• Arrakis@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    The force said a man was arrested on 1 November on suspicion of using a public communication network to send offensive messages and other offences.

    I think there may be more to this story than just “wearing an offensive costume”, but without seeing what was said in the posts that’s sheer conjecture.

    Edit

    Turns out there was more to the story! Whodathunkit!

    • PrettyFlyForAFatGuy@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      using a public communication network to send offensive messages and other offences.

      This is often used to prosecute “Offensive” social media posts. I think they got count dankula using something similar to that

      • Arrakis@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        People often forget that their right to free speech ends where it impacts the rights of others.

        • PrettyFlyForAFatGuy@lemmy.mlOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          I don’t think there is a “right not be offended” and i also don’t think there should be. if only for the fact that offense is entirely subjective.

          • Arrakis@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            I didn’t say anything about offense…

            You can’t call someone a racial slur and claim it was free speech, for example.

            Edit

            Is it really that controversial that hate speech isn’t the same as free speech? Really?

              • Arrakis@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                5
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                Maybe you should look up the definition of hate speech.

                I’m not saying it’s what happened here, but the idea it’s about “offense” is something worthy of the Daily Mail. The law doesn’t deal with opinion in reality, only headlines.

                  • Arrakis@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    arrow-down
                    3
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    1 year ago

                    Yes… That’s exactly what I’ve been saying, your right to free speech ends when it becomes hate speech. I’m not really sure what point you’re trying to make.

                    Re: your edit. Are you trying to say that hate speech should be allowed? I’m genuinely baffled.