When does freedom of speech become unacceptable?

[aliceBB]

I mentioned perspective, the Daily Mail, other mainstream media outlets or right wing groups do not encourage the beheading, extermination, massacre of anyone in this country, whereas radical Islamists do, so regardless of what you think is published in the DM, there is an upsurge of Islamophobia due mainly because radical Islamists were allowed to voice their vile bile on British streets as well as plotting terrorist attacks, hence creating that very climate of fear and intolerance you mention !

 

Here, have some full stops.... you sound as though you are ranting.

 

Please do not misinterpret my posts. If you read what I have written you will see that in my view the climate of insecurity and distrust of foreigners which is increasing in this country is due not only to the behaviour of radical Islamists but also to the way foreigners generally and poor immigrants in particular are represented in the generally conservative/right-leaning press we have in the UK.

 

Not only, but also. Got it?

[Harleyman]

It does indeed, and the way I see it is from the point of view of an innocent man being put to death by his country for a crime he knows he's innocent of.

 

When people advocate bringing the death penalty back I ask them would they be prepared to vote for it if a referendum was held and a record kept of all those who voted yes?

 

Then, when it was proven beyond any doubt that an innocent person had been executed - as inevitably it would be at some point - all those who voted for a return to capital punishment would be entered into a random lottery draw.

 

The person selected would then be executed themselves.

 

This seems fair to me, after all, the innocent man was exactly that, innocent.

 

The yes voter on the other hand played a part in the death of that innocent man, and as they take that last walk they can comfort themselves with the thought that they had helped to bring about the situation by their own actions, and so were not in fact innocent.

 

How do you think the result of a referendum under those rules would go?

 

True it has happened that an innocent person has been put to death and later on found to be innocent. I think DNA will now go a long way in preventing that happening.

 

The British system of death by execution was fatally flawed in a system that was always controversial.

The period between the time of sentencing and the time of execution was far too short. One appeal against the sentencing was allowed for review by the Home Secretary and if that appeal was turned down then it was a meeting with old Albert Pierpoint very shortly afterwards.

 

After the Timothy Evans trial debacle and his hanging it's small wonder that the abolitionists finally prevailed.

 

To be fair to the American system there is an extensive appeal process to be gone through which could and does take years in many cases. That has resulted in prisoners who would have eventually been executed being released after been found innocent. I think it would be fair that the prisoner in a case like that should be compensated by the particular State in the amount of at least 70,000 dollars for every year of incarceration. He may have lost his youth but money would in a small way compensate for that.

[Michael_W]

Here, have some full stops.... you sound as though you are ranting.

 

Please do not misinterpret my posts. If you read what I have written you will see that in my view the climate of insecurity and distrust of foreigners which is increasing in this country is due not only to the behaviour of radical Islamists but also to the way foreigners generally and poor immigrants in particular are represented in the generally conservative/right-leaning press we have in the UK.

 

Not only, but also. Got it?

 

Just as I thought died in the wool apologist lefty nonsense, there is not a chicken and egg situation here, you aimed blame generally in the direction of the right, no misinterpretation of your post or any rant on my part dear ..... get it

[Harleyman]

During the period of 2001 - 2010 thirty people who had killed were released from jail, only to subsequently kill again.

 

As some of these people would have been hung in the good old days, and as you oppose the death penalty, you are responsible for the deaths of the innocents subsequently murdered by them.

 

We've just put the names into the hat, had the draw held under your rules and your name came out.

 

Up the steps you go my lad!

 

Suing the hell out of the idiots who released these killers might be a solution.

I always believe that hitting people where it really hurts, in the pocket is a sound way to help balance their judgement a little better in the future

[LeMaquis]

.....right wing groups do not encourage the beheading, extermination, massacre of anyone in this country......

 

Really? Do you think that the likes of the BNP, NF, Britain First, etc, are all committed to peace, love and understanding?

[Michael_W]

Really? Do you think that the likes of the BNP, NF, Britain First, etc, are all committed to peace, love and understanding?

 

Did I say that .... NO, however I don't openly see any of them taking to the streets wanting people beheaded, massacred, murdered or exterminated, If you have any links or evidence to the contrary please feel free to post them, there are plenty from the radical islamists !

[Harleyman]

Fair enough, but life meaning exactly that, life, solves everyone's problem I would have thought.

 

No possibility of killing an innocent man, but full retribution for the crime.

 

Any killer sentenced to life shouldn't enjoy the comforts of a modern prison. Solitary confinement for the first seven years with no contact, food passed through a slot in the door, no reading material, no visits, no anything but no physical abuse either. There should be a picture of his victim hung from the cell wall, the only thing apart from a WC, bunk and wash bowl. The picture would be the last thing he saw at night and the first thing in the morning.

 

A few months of that and he'd soon be hollering he'd "found Jesus" at last

[aliceBB]

Just as I thought died in the wool apologist lefty nonsense, there is not a chicken and egg situation here, you aimed blame generally in the direction of the right, no misinterpretation of your post or any rant on my part dear ..... get it

The chance of anyone getting your frantic verbal spewings is remote, I'm afraid. Stop gibbering and slow down.

[Harleyman]

Not like you to miss the point Harleyman.

 

---------- Post added 06-02-2015 at 19:39 ----------

 

 

And...to answer your question...we don't!

 

So who is Uncle Sam trusting in then?

 

I guess like me.... on the soundness of the US dollar on the world money market

Edited February 6, 2015 by Harleyman

[Aleksandr]

In light of recent happenings locally and around the world (especially Paris). When does freedom of speech become unacceptable?

 

I had to disagree with David Cameron about being able to say or write what you want. I didn't hear what specifically he said, but I was told that what he said in a round about way.

 

Does a certain amount of freedom of speech have to be reconsidered, I think it does to some extent.

 

What's other peoples views? Personally I'm not looking for a right or wrong answer - just a discussion.

No one has a right not to be offended. Freedom of speech is above that. Freedom of speech becomes wrong when it involves inciting unjustified violence and so forth. So criticising or questioning someone's faith can never be wrong. Stirring up fellow believers to murder in the name of a religion, for example, would always be wrong.