Free speech: To allow or disallow?

[Crispin]

Off the back of “that other thread” I noticed this on google news: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...r-comments-about-woolwich-murder-8630368.html

I wholly agree with free speech and to be allowed to say whatever you want to say. Having said that, I think that opinions need to be aired when those around you share, or are willing to hear them. That is why we have platforms and groups that promote that. If something is said where it is deemed unacceptable by the wider audience or is totally out of context of the platform, then I agree with removing it.

What I don’t agree with though is how someone can be arrested (or not in some cases) for airing an opinion. To say “I like sex with a child” is airing an opinion which is promoting something that is totally illegal; that is a valid case for arrest. To voice your dislike or hatred for someone or an ethic group is, well, your opinion – we’re all entitled to it.

The blatant biased, or fear-of-reprisal, towards one direction of hatred and another is however curious….

Just curious about it all….

 

[Graham]

Free speach to a limit, yes.

I like rabbits, absolutly nothing against rabbits.

I love rabbits,,I love rabbits,,I love rabbits,,I love rabbits,,

Gra.

 

[Crispin]

But what limit? Your limits seems to be different to other peoples limits.

 

[Chris]

Much of this comes down to perception. And that is a very individual thing, often driven by local (in a global sense) culture. But there are some basic rules that hold true within society too. Unfortunately, again, these are globally local. Knowing and understanding these parameters isn't always easy. It's OK for a group of Irishmen to tell jokes about the Irish (I'd think) but is it OK for the rest of us to do it? I watched Jackie Brown last night - the film and the black people (personally I don't feel comfortable with that phrase but my black friends are) called each other the N word all the way through. But no white person in the film used it toward a black character. If they had, I would have felt uncomfortable because in my eyes it becomes a derogatory term rather than some sort of ethnic greeting. Where the rules are even more obtuse sometimes is where race and religion cross. For many of us, we are British (don't start than one again). That is my identity. Not heterosexual, not white, not atheist, but British. For others their identity is Muslim or Jewish. Above all and anything else, that is their identity. Now what I can't answer is why I wouldn't find a joke about a British person as offensive, but Jew may well find a joke about Jews as being offensive. They are both jokes about our identity. However, if we took the joke about the Yorkshireman being found dead at the back of a pay as you leave bus - it would be mildly amusing. If we said the same about a Jew being found dead on a pay as you leave bus, actually I can see people laughing in the same way. They are traits I suppose but ones equally applicable to many 'identities'

It's when the target is so specific, aimed in essence to almost BE offensive, not simply taken by to some to be offensive that I have to question its publication. There isn't a rule book for this. Somethng are described as being near the knuckle. Well when you get to that point, you have to ask whether you should or not - and sometimes a near the knuckle joke is funnier for pushing that boundary. It's whjen it goes beyond the pail that people get understandably upset.

But who hasn't laughed at recent Jimmy Saville jokes? Are they funny? Would you think it funny if that had been you? I might have winced at some, but I confess I found them very funny. Perhaps because they were well scripted.

All I can really say is that each of us has a moral compass that says when something is funny or not - to us. And we are all different (within obvious groups) but knowing that something is likely to cause offence to others should be in that set.

What can I say, I don't write the rules.

 

[majic79]

Saying "I like playing with badgers" implies that you've already played with badgers, and in a badger isolation zone, where it's illegal (fer instance) to play with a badger, then you might get away with it, you might get locked up for it (whereas saying "I play with badgers" is a definite admission of guilt in that same zone). Saying "I like the idea of playing with a badger" - well that sounds similar, but says something else - that you're a potential player, but you've not carried out an action that has broken the law (nor have you incited others to do the deed, but you may have made them think about it). Saying "Playing with badgers would be awesome, we should all go do it" - that's incitement.

It's all about the what's said and how it's said. So I think it should be free to voice your opinion - weather you think something is good or bad, just be prepared to deal with counter-opinion if it turns out you're an evil git trying to take over the world. Telling others to go and do something is definitely not voicing an opinion, but if you say "I think that we should stop the bloody badger players" - that's an opinion and not incitement. Heat of the moment can make you say the wrong thing though.

