Social Media still under fire for Hate speech

>>152885
Hate speech is the most idiotic thing I've ever heard of that people actually defend and justify in legal court

>>152885

>radicalized mudslimes

>all white people

Can you spot the difference?

What the Article meant is that calling for the violence of anyone should be flagged as inappropriate and should be removed as opposed to the whole "Protected Group" bullshit, because what they created is McCarthyism in digital form; simply call all of the marginalized and grassroot activists Commies and you can talk shit about them whenever you want.

>>152886
Let's say you write a law. Everything you consider hate speech is now banned.

That law doesn't go away while society moves on. Norms change, politics change, let's say your absolute worst nightmare comes to pass and the United States elects SUPERTRUMP, who goes out and actually does everything MSNBC said Trump was going to do. Then suddenly those laws that prevent hate speech can be used to restrict -YOUR- speech.

It sets a precedent that can be used by the government to silence people that it only need deem "hateful".

>>152886
it's marxist brainwashing that has made it acceptable. The left is a fan of government regulation of citizen thoughts.

>>152904
I understand your fear in restricting free speech, but don't you think it's possible to form an argument contrary to supertrump's policy without using a severed head to make a point?

>>152885
the key difference is in the words. If you say " ALL WHITE.....blah blah blah..." its already a bad call... but for "Hunt them, identify them, and kill them' doesn't mean MUSLIM them... it could be any THEM..

I mean, Come on People

Would you protect female drivers?

>>152911
In the words of Larry Elder, " If I kill a man, I've probably done it out of hate. There aren't many love crimes out there. Hate Speech is getting into a man's head, even though it is essentially impossible, and adding time to his sentence for motives that we have decided are worse than typical motives - jealousy, greed, apathy, evil, and wrath - with "group hate" which I suppose to a liberal is worse."

>>152885
It's based on how many people report it. Black people aren't following US congressman, it's why they're not a good voting block

>>152964
>even though it is essentially impossible
>you can't know nuthin
you can be pretty confident if you understand the context of a crime

>and adding time to his sentence for motives that we have decided are worse than typical motives - jealousy, greed, apathy, evil, and wrath - with "group hate" which I suppose to a liberal is worse.

This reflects a common fundamental misunderstanding of the purpose of criminal justice. The law doesn't exist to exact revenge. It exists to deter crime.

The federally mandated minimum penalty for premeditated murder is greater than manslaughter, not because the former is more evil, but because on balance, generally manslaughter requires less deterrent force to prevent than an act of murder committed out of malice. We can feasibly afford to make that distinction in order to divvy up prison time in the most effective way possible to minimize criminality.

In the same vein of logic, within premeditated murder, when it's clear someone committed a crime convinced they're on a holy mission to protect their race, religion, or community, especially when they're in the majority, that requires greater threat to deter in order to minimize incidence of crime.

>>153012
Studies have shown that mandatory minimum additions to sentences doesn't deter drug crimes, so why is it suddenly magically effective when it comes to hate crimes?

>>152885
Who would have thought that subsets of terrorists are not a protected groups?

>>153012
Do hate crime laws actually reduce the instance of rascism or exacerbate it?

>>153025
it stands to reason that harsher penalties have a greater deterrent effect. I don't know how these things are calculated. But if there's reason to believe that treating hate crimes differently when it comes to sentencing isn't effective enough in minimizing criminality with the resources we have, then I agree we should do studies on that, have experts come to a consensus on the results, and maybe change our sentencing one way or another.

>>153033
racism isn't illegal

>>153037
We have had studies, they've proven to be ineffective. "It stands to reason" falls apart in the face of statistical data, because life doesn't always work like the simple simulations we run in our heads.

See, someone who is going co commit a crime already has the consequences of their actions bouncing around in their heads. They KNOW. NOBODY thinks that murder will be a slap on the wrist if they get caught. The problem is that psychologically, an individual about to commit a crime has considered the consequences and decided to do it anyway, as they already have active motives to do so, whatever they may be. So, when we're looking at, say, penalties to sell meth, the meth dealer knows he's gonna get in trouble period, it's not that there are minimal penalties that justify it, it's because they want that sweet, sweet meth money.

Same thing with hate crimes. Somebody hates niggers, to the point of wanting to lynch one, they're not gonna stop because an extra twenty years got tacked on to the penalties for murder. What it does, though, is make all the white guilt liberals feel like they're making a difference in fighting racism! GOOD JOB, WHITE LIBERALS! Meanwhile, the asshole side of the equation gets to whine about how "muh freedom of speech" is being trampled.

