Which speech should be legally restricted?
>>76010213
Women saying "no"
>>76010267
and Arabic
>>76010267
kek. Women's speech in general.
>>76010213
Weaponzied Speech
>>76010213
none.
>>76010213
Only that which poses a clear and imminent threat to the health and well being of oneself or others, or attempts to incite others to acts of violence or chaos.
Death threats and outright slander.
>>76010213
None. If you allow compromise you will only invite more restrictions and erosion of your liberties.
>>76010355
Mua'dib!
>>76010213
Incitement to rebellion or separatism, and other treasonous speech.
>>76010357
This right here.
>>76010420
Shh! Even his name is a killing word
>>76010295
>>76010267
being this samefag
all of it :-)
>>76010213
Not any.
>>76010420
Triggily Spice
>>76010213
inciting violence or calling upon others to do the same
>>76010366
Eh yeah. desu our current free speech laws make a lot of sense. They just need to stop trying to criminalize offending people and broadening the definition of "hate speech" on top of that.
>>76010213
Concrete threats of violence.
Also >>76010295.
>>76010661
So going to prison for 2 years for insulting a tranny "makes a lot of sense"?
>>76010349
All women should be required to wear ball gags 24/7 and only be allowed to take them off when their husband or boyfriend has given them permission.
>>76010708
I've always hated my driveway. But you're right
>>76010843
>>76010213
Anti-gun-funky-bunch-speech
>>76010213
Incitement of violence and speech supporting the restriction of speech not covered in these two categories.
>>76010213
Slander, Libel and direct threats
>>76010921
I thought 'concrete' can mean 'distinct', 'direct' or 'easy to define' in English as well.
>>76010213
1. Slander and libel
2. Words that very clearly put people in serious danger
3. That nonsense college professors push about hating your country.
>>76011226
Do Hungarians not understand Irony?
>>76010453
Whoahhhhh there. There's a slippery slope from "treasonous speach" to "disagreeing with the government" and when the government is pro-immigrant, that's a problem. We need the freedom to contradict the state no matter it's opinion, m8.
>>76011350
How is that irony?
No speech should legally be restricted as it leads to far too many issues.
>>76010734
That happened?
If someone isn't a "public personality" then you shouldn't be allowed to publicly bully them, no. But with social media the line is blurred...
Just offending in private shouldn't be a crime though (unless it's harassement (and they are broadening the definition too)).
2 years in prison is way too much. A warning followed by an ever increasing fine should be more than enough. I wouldn't ever put anyone in prison for things like that. It just has to be generally discouraged, not stopped at all cost.
>>76011226
It does.
> I was just having some fun
It's not all serious anon
>>76010520
>not understanding id's
How stupid are you?
>>76011168
>>76010631
How would you punish someone for commenting
>Fags should be hanged!
or
>Let's beat those Muslim goatfuckers!
on a facebook article?
Really curious.
>>76010843
Yeah but think of the drool everywhere.
Maybe one of these would be best.
>>76011482
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/05/25/canadians-face-two-years-jail-criticizing-transgender-gender-fluid-ideology/
>>76010213
None
>>76010213
faggots saying spech should be restricted
"Free flow of information is the only safeguard against tyranny"
>>76011752
>>76011482
and in case you don't like the source
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/05/17/canadian-pm-justin-trudeau-announces-ban-on-transgender-discrimi/
http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/canadian-politics/liberals-introduce-bill-to-protect-transgender-canadians-from-hate-speech-and-discrimination
>>76010213
Memes will find a way.
>>76010213
None. That is the only acceptable answer.
No ideology or statement should be banned.
Except islam because fuck muslims.
>>76011958
Shit. Yeah we're going way over the edge. Slandering *specific* transpersons should be illegal to some extent. But this is madness...
>>76010213
>dat pic
Russia banned hentai, now officially.
21 May 2016, russian "duma" finally applied laws that compare any drawing of a naked child, exposing genitals to child porn.
It means ANY drawing, including lolicon hentai.
http://archive.is/5i3VT
http://archive.is/WmjHD
off to gulag fatty
>>76012410
>Slandering
I don't mean just slandering. I mean even generally humiliating specific persons in public (even if you're not lying) should be illegal if it's clearly malicious. Not unless they are a "public personality", then it's open season.
But they are criminalizing disagreeing with an ideology now it seems. This is bullshit...
>>76010213
none if a black man calls a white man a cracker the white man should legally be able to retort with nigger.
>>76010213
Speech about speech restrictions.
