El Paso and Dayton Shootings (SERIOUS TOPIC)

[choof]

Re: El Paso and Dayton Shootings (SERIOUS TOPIC)

And I have a pretty good idea of why the alt right is like gaining traction I just don't understand why you go to killing people
That's the part that baffles me, that isn't normal

eliminating perceived threats

[devonin]

Re: El Paso and Dayton Shootings (SERIOUS TOPIC)

i mean, i agree but i already voiced my personal disapproval of those decisions before :P

as in, its problematic that privately held firms have a big stake in platforming + modern day communication streams, to the point that speech is virtually thwarted without the services that these firms provide.

they do, and /should/ exercise their own individual rights to speech, but the issue i have is systematic

This is basically the discussion of when a new thing turns from "a new thing" to some kind of guaranteed human right that it is oppressive to not have.

20 years ago, social media functionally didn't exist. Then it did. At what point do you declare free access to social media a "right" that is oppressive to take away? 19 years ago? 18 years ago? Does the fact that many people over a certain age have no social media presence change this?

Does everybody have the right to the internet? If you don't think internet access is a universal human right, you absolutely can't argue that access to some subset of the internet is a human right.

If you think that a private group saying "We don't want your kind of speech in our private space, get out" is oppressive of free speech, do you also think that a business shouldn't be able to throw you out if you're causing a disturbance via speech or non-violent actions?

Is the only difference between "You can't talk like that in my store, get out" and "You can't talk like that on my service, get out" the fact that the service has a lot of people on it? Do the rules for when I can throw you out of my house change if you're there alone, versus a small group, versus a large party?

[Funnygurl555]

Re: El Paso and Dayton Shootings (SERIOUS TOPIC)

bad rabbit hole? to what? less discriminatory groups meeting up or, at the very least, them doing it in private? name three groups of people who would wrongfully be "disrupted" through government intervention if the government started cracking down on white supremacists or I'm posting a screenshot of this on r/enlightenedcentrism

in this case, if the system were to change the way you were suggesting, itd benefit us. but you also have to think of when government intervention in communication and assembly can harm us

civil rights, lgbtq rights, womens rights-- all of these movements needed free assembly and communication to effect change in a society that wasnt on their side

im looking at the future implications, not the impact govt intervention would have /now/

[choof]

Re: El Paso and Dayton Shootings (SERIOUS TOPIC)

in this case, if the system were to change the way you were suggesting, itd benefit us. but you also have to think of when government intervention in communication and assembly can harm us

I'm not arguing for anything other than change in the way I suggested lol

civil rights, lgbtq rights, womens rights-- all of these movements needed free assembly and communication to effect change in a society that wasnt on their side

free assembly and communication is great, as long as you're not, you know, espousing white supremacist rhetoric

im looking at the future implications, not the impact govt intervention would have /now/

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/slippery-slope

edit: the future implications of banning white supremacist speech would be continued ban of white supremacist speech w0w!

[Funnygurl555]

Re: El Paso and Dayton Shootings (SERIOUS TOPIC)

20 years ago, social media functionally didn't exist. Then it did. At what point do you declare free access to social media a "right" that is oppressive to take away? 19 years ago? 18 years ago? Does the fact that many people over a certain age have no social media presence change this?
Does everybody have the right to the internet? If you don't think internet access is a universal human right, you absolutely can't argue that access to some subset of the internet is a human right.

i wouldn't know exactly when, but the fact that social media for example is an integral form of modern communication streams and therefore should be publicly accessible

/i/ think that access to the internet + basic digital literacy should be a right.

If you think that a private group saying "We don't want your kind of speech in our private space, get out" is oppressive of free speech, do you also think that a business shouldn't be able to throw you out if you're causing a disturbance via speech or non-violent actions?

i already said that businesses should be able to do that though

Is the only difference between "You can't talk like that in my store, get out" and "You can't talk like that on my service, get out" the fact that the service has a lot of people on it? Do the rules for when I can throw you out of my house change if you're there alone, versus a small group, versus a large party?

i have an issue when lack of access to services comes to a point that the effectiveness of one's communication relative to modern standards is significantly thwarted.

if a cake shop denies baking you a cake for whatever reason, well fuck the cake shop but you have the ability to go to another shop and get the same kinda cake. what happens when every social media + video streaming company bans you?

