zlacker

[parent] [thread] 3 comments
1. spangr+(OP)[view] [source] 2024-02-01 14:08:55
Why stop there? I think we'd all agree that "mean words", either written or spoken, have immense power to "cause distress" and have driven many a person to suicide. We should ban those.
replies(1): >>AlecSc+r1
2. AlecSc+r1[view] [source] 2024-02-01 14:15:15
>>spangr+(OP)
We do. Incitement to violence or "true threats" for example already fall outside of 1st amendment protections. I personally see deepfakes created or disseminated for harassment purposes as an act of violence.
replies(1): >>spangr+Z4
◧◩
3. spangr+Z4[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-02-01 14:34:06
>>AlecSc+r1
I'm neither referring to "true threats" nor making any kind of argument about the US constitution, so I'm unsure why you're bringing these up. I thought it would have been pretty clear that in the context of driving people to suicide, I was suggesting banning "insulting words". Hope that clarifies things for you.
replies(1): >>AlecSc+78
◧◩◪
4. AlecSc+78[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-02-01 14:49:04
>>spangr+Z4
It seemed like you were making a sarcastic comment about the policing of harmful communications. I mostly hear such arguments from US citizens so wanted to point out that even the US has precedent for limiting such expressions to deter violence.
[go to top]