Please bear in mind, I say this as a white liberal myself. If we're gonna be the side that claims to care about science, reason, and progress, we have GOT to stop jumping on these feel-good bandwagons in favor of measures that are actually effective.

>>153037
What's the point of hate crime laws if not to reduce the instances of rascism?

>>153040
>We have had studies, they've proven to be ineffective. "It stands to reason" falls apart in the face of statistical data, because life doesn't always work like the simple simulations we run in our heads.
can you source this for me?

>See, someone who is going co commit a crime already has the consequences of their actions bouncing around in their heads. They KNOW. NOBODY thinks that murder will be a slap on the wrist if they get caught. The problem is that psychologically, an individual about to commit a crime has considered the consequences and decided to do it anyway, as they already have active motives to do so, whatever they may be. So, when we're looking at, say, penalties to sell meth, the meth dealer knows he's gonna get in trouble period, it's not that there are minimal penalties that justify it, it's because they want that sweet, sweet meth money.

You're mixing up issues here. The reason the war on drugs is moronic is because it's a pointless drain on law enforcement resources, and because once they're charged, it because exceptionally difficult for dealers to sustain any semblance of the livelihood they once had while pushing drugs because nobody wants to hire them, and because they're often users themselves. It's really hard to escape that world once someone is in it.

If you subtract out all of those circumstances unique to drug crimes, higher the penalty does of course produce a greater deterrent effect for most crimes that are premeditated because the threshold for motivation to commit the crime is increased when someone is facing life in stead of 20 years.

>>153050
You have limited resources to work with when it comes to the prison system to it's necessary to divvy up the severity of sentences with respect to where they'll produce the greatest deterrence in reducing criminality overall. Generally speaking, crimes committed with some motives will be easier to deter than others.

>>153056

I hope we increase hate crime sentences because it's frightening that militarized police are shooting black people and then trying to cover up the crime.

If someone killed my mum because they wanted money I'd feel less threatened than if they did it because of her race, so hate crimes against my race are a direct threat to my family. Especially if I'm the minority, that's quite terrifying and a lot of folks on the far right are using that against minorities.

>>153058
I agree. It's about time these cop loving white devil's get their due for what theve done to the minority people's of the world. It's time for a little payback.

>>152909
if authoritarian policies have ever been used to the benefit of the people, let me know

>>153033
>Do hate crime laws actually reduce the instance of rascism or exacerbate it?
Hate crime laws do nothing to reduce racist sentiments and absolutely exacerbate the problem. It gives haters much more reason to hate and resent people and creates inequality when it comes to punishing crimes. The law should protect all victims equally and not discriminate based on thought crimes. Otherwise you cannot call it fair and just.

>In the same vein of logic, within premeditated murder, when it's clear someone committed a crime convinced they're on a holy mission to protect their race, religion, or community, especially when they're in the majority, that requires greater threat to deter in order to minimize incidence of crime.
So in the same vein of logic should there be harsher penalties for Islamic Jihadists than for deranged retards that go on random shooting sprees?

>>153074
>So in the same vein of logic should there be harsher penalties for Islamic Jihadists than for deranged retards that go on random shooting sprees?
I would agree that it's worth consideration. Any crime that's done with a motive (so long as the motive can be proven beyond reasonable doubt) more difficult for standard penalties to deter might deserve a special category of its own with particularly severe sentencing.

>>153078
Do you really think in that example it would have any deterrent effect? Or might it further the resolve of the would-be perpetrators that they are engaged in a holy war against them which they must fight as ruthlessly as possible?

>>153078
Hate crime laws and affirmative action tend to make people embittered and "justified" in their racism

>>153087
Yep. It's hard to say that our society is equal when you get turned down for a job you worked hard to be qualified for in favor of a member of a "protected class" that is less qualified.

"Positive" racism is still racism.

>>153074
>Hate crime laws do nothing to reduce racist sentiments
probably
>absolutely exacerbate the problem. It gives haters much more reason to hate and resent people
i disagree. if you're so vitrolic that a law was made to punish you for criminally harming a man specifically for the color of his skin, you were already using whatever excuse possible in an attempt to 'justify' your racism

>inequality when it comes to punishing crimes
murdering a man for his wallet and murdering a man for the color of his skin are two different crimes. specifically lynching is murder + a hate crime, thus it isnt unequal to give it a greater punishment due to involving more criminal components

>The law should protect all victims equally
i dont think you really believe that yourself. the nature of the victim changes the nature of the crime. murdering a child versus murdering an adult.

