Australian Politics Forum - more suppression of free speech

cods

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 88048

Re: more suppression of free speech
Reply #165 - Feb 28^th, 2016 at 10:07am

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 28^th, 2016 at 9:48am:

cods wrote on Feb 28^th, 2016 at 9:46am:

The Heartless Felon wrote on Feb 28^th, 2016 at 9:24am:

Sydney Morning Herald-29 minutes ago

'A middle-aged man spat in a baby's face and then ran off only to be hit by a car in a bizarre unprovoked incident in an inner Sydney street '

I suppose this is OK as long as he did it "artistically"?

better ask sir he is the expert on CRIME and criminal acts..

Don't get so upset for being caught out.

you jest surely??/ have these fopolish young men been charged with a CRIME?>...you are the one that seems to know about it all...

I am just going by what I have read...

where they were charged with a mis....

public NUISANCE,,

you are the one banging on about it being A CRIME.....

you are the one who claims a misdemeanor is the same as a CRIME.......wow they must have beena real CRIME WAVE...

lets have a bet sir?

how many years do you think they will get?...sir

I think they will get off... WITH THIS MASSIVE CRIME....3 months good behaviour..

no record...

but then what would I know..

over to you sir..

Back to top

IP Logged

AiA Gold Member Offline Posts: 18405 Gender:	Re: more suppression of free speech Reply #166 - Feb 28^th, 2016 at 10:12am "fopolish"?
Back to top	“Jerry, just remember: It’s not a lie … if you believe it.” George Costanza IP Logged

sir prince duke alevine

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 23619
Gender: male

Re: more suppression of free speech
Reply #167 - Feb 28^th, 2016 at 10:14am

cods wrote on Feb 28^th, 2016 at 10:07am:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 28^th, 2016 at 9:48am:

cods wrote on Feb 28^th, 2016 at 9:46am:

The Heartless Felon wrote on Feb 28^th, 2016 at 9:24am:

Sydney Morning Herald-29 minutes ago

'A middle-aged man spat in a baby's face and then ran off only to be hit by a car in a bizarre unprovoked incident in an inner Sydney street '

I suppose this is OK as long as he did it "artistically"?

better ask sir he is the expert on CRIME and criminal acts..

Don't get so upset for being caught out.

you jest surely??/ have these fopolish young men been charged with a CRIME?>...you are the one that seems to know about it all...

I am just going by what I have read...

where they were charged with a mis....

public NUISANCE,,

you are the one banging on about it being A CRIME.....

you are the one who claims a misdemeanor is the same as a CRIME.......wow they must have beena real CRIME WAVE...

lets have a bet sir?

how many years do you think they will get?...sir

I think they will get off... WITH THIS MASSIVE CRIME....3 months good behaviour..

no record...

but then what would I know..

over to you sir..

Over to me for what? Public nuisance is a criminal offence and can carry imprisonment. You support the police. Therefore you think these kids are criminals. What am I missing, cods?

Back to top

Disclaimer for Mothra per POST so it is forever acknowledged: Saying 'Islam' or 'Muslims' doesn't mean ALL muslims. This does not target individual muslims who's opinion I am not aware of.

IP Logged

sir prince duke alevine

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 23619
Gender: male

Re: more suppression of free speech
Reply #168 - Feb 28^th, 2016 at 10:17am

The Heartless Felon wrote on Feb 28^th, 2016 at 10:04am:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 28^th, 2016 at 9:54am:

The Heartless Felon wrote on Feb 28^th, 2016 at 9:24am:

Sydney Morning Herald-29 minutes ago

'A middle-aged man spat in a baby's face and then ran off only to be hit by a car in a bizarre unprovoked incident in an inner Sydney street '

I suppose this is OK as long as he did it "artistically"?

And you have shown to have no understanding of freedom of speech and the difference between this and putting together a YouTube video.

Spitting on a person is a criminal act. It's called 'assault'.

Damaging a car or other property by throwing flour bombs or other articles is a criminal act. It's called 'criminal damage'.

Going armed in public even with a replica firearm is a criminal act. I'll let you guess what that one is...

What damage do you cause a car with a flour bomb? If there was actual damage I'd be seeking remuneration from the manufacturer.

It's assault if the person presses charges. If the act is staged then what is the criminal offence?

Back to top

Disclaimer for Mothra per POST so it is forever acknowledged: Saying 'Islam' or 'Muslims' doesn't mean ALL muslims. This does not target individual muslims who's opinion I am not aware of.

IP Logged

cods

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 88048

Re: more suppression of free speech
Reply #169 - Feb 28^th, 2016 at 10:27am

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 28^th, 2016 at 10:17am:

What damage do you cause a car with a flour bomb? If there was actual damage I'd be seeking remuneration from the manufacturer.

what has remuneration and the poor manufacturer got to do with a flour bomb???

now that is a CRIME>

if everyone who committed an affray was charged with committing a CRIME half the population would never be allowed to leave the country..