Taking offense to something - well that's purely subjective. So taking the badger example again. Where the culture has grown up worshipping the badger, the badger is held holy, playing with a badger has evolved to be taboo. Society says "you should not do this, it's bad", it gets ingrained into your psyche, and when you see someone playing with a badger, it conflicts with your internal culture that says "this is bad". We have certain moral compasses that make one thing or another "good" or "evil" - murdering badgers would be one of the "evil" things - but everything else is a shade of grey, with society playing a role in guiding that compass, the problem is sometimes someone might flip a viewpoint, and all of a sudden, instead of thinking "this is bad", you start to think "this might be good".

So our glorious badgers have dictated we should not incite badgers to badger one another - I'm fine with that, I want them to go away, so I'll incite my fellow badgers to stand strong and resist the weasels. Or moles. Or pigs.

 

[majic79]

The blatant biased, or fear-of-reprisal, towards one direction...

What have you got against One Direction anyway?

 

[Olazz]

For many of us, we are British (don't start than one again). That is my identity. Not heterosexual, not white, not atheist, but British. For others their identity is Muslim or Jewish. Above all and anything else, that is their identity.

The issue in my view is that there seems to be confusion of what constitites Identity.

If you are British, then that is an identity, as is American, Kenyan, Angolan, Congolese, Australian....

Being Muslim does not define your identity no more than being a Jew defines your identity. Neither is a race or identity; one an adherent of Islam...and the other Judaism.. defacto religions.

Having an opinion of either, good or bad cannot possibly be classed a racism as is so often the case.

It is a terrible reflection of British society today, that freedom of speech allows certain sectors to threaten, denigrate, challenge,insult and call for slaughter, with a complete disregard for law and order, yet other sectors are so overly worried about the PC element of their speech that nothing can ever be said without someone raising the race issue or causing someone offence..... it seems to work one way.... its alright for a black man to call a white man racist and be offensive, but it never is levied the other way. Some of the most bigoted racists I know are non white!

Lets not be fooled "Freedom of speech" is a misnomer in most of the western world today.

my 2c

 

[TonyP]

IMO everyone is entitled to their opinion and also should be free to express said views, however there are limits whether we like it or not.

Expressing your point of view in a public place like this forum has to come with some sensitivity and responsibility, you will know when you say something if it will offend, I believe even the staunchest racist knows that the K or N words will offend and probably say them to do so.

We have a community forum that is well run and on the whole everyone gets on well, so I personally cant understand the need to be insensitive. Its not the first time members have been offended by jokes that poke fun at others, so perhaps its time to take stock of what kind of club we want to be?

 

[Chas]

IMO everyone is entitled to their opinion and also should be free to express said views, however there are limits whether we like it or not.

Expressing your point of view in a public place like this forum has to come with some sensitivity and responsibility, you will know when you say something if it will offend, I believe even the staunchest racist knows that the K or N words will offend and probably say them to do so.

We have a community forum that is well run and on the whole everyone gets on well, so I personally cant understand the need to be insensitive. Its not the first time members have been offended by jokes that poke fun at others, so perhaps its time to take stock of what kind of club we want to be?

I'm sure things get posted without there being 'a need' to be insensitive, I think it is more a case of some people having a knee jerk reaction and being just a little too sensitive and HTT.

Could you expand on "What kind of club we want to be" are you possibly suggesting we vet our membership? or post what is seen as a racist comment and you're out? if I'm going to be censored in this way I'd be only too glad to leave.
I'm not saying it is the same, but there are a lot of members here who left another forum because of a certain persons censorship, I'd hate to see this club go the same way.

 

[Ian Rubie]

As has been said, there are plenty of forums where jokes of an insensitive nature can be told. In my opinion this forum should not be one of them. To my way of seeing things some of the "jokes" certain members post go too far.

Personally I just ignore certain threads but this is an open public forum and visitors or new members might not know which names to ignore.

