CKA Forums
Login 
canadian forums
bottom
 
 
Canadian Forums

Author Topic Options
Offline
Forum Elite
Forum Elite
 Montreal Canadiens
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 1176
PostPosted: Fri Dec 20, 2019 3:41 am
 


BeaverFever wrote:
HOLY FUCK NOBODY IS ARBITRARILY DECIDING WHATS ILLEGAL OR NOT WHERE ARE YOU GETTING THIS NONSENSE???

Go re-read my last post please. For the love of god.





:lol: :lol: :lol:


Offline
CKA Super Elite
CKA Super Elite
 Toronto Maple Leafs
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 9556
PostPosted: Fri Dec 20, 2019 7:14 am
 


Beve- ever hear of creep?


Offline
CKA Moderator
CKA Moderator
 Vancouver Canucks


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 65472
PostPosted: Fri Dec 20, 2019 10:01 am
 


Thanos wrote:
Goombye CKA. See y'all in the bread line at the re-education camp. What a fuckin' pajama-boy country this now is. :lol:


I'll buy CKA from Trevor, move it to a US server, and then send Trudeau a handwritten letter inviting him to kiss my ass. [kissass]


Offline
CKA Moderator
CKA Moderator
 Vancouver Canucks


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 65472
PostPosted: Fri Dec 20, 2019 10:14 am
 


newz wrote:
Can I still state that islam is a steaming pile of dogshit?

Further, when I prove islam is a steaming pile of dogshit in court, will I be found guilty of offending peoples feelings and therefore charged with hate speech despite the fact that I have used their own texts to make my case?


Truth is not a defense for the cucks on the left. If anything truth is an even greater crime than is the underlying charge.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 14674
PostPosted: Fri Dec 20, 2019 11:49 am
 


BeaverFever wrote:
HOLY FUCK NOBODY IS ARBITRARILY DECIDING WHATS ILLEGAL OR NOT WHERE ARE YOU GETTING THIS NONSENSE???

Go re-read my last post please. For the love of god.


Okay since this appears to have turned into an argument about semantics i'm going to ask one question to clear up my concerns and then I'll let it rest.

So, here we go:

Quote:
Justin Trudeau has told four of his cabinet ministers in his mandate letters to them that they are tasked with regulating online hate speech. Trudeau told the new heritage minister that he’s to “create new regulations for social media platforms, starting with a strong requirement that all platforms remove illegal content, including hate speech, within 24 hours or face significant penalties.” Except Trudeau doesn’t include a definition of “hate speech,” nor does he direct the heritage minister to come up with a definition.


https://www.informationliberation.com/?id=61028

So here's the question.

If we have laws that clearly define what constitutes "hate speech" why did Trudeau find a need to instruct the Heritage Minister to "create new regulations for social media platforms" pertaining to hate speech on the internet?


Offline
CKA Super Elite
CKA Super Elite
 Toronto Maple Leafs
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 9556
PostPosted: Fri Dec 20, 2019 12:06 pm
 


Exactly, the problem now, Beve, becomes what qualifies as "hate speech". Is it the usual Nazi dreck, or do they add anyone with a dissenting view?

Mandates like this are great ways to whittle away freedoms,


Offline
CKA Super Elite
CKA Super Elite


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 9938
PostPosted: Fri Dec 20, 2019 12:58 pm
 


Oh FFS the "freedom" to use hate speech?
I assume that Judges will "arbitrarily" decide if what someone does is hate speech, just like they arbitrarily fake news witch hunt maliciously persecute bank robbers.

Jesus, you guys have swallowed so much of your own bullshit you think everything is a threat or conspiracy against you.


Offline
Forum Elite
Forum Elite
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 1552
PostPosted: Fri Dec 20, 2019 1:05 pm
 


Freakinoldguy wrote:
If we have laws that clearly define what constitutes "hate speech" why did Trudeau find a need to instruct the Heritage Minister to "create new regulations for social media platforms" pertaining to hate speech on the internet?
In The Anarcky, it is called a trial balloon.

Trudeau's boss is testing the waters to see how the tards respond.


Offline
CKA Super Elite
CKA Super Elite
 Toronto Maple Leafs
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 9556
PostPosted: Fri Dec 20, 2019 1:07 pm
 


Hate Speech is already illegal.

Quote:
319 (1) Every one who, by communicating statements in any public place, incites hatred against any identifiable group where such incitement is likely to lead to a breach of the peace is guilty of

(a) an indictable offence and is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years; or

(b) an offence punishable on summary conviction.

Marginal note:Wilful promotion of hatred

(2) Every one who, by communicating statements, other than in private conversation, wilfully promotes hatred against any identifiable group is guilty of

(a) an indictable offence and is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years; or

(b) an offence punishable on summary conviction.

