CheckEmoji Community · the emoji forum
🏠 Home 🆕 What's new ❓ Unanswered 🔥 Popular 📡 RSS Members 👥 0 online log in · register
Home › Miscellaneous › Feedback & Suggestions › Thread cleanup: Pussy Riot members headed to prison

Thread cleanup: Pussy Riot members headed to prison

Started by Steven Wood72 · · 👁 3 views · 6 replies

📡 Subscribe to replies

Participants Steven Wood72goldenowl73
Steven Wood72 Steven Wood72 MemberOP
23 messages
joined Oct 2013
#1 ·
I’m asking for an explanation—can someone tell me why posts are being deleted on this thread?
goldenowl73 goldenowl73 Active Member
206 messages
joined Dec 2005
#2 ·
Seriously though, just type out "they should have been beaten harder." Honestly, saying stuff like they deserve to be tossed into a federal penitentiary because they're being provocative and all that is straight-up hate speech. From here on out, any kind of incitement to violence is going to get you flagged, and a lot of people are probably going to find themselves getting their accounts suspended or banned for calling for violence...
Steven Wood72 Steven Wood72 MemberOP
23 messages
joined Oct 2013
#3 ·
So, what about the people who support them? If this qualifies as hate speech, does supporting it make you a lunatic too? Are they going to be sanctioned next?

Besides, what kind of opinion is someone supposed to have about a group of girls who go out of their way to provoke people—shoving frozen chickens up their asses, having orgies in museums, and acting like complete idiots in churches?

If they actually deserve to be shut down, then is calling for their arrest considered hate speech? In my book, Breivik deserved to be locked up for what he did—is expressing that sentiment somehow hate speech?

If these women broke the law, are we suddenly forbidden from saying we want the law enforced and the criminals punished?
Steven Wood72 Steven Wood72 MemberOP
23 messages
joined Oct 2013
#4 ·
Just asking—can I go straight to the New York Times digital archives and report every single entry where they call for shutdowns or similar tactics against right-leaning politicians? You want to sanction that too, I suppose... just keep in mind there are quite a few posts like that from certain moderators over at the Times.
goldenowl73 goldenowl73 Active Member
206 messages
joined Dec 2005
#5 ·
Steven Wood72 said:Alright, but what about the people actually cheering them on? If calling out their behavior counts as hate speech, does supporting it count as "madman speech"? Are they gonna get sanctioned too?

I mean, seriously, what kind of opinion is someone supposed to have about a group of girls who spend their time being provocative, shoving frozen chickens up their asses, having orgies in museums, and acting like total idiots in churches?

If they’ve actually earned themselves a jail cell, then is saying they deserve to be locked up considered hate speech? In my book, Breivik deserved to be thrown behind bars for what he did—does that count as hate speech now too?

If these girls broke the law, aren't we allowed to say we want the law enforced and for them to face the actual consequences?

Look, you can totally criticize what they're doing in a constructive way, but any posts that call for literal lashings or those trollish rants where people are actively egging on repressive punishment for their "provocations" are going to be flagged as hate speech, which leads to a ban.
Steven Wood72 Steven Wood72 MemberOP
23 messages
joined Oct 2013
#6 ·
goldenowl73 said:You can offer constructive criticism regarding their actions—but any calls for violence, or those troll posts that cheer on repressive punishment for "their provocation," will be flagged as hate speech and result in a ban.

So, I’m not allowed to call for them to enforce their own laws? 😕

Can I just head over to the subreddit about the state constitutional amendment and report every single person who justifies beating up veterans? Is that going to get flagged as hate speech too?

I'm just asking to see if these rules actually apply to everyone equally... 🤷
Steven Wood72 Steven Wood72 MemberOP
23 messages
joined Oct 2013
#7 ·
Section 21. Use of Special Equipment

1. A police officer is authorized, either individually or as part of a unit, to employ special equipment under the following circumstances:

1) To repel an attack against a citizen or a law enforcement officer;

2) To prevent a crime or a misdemeanor from occurring.

Can we move forward with some actual detail here? I’m asking for this discussion to be reopened—it shouldn't be scrubbed just because someone is calling for the law to be upheld. 😕

Btw, feel free to lock this... I know it’s futile and that the arbitrary whims of those in power will continue regardless, but I felt the need to point out the issue.

You must log in or register to reply here.

Log in Register

🔗 Similar threads