 

[TonyP]

No I am not advocating editing posts, vetting members, reading PM's etc, as clearly we started this place due to the going ons at the other site. But do you advocate that its ok to post stuff that offends for whatever reason? Poking fun at someone because we can or because we are in the majority does not make it right.

As for what club i would like this to be.... well thats easy, all about Landcruisers in a tolerant and respectful way to all.

 

[Olazz]

But do you advocate that its ok to post stuff that offends for whatever reason?

People today are so very easily offended at many things; One cannot cause offence, one can only take offence IMHO.

If I were a troglodyte and you chose to call me that, I may fine with it, but someone, somewhere will want to leap to my defence and shout ...."offensive etc etc"
Who is to be the arbiter of what is offensive to whom?

If you are therefore advocating free speech, then it must be just that! The right to say what ever you chose to whom ever you chose.

We can all just turn off or block individuals who we find unpalatable..... but the forum must allow anyone to post and say whatever they feel. The rotten apples will soon leave if they are ignored.

 

[Gary Stockton]

Guys - you ALL agreed to the rules of the club. If you didn't, you either failed to understand them or lied. Simple.

To quote:

Although the administrators and moderators of Land Cruiser Club will attempt to keep all objectionable messages off this site, it is impossible for us to review all messages. All messages express the views of the author, and neither the owners of Land Cruiser Club, nor vBulletin Solutions, Inc. (developers of vBulletin) will be held responsible for the content of any message.

By agreeing to these rules, you warrant that you will not post any messages that are obscene, vulgar, sexually-oriented, hateful, threatening, or otherwise violative of any laws.

The owners of Land Cruiser Club reserve the right to remove, edit, move or close any content item for any reason.

--------------------------/end quote

So - we need to remember this is NOT a closed forum. We are open to view by all. We should want to project a certain image - and while human rights are great, they should be tempered with a bit of sensitivity. What's acceptable in the pub or around the camp fire isn't at work - if we can get it right there we should be able to get it right here.

My tuppence worth ...

 

[Crispin]

Could you expand on "What kind of club we want to be" are you possibly suggesting we vet our membership?

Land Cruiser Club. Of course we vet our members Chas. When last have you seen a spammer here? When last did someone come here trying to sell a rear half-shaft for a LR 90? I have an automated system which does not allow them to register. Should one slip through, and they do from time to time, people let me know and I delete him. If we did not vet the members then we would have many spammers which would be boring to the rest of the members and eventually, cause them to leave (or not join) because that's all we appear to be.
Flip that around - this is the Land Cruiser Club - it's open to the whole world regardless of creed or colour, the only real criteria is that you have some interest in Land Cruisers (or you'll be pretty bored here). On that basis, anyone and everyone is welcome. However, if there are posts that are unacceptable to the general membership then the members who find the general content offensive will leave or just never come along. If we had masses of spam messages which you found boring and annoying, would you hang around? No, you would ask me or a mod to remove them. The messages though would look just fine and perfectly in-context on www.SpamMessageForum.com.

if I'm going to be censored in this way I'd be only too glad to leave.
I'm not saying it is the same, but there are a lot of members here who left another forum because of a certain persons censorship, I'd hate to see this club go the same way.

I think the main difference between this "censorship" and "that" censorship is that Simon was rather underhanded with it; reading PMs, changing adverts to something totally different, deleting some adverts because he did not like them (no matter how relevant they were)
This? This was because of a number of emails and post reports asking what the point of the thread was and that it was over the top, which, I happen to agree with given the context.

To take aim and fire at the idiots and their apparent twisted interpretation of a religion and killing a soldier, well, that's fair game. I am a radical atheist (apathy stops me from doing anything radical though) and I really do not understand how someone can believe in something that has never been proven, causes so much hurt pain and suffering etc etc - if I wanted to publicly ridicule it all, I would find a website where there are people who would agree with me and I would come here to talk about Land Cruisers.

