Poll: Most California Democrats want to restrict free speech from white nationalists - Polidicks

[QUOTE=AlbertWesker;52691026]Probably because the people in charge of your country are actually reasonable to some degree. Have you seen how shit the administrations of the last two decades have been here? Shit I mean just look at who we have in charge right now and tell me they wouldn't abuse the fuck out of any laws which limit what people are allowed to say.[/QUOTE] I kind of agree with this. The current administration is blatantly authoritarian, and is already doing its best to legally silence reporters that disagree with it. I don't want to give any amunition to them until things have changed.

At the end of the day, I see the argument for both sides of the argument regarding restricting Nazi's free speech in public. On a private platform, ([b]like an internet forum[/b]) open Nazis should be banned on sight.

[QUOTE=Funktastic Dog;52693530]At the end of the day, I see the argument for both sides of the argument regarding restricting Nazi's free speech in public. On a private platform, ([b]like an internet forum[/b]) open Nazis should be banned on sight.[/QUOTE] Sure. Theres nothing legally or morally wrong with getting rid of Nazis from private places (IE businesses, clubs, establishments, forums, ect) but enacting laws to silence them just opens up an avenue that can be taken advantage of by others down the line to silence groups other than Nazis.

Snip Dumb and snide post bordering on personal attack I should know better

[QUOTE=Cyke Lon bee;52693664]Sure. Theres nothing legally or morally wrong with getting rid of Nazis from private places (IE businesses, clubs, establishments, forums, ect) but enacting laws to silence them just opens up an avenue that can be taken advantage of by others down the line to silence groups other than Nazis.[/QUOTE] i'm not saying this for a "epic zinger", but I am seeing this slippery slope a lot with these conversations, and I have to wonder exactly how one could go from silencing Nazis to say, silencing trade unions? because to me, that would be less of a slope and just a sheer drop off of a cliff [I]that said,[/I] I figure that the worry is that a government could write an open-ended law that could silence anyone the government deemed a threat which is understandably something we all want to avoid (especially here in the UK)

[QUOTE=EXPLOOOSIONS!;52693751]i'm not saying this for a "epic zinger", but I am seeing this slippery slope a lot with these conversations, and I have to wonder exactly how one could go from silencing Nazis to say, silencing trade unions? because to me, that would be less of a slope and just a sheer drop off of a cliff [I]that said,[/I] I figure that the worry is that a government could write an open-ended law that could silence anyone the government deemed a threat which is understandably something we all want to avoid (especially here in the UK)[/QUOTE] All it takes is a change of administration. Right now, we got a guy in office who is discrediting news medias he doesn't agree with. He could easily warp a law to silence racists to silence them instead of just discrediting them. All it takes is one shitty administration to abuse powers meant for good, and America has shown that its willing to elect a racist xenophobe. So is it really mental gymnastics to think that at some point in the future censorship laws could be abused? [editline]18th September 2017[/editline] And I dont think I've used the term "slippery slope" in any of my posts. I've made it clear that I just don't want to powers to silence people to exist at all in this nation, lest they be abused by an awful administration somewhere down the line.

[QUOTE=Cyke Lon bee;52694297]All it takes is a change of administration. Right now, we got a guy in office who is discrediting news medias he doesn't agree with. He could easily warp a law to silence racists to silence them instead of just discrediting them. All it takes is one shitty administration to abuse powers meant for good, and America has shown that its willing to elect a racist xenophobe. So is it really mental gymnastics to think that at some point in the future censorship laws could be abused? [editline]18th September 2017[/editline] And I dont think I've used the term "slippery slope" in any of my posts. I've made it clear that I just don't want to powers to silence people to exist at all in this nation, lest they be abused by an awful administration somewhere down the line.[/QUOTE] Some very fair points here, but my point is how does one go from Nazis to ordinary people? That's where the mental gymnastics lie. I understand that the slippery slope was not something you specifically said, however it is so often repeated with no actual explanation of how we could go from silencing Nazis to silencing something distinctly less serious

