It literally explicitly does not say that about imprisoning

@nic The question is whether or not the post is a threat or not

it very explicitly says that it has nothing to do with people acting on your post, only the contents of the post

From what I see it's a law against inciting violence against people using a public platform,

doesn't matter if it's a threat or not, as you can see by public act a), it just needs to be public and "reckless"

all that needs to happen is a gay guy gets punched

and if they can link you to it, they will

and you can't argue against it, because your intent doesn't matter

No it doesn't

Hey Nic you're <:gay:382982146249326612>

@nic Intentionally and recklessly inciting violence
that's the phrasing
it's not
a post that is internationally reckless, or incites violence

recklessly is used as an adjective in reference to the incitement of violence in that sentence

` Intentionally and recklessly`
Intentionally **or** recklessly

ffs gypsy

read da englith

it's worded in such a manner that they can ignore your intent and connect it to any violence or threat towards LGBT people

but it has to be threatening violence
that's the crime
not being reckless

you
don't
have
to
be
the
one
threatening
you
just
need
to
be
connected
to
it
somehow

whether you know the person or not

because it's public

and you're "recklessly" posting against LGBT

Well you better leave this chat room then cus we have illegal emotes

@nic No, because of the part you linked that clearly outlines that it literally cannot be connected to any violence towards LGBT people
It has to be judged entirely on whether or not the message itself is an incitement to violence
not its connection to real violence
as you yourself typed out

it is irrelevant whether or not the alleged did the attack, only the public act

you could literally still say gays are trash

its a law against inciting violence or threatening people online

I think you're misreading the part about whether people act on the threat

Words are violence Franti

you're not getting what I'm saying
say I'm a tommy robinson style figure, I critique this shit online all the time but always stay within the law
all it would take is one gay person to get bashed and the govt to go "right, it's connected to him, we'll charge him on this" and I wouldn't have a case against it

because intentions don't matter
I recklessly critised the lgbtlmnop

and now I have a nice cozy cell waiting for me

you're completely misreading that section

https://www.kron4.com/news/world/-flesh-eating-std-reported-in-uk-for-first-time/1389420994

welp

that's a wrap folks

pack it up

we are `d o n e`

Man I wonder how it could have gotten there

Maybe some men of "Asian" decent perhaps?