Back to top

IP Logged

sir prince duke alevine

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 23619
Gender: male

Re: more suppression of free speech
Reply #170 - Feb 28^th, 2016 at 10:32am

cods wrote on Feb 28^th, 2016 at 10:27am:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 28^th, 2016 at 10:17am:

What damage do you cause a car with a flour bomb? If there was actual damage I'd be seeking remuneration from the manufacturer.

what has remuneration and the poor manufacturer got to do with a flour bomb???

now that is a CRIME>

if everyone who committed an affray was charged with committing a CRIME half the population would never be allowed to leave the country..

Can you imagine if flour caused damage to a car? How is that even possible?

Back to top

Disclaimer for Mothra per POST so it is forever acknowledged: Saying 'Islam' or 'Muslims' doesn't mean ALL muslims. This does not target individual muslims who's opinion I am not aware of.

IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 49487
At my desk.

Re: more suppression of free speech
Reply #171 - Feb 28^th, 2016 at 3:43pm

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 28^th, 2016 at 8:30am:

Why are you ignoring your own arguments now freediver? I think it's because you agree how absurd they were Wink

Go over my posts, you'll see I didn't lie.

Are you denying that you claimed the streets were empty?

Alevines arguments so far:

* the streets were empty (except for all those people caught on film in the background)
* the people caught on film in the background couldn't possibly have noticed what was going on, but if they did, they would have known it was staged
* criminals never wear disguises
* crimes are never caught on film
* if you were a gambling man, you'd bet on them surviving
* a cop faced with an automatic weapon will stop and have a look around and realise that crimes are never filmed and criminals never wear disguises
* a kidnapping, bombing or shooting is really no different to a picnic in the park or a game of cricket.
* doing "nothing at all" to prevent the situation escalating counts as a "good effort"
* cops never shoot people accidentally
* it is OK to get shot if it is the cop's fault and their gun gets taken away

Back to top

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.

IP Logged

Soren Gold Member Offline Posts: 25654 Gender:	Re: more suppression of free speech Reply #172 - Feb 28^th, 2016 at 5:47pm Freedom of speech - use it. All the time, everywhere. It's not for some transient government to grant it or take it away.
Back to top	IP Logged

John Smith Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 75258 Gender:	Re: more suppression of free speech Reply #173 - Feb 28^th, 2016 at 5:48pm Soren wrote on Feb 28^th, 2016 at 5:47pm: It's not for some transient government to grant it or take it away. Does that apply to people that work in detention centers Soren?
Back to top	Our esteemed leader: I hope that bitch who was running their brothels for them gets raped with a cactus. IP Logged

mariacostel

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 7344
Sydney
Gender: female

Re: more suppression of free speech
Reply #174 - Feb 28^th, 2016 at 6:10pm

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 27^th, 2016 at 1:13am:

Swagman wrote on Feb 27^th, 2016 at 12:59am:

...that's not free speech.

Just like a fake triple 0. Throw the book at the wenkers

It is freedom of speech because it is artistic expression.

What a cop-out. Artistic experssion has to stay within the law, just like everyone else.

Back to top

IP Logged

mariacostel

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 7344
Sydney
Gender: female

Re: more suppression of free speech
Reply #175 - Feb 28^th, 2016 at 6:12pm

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 27^th, 2016 at 4:31am:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 27^th, 2016 at 4:23am:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 27^th, 2016 at 2:51am:

Swagman wrote on Feb 27^th, 2016 at 1:24am:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 27^th, 2016 at 1:13am:

Swagman wrote on Feb 27^th, 2016 at 12:59am:

...that's not free speech.

Just like a fake triple 0. Throw the book at the wenkers

It is freedom of speech because it is artistic expression.

..so ringing triple 0 as a prank, is artistic expression in your book? Huh

is it ringing triple 0 or pretending to ring triple 0 but actually ringing a staged triple 0, for the purposes of artistic expression?

Get off it swag - for a guy who claims to want small government you are happy to see government interfere in absolutely ridiculous areas. Such as charging kids for making a youtube video.

You miss the point. What if Police had driven past and seen them doing that? They could've been shot dead. Not to mention how traumatised members of the public can be by such an idiotic prank.

If the police saw them and decided to shoot instead of restrain then it would be murder. And again, no trauma - it was all stAgggged. Plus why do you care about trauma? You're one of those "ooooh racism is so pc today". You know how many people are left traumatised be caused of racism? Be consistent!!

What ignorant twaddle. If you pull a fake gun on police and aim as if you were going to shoot, you will be shot - probably dead. And the cops will be perfectly justified.