Marginal note:Defences

(3) No person shall be convicted of an offence under subsection (2)

(a) if he establishes that the statements communicated were true;

(b) if, in good faith, the person expressed or attempted to establish by an argument an opinion on a religious subject or an opinion based on a belief in a religious text;

(c) if the statements were relevant to any subject of public interest, the discussion of which was for the public benefit, and if on reasonable grounds he believed them to be true; or

(d) if, in good faith, he intended to point out, for the purpose of removal, matters producing or tending to produce feelings of hatred toward an identifiable group in Canada.


So, the question is if there is already a law on the books, why does the government feel the need to further crack down on speech?

Because it's less about "Hate Speech" and more about asserting control over the populace. Telling people what to say and what to think is the ultimate goal of this government, they want everyone to be good little drones and not question their decisions. its basically the worst parts of 1984.


Offline
CKA Moderator
CKA Moderator
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 37938
PostPosted: Fri Dec 20, 2019 1:17 pm
 


Freakinoldguy wrote:
So here's the question.

If we have laws that clearly define what constitutes "hate speech" why did Trudeau find a need to instruct the Heritage Minister to "create new regulations for social media platforms" pertaining to hate speech on the internet?


Ever notice how often the question is also the answer?


Offline
CKA Super Elite
CKA Super Elite
 Toronto Maple Leafs
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 9556
PostPosted: Fri Dec 20, 2019 1:21 pm
 


It's still covered under 319(1). Social Media is considered "Public Domain"


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 14674
PostPosted: Fri Dec 20, 2019 1:27 pm
 


DrCaleb wrote:
Freakinoldguy wrote:
So here's the question.

If we have laws that clearly define what constitutes "hate speech" why did Trudeau find a need to instruct the Heritage Minister to "create new regulations for social media platforms" pertaining to hate speech on the internet?


Ever notice how often the question is also the answer?
'

Sorry, that isn't the answer.

But, since you seem to think that it is, could you explain why the current hate laws be can't applied to the internet like they are for every other form of media?

I can't go on TV or rent newspaper space and spout hate speech so why should I be able to do it on the internet and why should the Liberal Gov't need a whole new set of different laws to stop me when the current ones are still applicable no matter the media.


Offline
CKA Super Elite
CKA Super Elite


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 9938
PostPosted: Fri Dec 20, 2019 1:41 pm
 


Simple: do you want Faceboook, Twitter and Instagram do some self-policing because they'd be liable or do you want to hire a shitload of cops to sit on their butts combing the Internet all day?


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 14674
PostPosted: Fri Dec 20, 2019 2:27 pm
 


herbie wrote:
Simple: do you want Faceboook, Twitter and Instagram do some self-policing because they'd be liable or do you want to hire a shitload of cops to sit on their butts combing the Internet all day?


We already have enforcement for our current "hate laws" both on and off the net, so why do we need even more laws when, what we actually might need is more police to do the job properly.

Quote:
Law enforcement agencies have been forced to acknowledge that given the size of networks such as Facebook (which has more than 18 million users in Canada), they cannot be policed without the help of the tech companies themselves.


https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal ... -1.4501653

Although as mentioned before this might just be another attempt by the Liberals to bring back this piece of free speech stifling crap:

Quote:
The law had been enormously contentious, with critics of all political stripes arguing it was overly broad and had weak safeguards around speech rights. Its defenders said the law was a necessary tool to fight hate messages spread through the internet.

Section 13 made it a discriminatory practice to convey messages over the phone or internet that contain “any matter that is likely to expose a person or persons to hatred or contempt,” as long as those people were “identifiable on the basis of a prohibited ground of discrimination.”

Instead of proceeding through the criminal courts, complaints made under Section 13 were dealt with in the quasi-judicial Canadian Human Rights Tribunal, which hears complaints made under the Act. If a Section 13 complaint was upheld, the tribunal could levy fines of up to $10,000 and issue cease-and-desist orders.


https://nationalpost.com/news/politics/ ... ed-in-2013


Offline
CKA Moderator
CKA Moderator
 Vancouver Canucks


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 65472
PostPosted: Fri Dec 20, 2019 2:52 pm
 


herbie wrote:
Oh FFS the "freedom" to use hate speech?
I assume that Judges will "arbitrarily" decide if what someone does is hate speech, just like they arbitrarily fake news witch hunt maliciously persecute bank robbers.

Jesus, you guys have swallowed so much of your own bullshit you think everything is a threat or conspiracy against you.


I hate people who want to use force to silence others.

I have no compunctions or qualms about using disproportionate and excessive force to frustrate, incapacitate, and destroy such people wherever they may be found. I also encourage others to stand up for liberty and to oppose tyrannical authoritarians by any and all means.

If that constitutes 'hate speech' then so be it.


Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 48 posts ]  Previous  1  2  3  4  Next



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 16 guests




 
     
All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner.
The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © Canadaka.net. Powered by © phpBB.