Some absolutely VILE twitter accounts! Why do they allow it?

124»

Comments

  • TRIPSTRIPS Posts: 3,714
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Axtol wrote: »
    I think you're right about that last bit. My answer is we should take the censorship to the point where you should face legal punishment for making an incorrect factual claim about someone. If a person is accused of a crime and then found innocent I can't state that they are a criminal because that's slander. I can state an opinion that I think they are guilty and they just got off with it because that's only an opinion. I have to make it clear I can't say or even imply that they ARE one though.

    Twitter accounts that just express "vile" political beliefs shouldn't be censored because they aren't slandering anyone. They are expressing a political belief even though it's a rather nasty one that not many people today approve of.
    Yes I agree to a point, To be honest I cant think of an example of a vile political belief.
    Do you mean the Nazis? It still all boils down to what has been said or done. i don't think anyone can hide behind politics whenever they incite people to hurt others for example.
    Obviously wars are the grey area, AFAIK i dont think any Nazi was lawfully hung for starting WW2, they were hung for war crimes.
  • AxtolAxtol Posts: 8,480
    Forum Member
    TRIPS wrote: »
    Yes I agree to a point, To be honest I cant think of an example of a vile political belief.
    Do you mean the Nazis? It still all boils down to what has been said or done. i don't think anyone can hide behind politics whenever they incite people to hurt others for example.
    Obviously wars are the grey area, AFAIK i dont think any Nazi was lawfully hung for starting WW2, they were hung for war crimes.

    Yes as an example I am talking about a modern day Nazi who has pictures of swastikas on his online accounts and has copies of Mein Kampf and who talks badly about minorities.

    By incitement I assume you mean if there's also a statement of criminal intent contained within the opinion being expressed. If someone said I hate gay people then that's fine for them to have and talk about that view. If it was I hate gay people we should attack them in the street then that's where the line has to be drawn and they should face punishment for saying that. The second comment is illegal because it is no longer just an expression of an opinion. It now contains an instruction telling people to commit a crime
  • TRIPSTRIPS Posts: 3,714
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Axtol wrote: »
    Yes as an example I am talking about a modern day Nazi who has pictures of swastikas on his online accounts and has copies of Mein Kampf and who talks badly about minorities.

    By incitement I assume you mean if there's also a statement of criminal intent contained within the opinion being expressed. If someone said I hate gay people then that's fine for them to have and talk about that view. If it was I hate gay people we should attack them in the street then that's where the line has to be drawn and they should face punishment for saying that. The second comment is illegal because it is no longer just an expression of an opinion. It now contains an instruction telling people to commit a crime
    yes that's exactly the point i was trying to make.
Sign In or Register to comment.