Anderson

Another useful reference - The Rabat Plan of Action https://www.ohchr.org/en/issues/freedomopinion/articles19-20/pages/index.aspx

https://edwardsnowden.substack.com/p/ns-oh-god-how-is-this-legal

add achivementz plz

They can make an exception if asked nicely. It's been 20 years.

Do we need to ask for written permission from the authors?

Also human rights.

I suggest to put money into guaranteeing that it's illegal for police to use expired tear gas, electroshock weapons and resort to torture or inhuman, degrading treatment. Give them mental and psychological check ups. Lots of police become biased when working in the field too much. To the point when they don't see innocent people anymore - dumping innocents into party wagons and breaking lives every day. The way police currently operates, makes them barely more tolerable than criminals. Sometimes organized crime wins since they try to maintain at least some principles - otherwise organized crime wouldn't survive. Despite that, there isn't anything good about organized crime. The reason this comparison comes up in general is because both worry more about their image than what they're actually up to.

I can't say 100% about the common law system, but generally malicious intent as part of the subjective element of crime does not require a confession. Even if one pleads not guilty, malicious intent can still be found if evidence points at it. There's many studies: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2020/655135/IPOL_STU(2020)655135_EN.pdf https://tile.loc.gov/storage-services/service/gdc/gdcovop/2014360654/2014360654.pdf https://scm.bz/wp-content/plugins/pdfjs-viewer-shortcode/pdfjs/web/viewer.php?file=https%3A%2F%2Fscm.bz%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2021%2F04%2FHate_Speech_Report_EN_03.pdf&download=true&print=true&openfile=false https://cloudflare-ipfs.com/ipfs/bafykbzacedzqth56hl3l2t7vfj6bvc2layq4g5kvcjerkf7iqnsbag6uibwlg?filename=Anne Weber - Manual on Hate Speech-Council of Europe Publishing (2009).pdf https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10677-019-10002-0.pdf Banning hate speech helps both parties of the conflict. Otherwise the voices of those who commit, spread and encourage violence are amplified. There was violence against police and there was police brutality. It happens every day, especially at almost every riot. So, what's bad about defunding the police?

Porn is art. Now this is next gen police abuse - using copyright to block access to information. Unexpected consequences for copyrasts.

Decriminalization of homosexuality, of drug consumption and other progressive movements go in tandem with the adoption of hate speech laws to protect and safeguard these achievements. Else, all of these efforts would have been only half steps. We already see how democracy is eroding, rule of law goes down a slippery slope in Poland, Hungary, Russia, Turkey.

True. At the same time all laws require a degree of abstraction in order to be applied correctly. In principle all laws require a "good faith human analysis". That's why homosexuality criminalization laws eventually became obsolete and at the end they were repealed when society wouldn't resist it too much anymore. It's an evolutionary process. Something changes, disappears, other things remain the same.