[QUOTE=EXPLOOOSIONS!;52696541]Some very fair points here, but my point is how does one go from Nazis to ordinary people? That's where the mental gymnastics lie. I understand that the slippery slope was not something you specifically said, however it is so often repeated with no actual explanation of how we could go from silencing Nazis to silencing something distinctly less serious[/QUOTE] I thought I explained it pretty well, but ok. So "Censor the Nazis" law is passed, and it bans all speech and literature related to the modern Nazi movement, bans pro-Nazi protests, ect. President Steve is sick of getting trashed by NewsCorp, so he passes an Executive Order redefining "Nazi" to include being critical of the Government, so no longer is it legal to criticize the US government. Or President Jon passes an EO to redefine Nazi to include any and all speech relating to x minority religious group. Like I've reiterated many times, all it takes is a change of administration. America has this dumb fucking system where a president can make changes to a law, almost limitlessly, without congressional approval, so a censorship law can easily be abused with this process. America has shown that its willing to elect a xenophobic racist given the right circumstances, so is it mental gymnastics to think that we could elect someone thats willing to censor people other than Nazis?

[QUOTE=Cyke Lon bee;52697063]I thought I explained it pretty well, but ok. So "Censor the Nazis" law is passed, and it bans all speech and literature related to the modern Nazi movement, bans pro-Nazi protests, ect. President Steve is sick of getting trashed by NewsCorp, so he passes an Executive Order redefining "Nazi" to include being critical of the Government, so no longer is it legal to criticize the US government. Or President Jon passes an EO to redefine Nazi to include any and all speech relating to x minority religious group. Like I've reiterated many times, all it takes is a change of administration. America has this dumb fucking system where a president can make changes to a law, almost limitlessly, without congressional approval, so a censorship law can easily be abused with this process. America has shown that its willing to elect a xenophobic racist given the right circumstances, so is it mental gymnastics to think that we could elect someone thats willing to censor people other than Nazis?[/QUOTE] It's pretty common for EOs to be overturned by the judicial though.

[QUOTE=Cyke Lon bee;52697063]I thought I explained it pretty well, but ok. So "Censor the Nazis" law is passed, and it bans all speech and literature related to the modern Nazi movement, bans pro-Nazi protests, ect. President Steve is sick of getting trashed by NewsCorp, so he passes an Executive Order redefining "Nazi" to include being critical of the Government, so no longer is it legal to criticize the US government. Or President Jon passes an EO to redefine Nazi to include any and all speech relating to x minority religious group. Like I've reiterated many times, all it takes is a change of administration. America has this dumb fucking system where a president can make changes to a law, almost limitlessly, without congressional approval, so a censorship law can easily be abused with this process. America has shown that its willing to elect a xenophobic racist given the right circumstances, so is it mental gymnastics to think that we could elect someone thats willing to censor people other than Nazis?[/QUOTE] Thanks, that does make a lot more sense and in general, should be avoided. I do, however, doubt that any law of that nature would be passed by the current administration, or any future ones like them. It's evidently not within Trumps interests to piss on the far right

[QUOTE=Cyke Lon bee;52697063]I thought I explained it pretty well, but ok. So "Censor the Nazis" law is passed, and it bans all speech and literature related to the modern Nazi movement, bans pro-Nazi protests, ect. President Steve is sick of getting trashed by NewsCorp, so he passes an Executive Order redefining "Nazi" to include being critical of the Government, so no longer is it legal to criticize the US government. Or President Jon passes an EO to redefine Nazi to include any and all speech relating to x minority religious group. Like I've reiterated many times, all it takes is a change of administration. America has this dumb fucking system where a president can make changes to a law, almost limitlessly, without congressional approval, so a censorship law can easily be abused with this process. America has shown that its willing to elect a xenophobic racist given the right circumstances, so is it mental gymnastics to think that we could elect someone thats willing to censor people other than Nazis?[/QUOTE] As Lambeth said, that's why we have the judicial branch. So that President Steve and President Jon [I]can't[/I] keep executive orders like the ones you suggested.

[QUOTE=MrRalgoman;52699678]As Lambeth said, that's why we have the judicial branch. So that President Steve and President Jon [I]can't[/I] keep executive orders like the ones you suggested.[/QUOTE] If the judicial branch isn't going to overturn a blatantly unconstitutional restricting speech, they probably wont overturn another one restricting speech.