Where do you get this drivel?

Back to top

IP Logged

Aussie Gold Member Offline OzPolitic Posts: 38865 Gender:	Re: more suppression of free speech Reply #176 - Feb 28^th, 2016 at 6:20pm I'm not gonna read 12 pages to see if this obvious comparison has been drawn: Start at about the 2.00 minute mark. What is the difference?
Back to top	IP Logged

mariacostel

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 7344
Sydney
Gender: female

Re: more suppression of free speech
Reply #177 - Feb 28^th, 2016 at 6:29pm

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 27^th, 2016 at 10:38am:

freediver wrote on Feb 27^th, 2016 at 10:30am:

What were these controls? You keep going on about the effort these kids supposedly went to to prevent things getting out of hand. The only examples of this effort you have presented is that they had a camera, were acting, and the videos do not show a lot of other people. They have "making of" style videos which also show no effort to control the situation.

If a floor cleaner in a supermarket can have the sense to put out a signing warning people they might slip over, do you really think these kids made their "best effort" to avoid an unintentional shootout with police, by doing even less?

It's not a shootout when only one party is doing all the shooting. And if the cops are trigger happy to the point that they don't first assess the situation, see the camera, the fake beards, and the fake guns, then I'm sorry but our society must have a much bigger problem then some kids performing a prank.

What would you suggest we do? All live a beauracratic life? Everything we do is stamped and approved before we do it? They did reasonable best effort: everyone was an actor. Streets were practically empty and where they aren't empty you can see the participants either uninterested or giggling. No one seems to be threatened.

And I love your wet floor sign examples. Guess what: if a person fails to put out a wet floor sign, but mops, it can be foreseen that someone trips and dies. Guess what - it would most likely be deemed an accident and a civil matter between business and plaintiffs. Doubtful the moppee would be found of a criminal act. And guess what, not having a wet floor sign is NOt a criminal act. Yet what about all those what ifs? That poor grandma with her bad hip?

At what distance can you tell a gun is fake? Remember, as a cop you only have 1-2 seconds to assess that. Movie prop guns are designed to look like the real thing for obvious reasons. If you point one of them at a cop, he will rightly assume it is real and you intend to fire and despatch you to the morgue. And it will be entirely your fault.

Back to top

IP Logged

mariacostel

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 7344
Sydney
Gender: female

Re: more suppression of free speech
Reply #178 - Feb 28^th, 2016 at 6:32pm

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 27^th, 2016 at 11:01am:

Ajax wrote on Feb 27^th, 2016 at 10:52am:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 27^th, 2016 at 10:43am:

Ajax wrote on Feb 27^th, 2016 at 10:37am:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 26^th, 2016 at 11:06pm:

The cops are insane in this issue - why are we wasting time and money on what is obviously a prank????

http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/they-were-all-actors-jalals-admit-girl-in-driv...

Their insistence to charge these pranksters is nothing more than an attempt to suppress acts of free speech from ordinary citizens.

Wow that is your definition of free speech..........????

These guys are nothing more than a bunch of clowns that need to be disciplined....!!!!

Freedom of speech is being able to express one self without being persecuted.

So if you're dressed in a tux with the misses in evening attire and waiting for the green man to cross the road, and these clowns roll up and throw raw eggs at you and the boss.

This is free speech.............???

Or a stupid act by a bunch of clowns that just ruined your night.

You can sue for civil actions if you like to get the suit cleaned. But no cop would bring criminal charges for that.

Really? You clearly don't know much about the law. REmember the idiot that threw a shoe at Howard - and missed? Was charged and convicted of assault.

Back to top

IP Logged

mariacostel

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 7344
Sydney
Gender: female

Re: more suppression of free speech
Reply #179 - Feb 28^th, 2016 at 6:34pm

freediver wrote on Feb 28^th, 2016 at 3:43pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 28^th, 2016 at 8:30am:

Why are you ignoring your own arguments now freediver? I think it's because you agree how absurd they were Wink

Go over my posts, you'll see I didn't lie.

Are you denying that you claimed the streets were empty?

Alevines arguments so far:

* the streets were empty (except for all those people caught on film in the background)
* the people caught on film in the background couldn't possibly have noticed what was going on, but if they did, they would have known it was staged
* criminals never wear disguises
* crimes are never caught on film
* if you were a gambling man, you'd bet on them surviving
* a cop faced with an automatic weapon will stop and have a look around and realise that crimes are never filmed and criminals never wear disguises
* a kidnapping, bombing or shooting is really no different to a picnic in the park or a game of cricket.
* doing "nothing at all" to prevent the situation escalating counts as a "good effort"
* cops never shoot people accidentally
* it is OK to get shot if it is the cop's fault and their gun gets taken away

That sums it up well!

Back to top

IP Logged