Hacker News Reader

Comment by forgetfreeman | Hacker News Reader

How about instead of "curtailing freedoms" we attach some really aggressive consequences for poor choices as regards broadcasting obvious bullshit in public spaces? We good now?

View on HN

You support this until you and the arbiter of "obvious bullshit" begin to disagree.

As facile arguments go that's a real gem. Claims require proof, problem solved.

I'm absolutely fine with not necessarily being able to say anything and everything. I'm generally supportive of anti-hate speech laws and I'm not a free speech absolutist. However, just because I might agree with their goal doesn't mean I agree with how they choose to achieve it and I'm skeptical of the above approach.

How about we treat freedom of speech like the inalienable right it is? We better now?

We pretending freedom of speech means you can say literally anything you feel like in any venue at any time without repercussions? Care to review any of the laws barring communicating threats, hate speech, slander, libel, etc? If what you're trying to defend is folks shilling obvious falsehood and intentionally misleading rhetoric what's your agenda here?

> you can say literally anything you feel like

Yes, by definition.

> any of the laws barring communicating threats, hate speech, slander, libel, etc

By definition, such laws are incompatible with free speech.

> what's your agenda here

Free speech

Having proposed we legalize calling in bomb threats I feel like you've thoroughly invalidated any argument you may have been trying to advance here.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com