>thought crimes
making a post on social media demanding that certain people should be killed is not a thought crime, it is a regular crime. it stopped being a private thought the moment you posted it for others to see. there's a world of difference between saying "i hate these people" and "i demand that we kill these people"

>So in the same vein of logic should there be harsher penalties for Islamic Jihadists than for deranged retards that go on random shooting sprees?
so a muzzie shooting up a place for allah is a jihadist terrorist, but dylan roof murdering a bunch of black people explicitly because of his ideology just makes him a deranged retard? if yes, explain why.

to actually answer your question: assuming the latter case truly is just a deranged retard, then yes of course. but in reality they usually arent anymore deranged and retarded than the jihadi, but because they are white and share your culture you seek to protect your race's reputation by labeling the guy as some sort of aberration that shouldnt reflect upon your culture.

>>153087
no it doesnt, even slightly. those people were already bitter and were already using whatever they had available to "justify" their racism.

>>152907
>Current year
>Still use buzzwords that aren't relevant to the topic

>>153098
>Criminal harm
When it comes to hate speech, that's not harm. If you're hurt by words, that should be your fault, not the opposition.
>Lynching
Indeed it is different crimes, but not when it only counts for one side. A bunch of black guys beating and hanging a white guy isn't a lynching?
>Child murder
That's your own bias and honestly, they shouldn't be treated differently; it's still murder. Just because you feel extra special hurt by it doesn't mean it's extra special.
>Social media posts; endorsing murder
Not a crime. People call for the death of people/s all the time without punishment; next you're going to start pinning people for hate speech against fictional mmorpg races of beings.
>Motivated murder
If your murder comes with a manifesto, yes, you should be treated for mental illness and given time. If the person just snapped, they definitely need short period medication and given time. I'd be much more worried about the person/ people's who try to justify and convince themselves and others to commit crime.

>>153079
It may not in the case of suicide attacks, but in enough cases it still might be effective in reducing criminality.
Reduce the penalty for conventional premeditated mass murder and increase the penalty for premeditated mass murder motivated by holy war.
Premeditated crimes committed with petty murders require a lower threshold of severity in penalty to successfully deter.
Focus the resources of the penal system in such a manner that provides the optimal reduction in criminality. More jail time, hard labor, death penalty for crimes harder to deter, less for others. Make distinctions on the basis of motive proven beyond reasonable doubt wherever feasible.

>>153102
>That's your own bias and honestly, they shouldn't be treated differently; it's still murder. Just because you feel extra special hurt by it doesn't mean it's extra special.
i was going to give a real reply until i read this insipid lunacy. you're just a laughably pathetic spiteful shithead, and i should have expected that with your equally pathetic butthurt rage name.

done with you. enjoy your butthurt rage as you are impotent to stop the world from improving despite you.

weak. worthless. pathetic.

>>153107
poster
>Premeditated crimes committed with petty murder
*Premeditated crimes committed with petty motives

>>152885

http://www.cnbc.com/2015/09/27/angela-merkel-caught-on-hot-mic-pressing-facebook-ceo-over-anti-immigrant-posts.html
Javier E. David | @TeflonGeek
Sunday, 27 Sep 2015

Angela Merkel caught on hot mic griping to Facebook CEO over anti-immigrant posts

German Chancellor Angela Merkel was overheard confronting Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg over incendiary posts on the social network, Bloomberg reported on Sunday, amid complaints from her government about anti-immigrant posts in the midst of Europe's refugee crisis.

On the sidelines of a United Nations luncheon on Saturday, Merkel was caught on a hot mic pressing Zuckerberg about social media posts about the wave of Syrian refugees entering Germany, the publication reported.

The Facebook CEO was overheard responding that "we need to do some work" on curtailing anti-immigrant posts about the refugee crisis. "Are you working on this?" Merkel asked in English, to which Zuckerberg replied in the affirmative before the transmission was disrupted.

In recent weeks, hundreds of thousands of Syrian refugees have washed up on Europe's shores, seeking asylum from the raging civil war in their homeland. As Europe's largest economy, Germany has sheltered the majority of them, leading to widespread objections within the country.

