Free speech

Post Reply New Topic

Censoring state secrets is fine.

There are already laws against libel and slander.

The rest should not be "criminalized".

But non government and private institutions are free to censor as they wish (like this website).

If by "junk science" the OP means "scientific falsities", and if those falsities are also down right dangerous, then...

well lets just say that if that IS what he meant then that issue takes on a new and interesting meaning now (nine years later) because now we get questionable stuff coming from riff-raff like this person:

Old thread but perhaps even more relevant today than when it was written back in 2011. My view is

Public prayer NOT in church, mosque etc. :- Not a crime
Libel and slander :- Should be a crime and usually is in most countries.
Revealing state secrets :- depends on the secret. A state secret of human rights breaches should not.
Criticizing the government :- Hell no.
Use of offensive vocabulary :- Nope
Talk demeaning minorities :- depends on if the talk is based on facts.
Vocal picketing of abortion clinics, churches, schools :- Nope
Heckling speakers :- nope
Inciting to riot :- Depends on the reason for the riot and who is targeted. Perhaps if the police and government is arresting and jailing people with disabilities for having kids then a violent response against only police officers and government members might and I mean might be proportional. Just an example.
Chatting during a performance lol what? Nope
Obscenity and blasphemy Nope
Publishing junk science Yes absolutely it should be a crime as it can lead to all kinds of harm.

Relevant today is whether it's *FREE SPEECH* to encourage someone to suicide using a chat application.

Suicide isn't a crime so encouraging someone to commit it often isn't seen as one although depending on how venerable the person on the receiving end is it probably should be.

I think it's fair to assume however that like other rights, freedom of speech can end when its being used to cause or attempt to cause harm to others which by default breaches the rights of others. There is no weighting to fundamental human rights when listed in relevance of importance but it's safe to assume that most people consider the right not to blatantly and intentionally demoralised and/or harass others to the point of killing oneself of greater importance to right to freedom of speech. In other words, if freedom of speech to certain people involves trying to get others to kill themselves, then they no longer have the right to even have a voice box anymore.

Suicide baiting is indeed a crime. People have gotten in trouble for it too. If someone is suicidal and they said they were going to kill themselves and I said "okay bye" and they did it, I can get charged. That is if they have proof. If I wrote it online, yeah there is evidence right there. That is why websites do not allow suicide talk or allow the talk about telling someone to self harm because of stuff like this and it's to avoid liability. On Twitter, you can actually report a suicide tweet and report it as self harm, same as if they are posting personal information about themselves eg. home address, banking information.

It's doesn't matter if someone is doing it for attention and out of manipulation because they didn't like being held accountable for their actions. It's taken seriously. Let that be a lesson for them when they see the cops show up at their house because someone reported them for suicide attempt. This sort of thing actually happened and this person was pissed someone reported her tweet and called the cops on her having the officer show up at her house and she had to convince him she was okay and not a danger to herself. She wrote all about it on her page and then eventually deleted her account after she lost so many followers and customers. She created content for people, art stuff. No one likes to be accused of pedophilia and that is what she did so hence the consequence she got. And of course, those who reacted to her attack on them got accused of bullying when she was the bully. My online friend thinks she was just trolling when she wrote that and I took it too personally. Then it all backfired on her and she couldn't handle it. Boo f*****g hoo.

Let me get this straight. If I want to murder someone and I simply abuse them to a point where they take their own life, I can get away with murder?

Under the current laws in many nations around the world that does appear to be the case. My post however said that it shouldn't be the case in my eyes though.

Yes you can and it happens all the time. The bullied victims have committed suicide before because they couldn't take it anymore. There was one mom that pretended to be a 13 year old kid online to get back at Megan and she had a online relationship with her posing as a kid that isn't even real and one day she broke up with her and said the world is better off without her. She hung herself. No charges were ever filed.

Here is the story about her:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suicide_of_Megan_Meier

I remember hearing about it on the Dr. Phil show too.

However, reason why it's so easy to get away with this is because if we charged every person for someone's suicide, then people wouldn't be able to break up with their partners or not be able to stand up for themselves because that person may kill themselves if you say no.

So it's very difficult to charge someone for someone's suicide and very hard to prove they had intentions to make them commit suicide. Unless they say out loud "You should kill yourself" "the world is better off without you" and also helping them commit it and giving them suggestions how they can do it. If you do none of this, yeah it's very easy to get away with it, I call it legal murder.

It can be argued that you would be only an accessory to suicide.  It can also be argued that you could have done more to prevent the suicide, and thus could be charged with "Negligent Homicide".

But First-Degree Murder?  Unless you took an active role in the actual suicide, and were physically present when the suicide occurred, you are not likely to be so charged.I think League_Girl hit the nail on the head.  I would hate to have to go to prison because someone committed suicide after I had turned them down for a date.

It gets more complex the more you theorise over it. A man who tells a multi millionare who's mentally sharp and happy to "go and kill yourself" after said man assumes he have been ripped off for new double glazed windows is a lot less serious than for example a carer who's at his wits end caring for a venerable person who tells the vulnerable person to "go and kill yourself" every day until that person actually does. Where the line is drawn between an angry retort and genuine sinister malice is hard to gauge.

I think you better check your national laws. You will find that a premeditated killing, whether you are directly instrumental or not, is a criminal offence. It has nothing to do whether it is easy to prosecute.

The law is usually black and white but the difference between the letter of the law and spirit of the law (common law) is completely different and in the court room things are rarely black and white. That is why lawyers get paid the sometimes insane salaries they get.

Simple, don't tell someone to kill themselves or say anything that will lead to death such as "go jump off a bridge." How hard is that?

It's actually very, very hard. Morality of it aside how many stroppy teens have told their parents to go and jump off a bridge of kill themselves in a heated argument just today? Probably a more than I can count .

I have never ever told anyone to go kill themselves nor have I told them to go harm themselves. I have never seen anyone around me talk this way at all to anyone, especially during fights and arguments other than my kids talking this way because they got influenced by youtube stuff they had been watching and we had to put a stop to it and tell them "we do not talk this way, it can get you into lot of trouble with the law."

Only thing I remember hearing as a child was "I am gonna kill you" and "my parents are gonna kill me" long before this got perceived as a threat because of all the school shootings. But it was pretty easy to cut this phrase from my vocabulary in junior high. Same as how easy it is to not say the R word.

Common law is not "spirit of the law." Common law are the basic legal principles that underpin the legal system that is not statutory or constitutional. Murder is clearly defined and so are the rights of the defendant. I am sorry, but you are not going to justify using abuse to kill, regardless if it is difficult to prosecute.