Share.

    27 Kommentare

    1. Big_Presentation2786 on

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

    2. You can speak freely as long as you don’t say things I don’t like

      UK free speech in a nutshell and Keir word salading his way around the issue is hilarious

    3. GiftedGeordie on

      **“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.

    4. Dedsnotdead on

      UK’s “Starmer” should give the Police some credible guidance, because at the moment they are being asked to do the impossible.

    5. GuyLookingForPorn on

      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.

    6. There has always been a legal limit on free speech, but if he thinks he’ll take away the right to protest and criticise the government, he’s wrong.

    7. newaccount252 on

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

    8. Yes, because unlike the Americans, most of us don’t think that hate speech or telling people to kill themselves should be legally protected speech!

    9. Hopeful-Climate-3848 on

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

    10. Probably shouldn’t bring up pedophilia with Trump around. He’ll get Starmer taken off the air.

    11. DrIvoPingasnik on

      Who is Starmer to tell anyone what is the limit?

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

    12. I agree with Starmer here. Yes, you can say what you want, but there is a point where your words can pose an issue. For instance, there’s 0 issue with thinking ‚This government is awful‘ or ‚I don’t like this person‘, but when your speech devolves into threats & all sorts of nasty things, then yes, damn right legal consequences will come from your words.

    13. Trump following Starmer, after Starmer designated Palestine Action a Terrorist organisation which has caused the Police to romp around arresting anyone protesting Israel in a dampening effect on free speech.

      Trump has now designated the entirely nebulous Antifi as a terrorist organisation even though it’s not actually an organisation at all but simply an umbrella term for anyone that protests against them.

      Starmer must be kicking himself that he didn’t designate „Antiblairitewanker“ as a terrorist group.

    14. 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.

    15. Mountain_Evidence_93 on

      By free speech he means as long as you agree with me.

      BTW Starmer is a GAYBOI!

    16. GainsAndPastries on

      „….but there is a limit“

      Is a very disturbing statement coming from the leader of the country.

    17. 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?

    18. Says the man that classified a protest group as a terrorist organisation and enabled the online safety act and tried to get apple to install a default back door vulnerability. Didn’t two people get arrested for projection of epstein and trump on a wall? Free speech my arse

    19. Electronic-Ring-2518 on

      Apparently that limit is projecting a photo of Trump and Epstein

    20. sedationGuy on

      After the new censorship bill that was applied, which is very vague, much like the ‚Islamphobia‘ law that is trying to get pushed through.

      Basically, they are giving the next government a very authoritarian set of laws that can be applied very easily.

    21. appletinicyclone on

      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

    22. Correct-Junket-1346 on

      Like if you protest against Israel or against Epstein’s friends.

    23. oncemorein2thebeach on

      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.

    24. InternetHomunculus on

      The line being showing a picture of Trump with Epstein in public?

    25. zestinglemon on

      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.

    Leave A Reply