Message from @The Electric Lizard

Discord ID: 625089607507378177


2019-09-21 22:00:50 UTC  

They are in the UK

2019-09-21 22:00:52 UTC  

Who

2019-09-21 22:00:55 UTC  

Yes they are in the us

2019-09-21 22:00:56 UTC  

I've shown you they are.

2019-09-21 22:00:59 UTC  

Give me a case study

2019-09-21 22:01:02 UTC  

Bomb threats, even if they're a joke.

2019-09-21 22:01:04 UTC  

no you have not

2019-09-21 22:01:08 UTC  

Over Hate Speech

2019-09-21 22:01:13 UTC  

Do you not know what the patriot act is?

2019-09-21 22:01:17 UTC  

Who in the US was arrested for Hate Speech

2019-09-21 22:01:19 UTC  

?

2019-09-21 22:01:39 UTC  

<:thinkcide2:462282425486147585>

2019-09-21 22:01:39 UTC  

Just one name of someone convicted for Hate Speech in the US

2019-09-21 22:01:57 UTC  

Does anyone have it?

2019-09-21 22:02:01 UTC  

This shit ain’t even about the uk

2019-09-21 22:02:10 UTC  

A name of someone who was convicted for hate speech in the US

2019-09-21 22:02:23 UTC  

oh wait

2019-09-21 22:02:25 UTC  

you can't

2019-09-21 22:02:35 UTC  

cause they ruled hate speech was free speech

2019-09-21 22:02:56 UTC  

We need to do exactly that in the UK

2019-09-21 22:03:03 UTC  

we need to

2019-09-21 22:03:07 UTC  

but probably wont

2019-09-21 22:03:24 UTC  

We can

2019-09-21 22:03:25 UTC  

not that it matters to me

2019-09-21 22:03:32 UTC  

Just pass it through Parliament

2019-09-21 22:03:34 UTC  

"

Eleven years after the St. Paul case, the U.S. Supreme Court revisited the issue of cross-burning after three people were arrested separately for violating a similar Virginia ban.

In a 5-4 ruling written by Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, the Supreme Court held that while cross-burning may constitute illegal intimidation in some cases, a ban on the public burning of crosses would violate the First Amendment.

"[A] State may choose to prohibit only those forms of intimidation," O'Connor wrote, "that are most likely to inspire fear of bodily harm." As a caveat, the justices noted, such acts can be prosecuted if the intent is proven, something not done in this case."

2019-09-21 22:03:37 UTC  

the pc shit is mostly south end

2019-09-21 22:03:38 UTC  

Virginia v. Black (2003)

2019-09-21 22:04:02 UTC  

That is an action

2019-09-21 22:04:04 UTC  

Not words

2019-09-21 22:04:07 UTC  

Speech non the less.

2019-09-21 22:04:10 UTC  

Just pass it through parliament™️

2019-09-21 22:04:10 UTC  

^^^^^^^^^^

2019-09-21 22:04:12 UTC  

IT IS LITERALLY

2019-09-21 22:04:13 UTC  

Moving the goalposts now.

2019-09-21 22:04:14 UTC  

Count Dankula was convicted over words alone

2019-09-21 22:04:14 UTC  

A DEED

2019-09-21 22:04:18 UTC  

NOT A WORD

2019-09-21 22:04:29 UTC  

Deeds are speech <:pot_of_kek:544849795433496586>

2019-09-21 22:04:35 UTC  

Ok, If it is passed through Parliament it becomes statute law and the courts have to apply it