again, under this system it's legal and businesses aren't doing wrong. i just wish most communication streams weren't privately held.

i don't mean to derail this thread, so i could stop if you guys would like

[Funnygurl555]

Re: El Paso and Dayton Shootings (SERIOUS TOPIC)

I'm not arguing for anything other than change in the way I suggested lol


free assembly and communication is great, as long as you're not, you know, espousing white supremacist rhetoric

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/slippery-slope

edit: the future implications of banning white supremacist speech would be continued ban of white supremacist speech w0w!

it sets the precedent that you could ban certain groups' ability to communicate. it's not a slippery slope. societal consensus is not always on the right side

[choof]

Re: El Paso and Dayton Shootings (SERIOUS TOPIC)

it sets the precedent that you could ban certain groups' ability to communicate. it's not a slippery slope. societal consensus is not always on the right side

are you going to name some groups who would be wrongly affected or are you just going to keep on being vague
societal consensus is on the right side this time, bub

[Funnygurl555]

Re: El Paso and Dayton Shootings (SERIOUS TOPIC)

are you going to name some groups who would be wrongly affected or are you just going to keep on being vague
societal consensus is on the right side this time, bub

i have no choice /but/ to be vague. you have to think of the future when writing laws.

the second amendment didn't predict mass shooters, and now look

edit: i just want to clarify that i'm NOT SUPPORTING WHITE SUPREMACY i'm black. alright. alright clarification over

[choof]

Re: El Paso and Dayton Shootings (SERIOUS TOPIC)

i have no choice /but/ to be vague. you have to think of the future when writing laws.

oh okay so no current groups but some unknown groups in the future may be wrongly impacted by cracking down on white supremacist rhetoric

the second amendment didn't predict mass shooters, and now look

this is so non sequitur

edit: i just want to clarify that i'm NOT SUPPORTING WHITE SUPREMACY i'm black. alright. alright clarification over

*farts*

[choof]

Re: El Paso and Dayton Shootings (SERIOUS TOPIC)

actually i don't have a reddit account so can someone post those to r/enlightenedcentrism and we'll split the karma, thanks in advance

[devonin]

Re: El Paso and Dayton Shootings (SERIOUS TOPIC)

oh okay so no current groups but some unknown groups in the future may be wrongly impacted by cracking down on white supremacist rhetoric

Her point is that the law that went into place could end up being defined as like "Assembly or communication contrary to the common good" or something that could also be used to harm the kinds of assembly or speech -we- like if people who don't think like us get into power.

But I don't agree that the law would be worded that way. Canada has laws against hate speech and incitement to violence, and I'm struggling to think of any time I've seen them misapplied.

[Funnygurl555]

Re: El Paso and Dayton Shootings (SERIOUS TOPIC)

oh okay so no current groups but some unknown groups in the future may be wrongly impacted by cracking down on white supremacist rhetoric

cracking down on white supremacist rhetoric isn't the thing that's wrong; it's the instrument through which you're suggesting it happens that i take issue with

perhaps there is a way to pass a law that could crack down on white supremacist hate speech, but you have to be /very careful/ with the way you word it

this is so non sequitur

no it's not it's quite literally why gun control in the us is so tricky to implement

But I don't agree that the law would be worded that way. Canada has laws against hate speech and incitement to violence, and I'm struggling to think of any time I've seen them misapplied.

oh canada, our home and native land

[DaBackpack]

Re: El Paso and Dayton Shootings (SERIOUS TOPIC)

if a cake shop denies baking you a cake for whatever reason, well fuck the cake shop but you have the ability to go to another shop and get the same kinda cake. what happens when every social media + video streaming company bans you?

what happens if every cake shop bans you?

EDIT: I'm also pretty sure "hate speech" has a specific legal definition

[Funnygurl555]

Re: El Paso and Dayton Shootings (SERIOUS TOPIC)

what happens if every cake shop bans you?

then you lack access to premade cakes, which is bad but you could still go to a store and make a cake, which is a relatively easily producible product OR buy another treat that tastes just as good to you, like a pie

this example breaks when every dessert shop imaginable bans you and stores ban you from buying the basic commodities to make desserts.

[Funnygurl555]

Re: El Paso and Dayton Shootings (SERIOUS TOPIC)

if hate speech has a specific definition then thats good and invalidates some of what ive been saying