argument after bad faith argument.

There are laws and treaties covering prosecutions arising from social media, also. I'm sorry you couldn't find a YouTube video to tell you all about them, but if things get really desperate you could, I don't know, research the subject yourself?

Edited by King of Dick Mountain

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He basically said Trump made him do it, that is fucked up but Trump is what he is and saying he isn't will further all these crimes against minorities. Seems The Don has a lot of influence in the world and Christian whites will go out of their way to make him a martyr.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/16/2019 at 2:03 AM, King of Dick Mountain said:

Well here's a thought, you could read about them when they become relevant? Meanwhile, while we continue to live in a Province that bases its law on Britain, in a country that's based 12/13 on British law and we're talking about another country that bases its law on Britain, perhaps you could look into the common law on the subject, the same common law you were allegedly so interested in over a year ago and still haven't bothered to even glance at.

You're blatantly not actually bothered or at all interested in the limits placed on expression by the legislature and the courts, you just want to stir the pot amongst your similarly uneducated and wilfully ignorant brethren.

Just bad faith argument after bad faith argument.

There are laws and treaties covering prosecutions arising from social media, also. I'm sorry you couldn't find a YouTube video to tell you all about them, but if things get really desperate you could, I don't know, research the subject yourself?

No, IIRC we just disagreed on what should be protected as free speech.

You're saying all these laws were based on British Law, but that's changing. The UK is moving away from free speech.

We disagreed about Count Dankula, it was clearly a joke, he wouldn't have been arrested in the US.

Gervais said it best,

Quote

“A man has been convicted in a UK court of making a joke that was deemed ‘grossly offensive.’ If you don’t believe in a person’s right to say things that you might find ‘grossly offensive,’ then you don’t believe in freedom of speech,” tweeted Gervais.

People in the UK are arrested for malicious speech for making jokes in poor taste on Facebook

People have also been arrested for posting rap lyrics in the UK.

The UK really no longer has free speech anywhere similar to the US and to suggest so is bad faith on your part.

 

Censorship also plays a major part.

Edited by Kulemin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, remind us of your ignorance, demonstrate that ignorance anew and then lecture an English law grad. on English law.

It is still called freedom of expression and I haven't ever claimed that the situation on allowable expression is similar between the U.K. and U.S.A., largely because I don't believe the situation in the U.S.A. is a laudable one in many aspects.

While we're riffing on bad faith, you insolent little shit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, King of Dick Mountain said:

Yeah, remind us of your ignorance, demonstrate that ignorance anew and then lecture an English law grad. on English law.

It is still called freedom of expression and I haven't ever claimed that the situation on allowable expression is similar between the U.K. and U.S.A., largely because I don't believe the situation in the U.S.A. is a laudable one in many aspects.

While we're riffing on bad faith, you insolent little shit.

And North Korea still has democratic in its name, doesn’t mean its a democracy. 

I don’t have to point any farther than the teen in Liverpool that got charged for posting a rap lyric to Instagram. 

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-merseyside-43816921

Prosecutors said her sentence was increased from a fine to a community order "as it was a hate crime".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When all else fails, mention North Korea. Even if it makes absolutely no sense at all to do so. I mention freedom of expression because calling it freedom of speech is an obvious 'tell' that either the person speaking is a clueless ignoramus, or their target audience is clueless ignoramuses.

You do. You have so so so so so so much more to demonstrate, but as ever you're entirely too ignorant to even know the parameters of your own argument. Resting your laurels on an aberrant judgment from a court of first instance is no more than another 'tell' that you're completely unarmed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, King of Dick Mountain said:

When all else fails, mention North Korea. Even if it makes absolutely no sense at all to do so. I mention freedom of expression because calling it freedom of speech is an obvious 'tell' that either the person speaking is a clueless ignoramus, or their target audience is clueless ignoramuses.

You do. You have so so so so so so much more to demonstrate, but as ever you're entirely too ignorant to even know the parameters of your own argument. Resting your laurels on an aberrant judgment from a court of first instance is no more than another 'tell' that you're completely unarmed.

Its not one “aberrant” judgment. It’s the start of more prosecutions to come from new laws restricting expression and speech. 

The YouTube pug guy is another great example of the fact that the courts can use these laws created to charge people for making bad jokes. It happened another time with someone posting a joke about a garbage truck that ran over some people in Glasgow.

Now someone was arrested in NZ for sharing the video of the terrorist attack.

Edited by Kulemin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are literally thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of prosecutions every single year and you're forced to rely on two examples both of about a year's vintage, neither of which is yet res judicata. Look it up, dipshit.

Obviously because prosecutions like them are just way, way, way, out of control and happening all the time.

What was the NZ guy charged with? Do you even know? Do you care, so long as it fits your cobbled-together, fact-poor narrative? Was he charged with 'hate speech' or has he been charged with a contempt offence for violating a court order suppressing the dissemination of evidence in an ongoing investigation and eventual trial for murder on 50 counts?

Again, do you care? Is the very real risk of a mistrial for that fucknut really secondary to your edgelord shenanigans? 

Edited by King of Dick Mountain

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Accused gunman in Christchurch terror attacks denied newspaper, television and radio access

 

The accused gunman of the Christchurch terror attack is being denied access to newspapers, television and radio while being held in segregation.

Denying him access to media outlets would prevent him accessing media reports about the massacre committed on Friday afternoon.

In a statement to the Herald, Corrections said the 28-year-old accused, Brenton Tarrant, was being held under 24-hour surveillance and no visitors have been approved to see him while he was in segregation.

"He is being managed in accordance with the provisions set out in the Corrections Act 2004 and our international obligations for the treatment of prisoners. At this time he has no access to television, radio or newspapers and no approved visitors."

 

The Herald understands the alleged gunman has been moved from Christchurch to the country's only maximum security prison in Auckland.

Auckland Prison, known as Paremoremo Prison, is home to New Zealand's only specialist maximum-security prison unit and houses some of the nation's most violent criminals.

The prison holds men from minimum to maximum security risks and first opened in 1968.

Andy Langley, Auckland Prison director, last year told the Herald that maximum security inmates would spend 19 to 20 hours a day in cells.

Corrections confirmed its staff worked with "other agencies" to transfer him after his appearance in Christchurch.

It is not known whether he will be flown back to Christchurch for this next court appearance next month or appear via audio visual link.

 

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=12214411

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's pretty unusual to make the effort to secure them and transport them just for procedural hearings in regular cases. In a case like this, where his presence is likely to be a catalyst for demonstrations and protests, I can't see any reason why they would bother.

I'd bet he appears via a/v.

I don't see why he can't have newspapers, either. Just take out the bits that talk about him and what he did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...