Cyclone Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 I generally try to avoid getting into debated arguement on the forum with folks who have a posting count which is a large multiple of the days they have been a member on here. Such debate is obviously a waste of time because such folks will always have the last word as they clearly have more time to waste than you. This is probably down to the fact that they are unemployable due to their know it all attitude. I try to avoid making unsupported assumptions as it can make you look very silly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 there is no right to freedom of speech anywhere, try shouting "fire" in a crowded theatre and use "freedom of speech" as a defense. you are not forced to post on a forum and if you feel that the rules of a forum do not allow you to express your views then go elsewhere or even better put your hand in your pocket and start your own forum. Try shouting it in an empty field... In fact, go into that field with a friend and find out if your speech is somehow restricted... There is clearly free speech in some places, what you mean is that freedom of speech doesn't exist everywhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeffrey Shaw Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 But how do we know that you know what you know? It's possible that you only think you know what you know. How is it possible to know what you don't know? Known unknowns, you see. Refer to Donald Rumsfeld: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 If there is wasn't the police wouldn't, couldn't arrest the person refusing. "Other than refusing to take it off". Would it be considered an offence to put back on a balaclava after the police have request it's removal? Is this thread all about you being factually incorrect about the legality of wearing a balaclava??? Anyway, to answer your question, it depends. If there is a S60aa order in force then putting it back on would be an offence. If however you were just asked to take it off to allow you to be identified then you would be free to put it back on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 Make me an offer. Soliciting money for sex is a crime however! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lockjaw Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 "This statement is false". Discuss. Language has limitations. The above demonstrates one of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 I don't think that's a limitation of language, it just demonstrates that people can make contradictory statements. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danot Posted September 13, 2011 Author Share Posted September 13, 2011 Surely it depends on the topic in question. Some things have a right or wrong answer, factual things which someone can check and reference. Other things are entirely a matter of opinion and there is no criteria for being right or wrong. Yes, but it could be argued that the links and articles that someone presented to corroborate their claims are, in actuality, only serving to support their claims as opposed to proving right their claims or disproving the opposing argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
salsafan Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 It takes a lot from someone to really get the context of the thread. Everybody displaces their own wants and desires, instead of really reading, listening, and engaging in understanding what the other person is really saying. The right and wrongs are: -morally -factually People do not always read the context before jumping in. There are no rules, but the mods do have ultimate online power. Which makes any decent debates or discussion quite biased in many respect. Out goes fairness really. It takes a really mature and strong-willed person to pull back and assess the context, and or admits their own wrong-doings. Not many admit their own wrongs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danot Posted September 13, 2011 Author Share Posted September 13, 2011 Is this thread all about you being factually incorrect about the legality of wearing a balaclava??? Anyway, to answer your question, it depends. If there is a S60aa order in force then putting it back on would be an offence. If however you were just asked to take it off to allow you to be identified then you would be free to put it back on. Factually incorrect? What about the legitimacy of my argument? Wouldn't the presumption that a criminal could be wearing a niqab pose the same degree of risk to security as the presumption that a balaclava wearer could be a criminal? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.