UK’s Starmer says free speech must be protected, but there is a limit

Given trump just got Kimmel cancelled, I reckon we cant get any worse than the Americans..

**”I draw the line between free speech and speech of those that want to peddle paedophilia and suicide on social media to children; therefore I’m all for free speech, but I’m also for protecting children from things that will harm them”**

I’m not even mad about the ***”If you disagree with the Online Safety Bill then you’re a nonce”*** thing because we all know that it’s stupid and Labour have been throwing out that bullshit since the bill was passed, but I’m more worried about people that aren’t promoting self harm or suicide, but are instead using the internet to talk about their feelings and how they’re feeling.

You shouldn’t be allowed to promote someone taking their own life, but you also shouldn’t feel like you can’t talk about your dark feelings, as someone who’s felt like that before, bottling it up doesn’t help.

Americans love to hate on us for our free speech laws, but you know after looking America I’m very glad how we do things.

‘Free speech’ to me these days basically means, can someone be racist without consequences.

And that limit is “If Klemperer or Chalmers don’t like it.”

Who is Starmer to tell anyone what is the limit?

Ah yes, more censorship. That’s what he wants to be remembered for.

He’s already nuked it with the OSA, and they want and are trying to go further. It gonna get much worse in the near future.

[removed]

Why are we comparing ourselves with America? Starmer is the UK PM and he is addressing stupidity like the arrest of the Irishman and the impact of the OSA.

Personally I think the problem is with the police rather than the legislation. It has always been their job to enforce the law but also be reasonable in their application of it. However they do seem to have become overzealous in recent years and don’t row back until a court or politician calls them out.

They police by consent and for most people an old fashioned bollocking off a copper is enough to keep you in line. For the over entitled and bolshy a night in the cells would suffice. That leaves the police free to deal with the serious offenders including the really nasty online nutters.

Yes we have freedom of speech but it has always been the case that inciteful or provocative speech in a public forum will get you in trouble. Social media has given gobshites more outlets and the police have to respond. Whenever somebody claims loudly the first test should be what else were they doing when they got arrested?

Apparently that limit is projecting a photo of Trump and Epstein

I’m more worried about paid speech. That is speech paid by billionaires to to focus us off massive wealth redistribution to the top since covid and onto minorities and migrants to scapegoat worlds problems onto them

The problem with limits is that as soon as you have them, someone has to decide what they are and then they can be changed to whatever the next person wants them to be. Even if you trust the person currently setting the limits, there’s a very good chance that won’t always be the case.

Suppressing speech just suppresses the root causes of why people might feel the way they do. Either you are lucky and those feelings die down or, more likely, they build to a point where nothing will suppress them and then things properly kick off. Probably better to actually address the problem, rather than try unsuccessfully to bury it. If your population is so easily swayed by a few agitators, that suggests a much wider problem than a few people saying something unpleasant.

Obviously the limit is pretty big because we can’t even display a picture or Epstein and Trump together without being arrested, having our possessions taken and months of bail.

Isn’t it still illegal to criticize the government in the UK? Starmer can’t be serious.

This has always been the case.

There has never been Total Free Speech. There has always been Free speech within whatever limits have been set by the Government in Power.

As soon as there’s a limit it isn’t free speech. It’s permission to say what the government permits you to say.

He has attacked and arrested those using free speech to shame war criminals and tyrants.

Starmer has eroded out free speech.

If someone comes up to me and says: “I believe in freedom of speech, But…” I stop listening.

There’s no such thing as free speech in the UK. The limit is whatever the state decides it is, and it can literally be *anything it wants*.

It doesn’t have a first amendment or anything like it, although it likes to pretend it does.

I hate that the UK has such a weak constitution.

The U.K has been ” an enemy of the internet” for years, we pay to be hidden off the list.

It used to be on Wiki, but not sure it still is.

Wikipedia are suing the U.K govt.

They have been categorised as a social media site and are expected to ask for age verification.

They are not and have no ability to safely store any information involving bank cards,passports etc.

Nor faces; stolen by identity thieves and scammers for sites and identity theft.

They are talking of geododging the U.K.

There is nothing stopping false sites going up and asking for “verification” and making sure “selfie” isn’t an option.
Then being given Passport,Driving Liscence and Bank details to use as they wish.

U.K banks only repay upto 80,000. This will cover most people, but not everybody.

Banks only have so much money in any case.

Online safety is the exact opposite of what this bill.is about.

What it is about is control.

And Starmer being a prude.

Pedophilia has been totally illegal in the U.K since the dawn of the 20th century . It is already illegal.

And pedophilia has been on the Internet before it even was the World Wide Web.

No amount of “laws” is going to stop that.
Better technology and methods of investigation are needed , and a U.N war on pedophilia as an international crime.

It should be considered a form of terrorism.

Inciting self-harm is covered under inciting somebody to commit suicide. This is illegal and on the sites that did it not hard to prove.It may also be illegal under “assisted assault”.

Fining the platform provider might be a better way to tackle these sites.

This is a case of “it’s not affecting me yet,so I’m all for it!”

Which is how Trump got elected. When he campaigned to attack/ destroy “them” everyone who voted for him was hollering hate and now it’s also happening to “us” crying foul!

Starmer’s full of shite as usual, he can bleat on about free speech, but we all know the reality of it, police are constantly receiving reports or complaints about people writing hurty words in social media. The simple fact is unless they are racial abuse or inciting violence etc i.e the really serious issues that should be looked at you could argue it’s all a matter of personal perception, just scroll on down or if you’re like me and threaders with the lefty liberal idiots maybe write an occasional hurty comment back… I feel educating someone with a few facts and truths of what they have been spouting off about then telling them they are a dog shit eating turbo cunt is an adequate response generally. For example people who continue to think Labour are doing a good job are prime targets, along with anyone who might think Ed Milliband is doing a splendid job, that sort of argument.

That limit is at this point so hilariously manipulated it’s scary.

Hell, people have gone to prison for tweets that even the PM has made. Where is the line of hate crime vs. Concern?

And then we have Linehan, a tosspot by any account, but why are you meeting a tubby comedian that couldn’t run a mile at the airport with 5 armed coppers over a tweet, what’s he gonna do, stab you with it?