I'm not fighting to protect all those who don't yet know that they have been offended; We recently lost a very active member because he was offended by a post which was "poking fun". I asked if I should remove the posts which were poking fun at the Irish, the South Africans, the Aussies etc as I was unsure, in this case, where the line was. [TIC] I was not about to get dragged into a debate of feelings and sensitivity. Sadly, said member left us.

We're never going to keep everyone happy all the time and we're not aiming to. If there is a thread or topic you don't like, don't read it - simple. It's like people saying "oh I can't stand watching Jeremy Clarkson on TV". Well, don't....

If you wanted a section which is for members only, that can be set quite easily. If people did not want to view it then they don't have to.
What shall we call it? The Pub?

 

[Jon Wildsmith]

something doesn't have to be outright offensive to be unwelcoming. I suspect a lot of those who we might imagine could be offended have heard worse and think these are pathetic efforts but are unlikely to conclude this is a good place for them to talk Landcruisers. Can we talk about Landcruisers please if that's the best we can do, I can get crap jokes from a xmas cracker (sorry if that offends, freedom of speech and all that right?).

 

[Chas]

I can get crap jokes from a xmas cracker (sorry if that offends, freedom of speech and all that right?).

Sorry Jon, I find that deeply offensive. That deserved three laughs.

 

[Chas]

If you wanted a section which is for members only, that can be set quite easily. If people did not want to view it then they don't have to.
What shall we call it? The Pub?

If that would stop the HTT people from winging then yes good idea.

 

[AndyCook]

Come on chaps, get out driving or modding your 'cruisers or planning your summer trips, thats what I'm doing

 

[clivehorridge]

I don't know the degree of relevance of what I may write here because I have all sorts of thoughts running through my head, many which won't be aired because I'd write a book otherwise.

I know I'm older than many on the forum and I'm probably old-fashioned at heart although I try to stay young at heart at the same time.

Its my opinion that Britain has always prided itself for being open, tolerant and free. That's one of the reasons why it's such an attractive place to be, especially to people from cultures and laws in other countries that don't have that freedom. This shouldn't be a reason for tightening up on freedom, that would defeat the whole object.

Having lived in several very different countries for various lengths of time, the one thing that stands out for me is that humans are very much the same wherever they have been brought up. They have the same hopes, the same fears, the same worries, have we enough money, are their kids going the wrong way, is the wife happy, is she seeing someone else and so on. They have the same mother-in-law jokes and their equivalent of the "Englishman, Irishman and Scotsman" type jokes as we do, wherever they are and whatever religion or colour they are.

IMO anyone that's offended by such jokes is over sensitive to the extreme. A joke is a joke and its either funny or it's not, but it's still a joke. The problem is, I would soon give up this forum if it tolerated blatant hatred, which I'm confident that it wouldn't. If Britain got to the stage that Germany did under nazi control where open abuse, physical, mental and systematic propaganda against a particular race or colour became acceptable and encouraged, then that would be the saddest day.

Humans have a duty of self control. Freedom should be respected and not abused. Whatever our beliefs and opinions are, we should respect those that have counter beliefs and opinions. That's what tolerance and sociable behavior is all about, dignity in ones conduct as a matter of course.

Ranting racial or religeous hatred has no dignity and it has no place in Britain, irrespective of what race, colour or religeon the "offender" is. There's nothing racial or predjudiced about that remark. Murder is against the law, it also cuts across the very basis of of any society, which is why it became against the law.

Murder for the purposes of making a racial or religeous statement is abhorrent. The guy I saw in Woolwich holding a machete covered in an innocent's blood should never be set free. He was as inhuman as any child molester or child killer. So as tolerant as I am, I could not accept freedom of speach that would extend to broadcasts that incite or promote such behavior.

Yes, freedom of speach for all, but only for those who respect it for what it's worth, not those who abuse it.

That's a bit of my bit. Sorry it was so boring.

Now, did you hear the joke about the Serb, the Spaniard and the Latvian? ......

 

[Shayne]

Does this mean we can't pick on landrovers any more