Earlier this month, Facebook vowed to clean up what it deemed was racist content on the German version of its website. At the time, the social network said it would partner with a non profit group to oversee hate postings.

Yet any action from Facebook is likely to stoke concerns about free speech. In the past, the social network has come under suspicion for suppressing or deleting posts and groups that advocate unpopular beliefs.

>>153099
Says you. I know loads of people who think affirmative action is racist bullshit

Thing that pisses me off too is that when blacks commit hate crime related murders (cop killing, ausaulting that autistic kid in Chicago, etc.) The authorities just shoo it off like it's nothing. "Undetermined motive" or "not racially motivated" - typically because these laws are made as ways for the "oppressed classes" to have special protections. It's a fuck fuck game.

>>153112
>2015

Old as shit. Post something more recent next time.

>>153055

You can't be bothered to research before opening your mouth? Fine. Here's some of those studies you didn't believe existed.

https://static.prisonpolicy.org/scans/mandatoryminsent.pdf

http://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/wflr28&div=19&id=&page=

And my favorite...
http://www.sentencingproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/Deterrence-in-Criminal-Justice.pdf

So, no, you're fucking wrong. Go ahead, do some reading. (Kinda doubt you will, but I'm sure I'll get a response anyway, the internets fun like that..) Certainty of punishment deters crime, not severity of punishment. The War on Drugs is moronic for the reasons you list, but it's fucktarded in the extreme to assume that harsher penalties in one instance, but not others.

>>153115
yes, you know a load of racists. regardless, hate crime laws =! affirmative action.

>>153136
Affirmative action is racist
You are racist for thinking it is not

>>153098
>murdering a man for his wallet and murdering a man for the color of his skin are two different crimes

Both murders should both be punished equally as goddam murder. You must be a real shithead to make such a retarded statement.

>>153145
>said the edgelord.
Meanwhile, SJWs' focus on Identity politics has distracted them from the soul crushing might of capitalistic imperialism the destroys the lives of billions of people.

>>152909
>I understand your fear in restricting free speech, but don't you think it's possible to form an argument contrary to supertrump's policy without using a severed head to make a point?

Probably, but it's not for you (and especially not for the government) to decide what is "appropriate" speech.

"Hate speech" has no definition because it is impossible to define, as anything and everything can be deemed hateful by someone somewhere.

>>153098
>so a muzzie shooting up a place for allah is a jihadist terrorist, but dylan roof murdering a bunch of black people explicitly because of his ideology just makes him a deranged retard? if yes, explain why.

Because he was a lone gunman acting under his own volition while Muslim terrorists act under the direct orders or influence an organization.

>>152909
>don't you think it's possible to form an argument contrary to supertrump's policy without using a severed head to make a point?

That is an odd thing to randomly mention.
The problem is that arguments contrary to other people's bullshit readily GET LABELLED AS HATE SPEECH ALREADY.
Just look at the SJW's who call any conflicting facts or opinions or criticism of their ideology hate speech.

>>153585
Edgy commies get copters

>>152885
In what world is calling for the deaths of a group of a group that regularly massacres innocent people a crime? It's okay to hate evil people.

>>153631
>In what world is calling for the deaths of a group of a group that regularly massacres innocent people a crime? It's okay to hate evil people.

Calling for the death and/or misery of anyone is a crime, because it justify the deadly force of imperialism.

>>152885
Hate speech is like "Diversity" it's code.

>>153050
what's wrong with racism?

>>152886
>>152898
>>152900

DEATH TO AMERICA

USA IS SAUDI/ISRAEL/RUSSIA PUPPET

>I expect you to defend my right to keep posting anti-American bile and lies.

>>153654
>Calling for the death and/or misery of anyone is a crime

Not in America.

>>153659
I could care less unless you actually inflict physical harm / conspire

dreadful

>>153098
>making a post on social media demanding that certain people should be killed is not a thought crime, it is a regular crime.
Not the topic. We are talking about charging people additionally for their feelings rather than their actual actions.

>but dylan roof murdering a bunch of black people explicitly because of his ideology just makes him a deranged retard? if yes, explain why.
Fucking seriously? No.
They are all deranged retards, but the point was about those who have no explicit ideology.

I meant someone who simply wants to murder, or some nutjob whose only ideology is that he's the frickin' Joker from Batman or something.