This is sickening...

[Nerys Ghemor]

I know that to carry a gun, you have to have a license.

I know that it's not necessary for pepper spray. For tasers, I'm not sure what the legality is there, whether you have to have a license or not.

 

[JarodRussell]

We had these ads everywhere some time ago:
http://hyperchondria.files.wordpress.com/2008/06/frenchad.jpg

I believe this is a british ad against cellphones in cars or something:
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-iIS7-geVVAk/TZnOhSd4JPI/AAAAAAAAIc4/1CyEPmpdSb4/s1600/drivesafe_ad5.jpg
http://www.yeeeeee.com/wp-content/2010/04/3189_1272312367.jpg

Yo Americans would think that's pretty offensive/disturbing. Children will go blind, etc...

 

[Nerdius Maximus]

I guess free speech doesn't mean much to you, huh?

Free speech doesn't protect hate speech, nor avocation of violence.

And it shouldn't. Openly displaying depictions of decapitated and mutilated children is a clear warning sign, one that should be heeded by the authorities, that what we pay them for.

Free Speech does unfortunately cover hate speech. SCOTUS determined that with the recent WBC case. Free speech, however, doesn't cover inciting violence. Under the law images of violence or the results of violence do not necessarily mean inciting violence. However that doesn't make the guy's choice in car decals any less disgusting or insane.

I don't think it's unfortunate that free speech covers hate speech. It should.

 

[DeafPoet]

Free Speech does unfortunately cover hate speech. SCOTUS determined that with the recent WBC case. Free speech, however, doesn't cover inciting violence. Under the law images of violence or the results of violence do not necessarily mean inciting violence. However that doesn't make the guy's choice in car decals any less disgusting or insane.

Yeah, if violent images alone were enough to claim "inciting violence," then there'd be no violence on TV or in movies.

I'm really disturbed by the eagerness to lock someone up who has apparently committed no crime.

You know, there are some words I’ve known since I was a schoolboy: “With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censored, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably.” Those words were uttered by Judge Aaron Satie, as wisdom and warning. The first time any man’s freedom is trodden on, we’re all damaged

This. Mostly because the sick fuck in me loves the idea of Picard implicitly defending this guy's car

So yeah, this guy's obviously a dick but who cares? Free speech, blah blah blah. Everyone above has already said it and said it well. Talk to me when this guy's parading around with actual baby heads.

 

[JarodRussell]

Just imagine he'd have stickers of Mohammad and the Pope molesting children while saying "Queen is gay". Folks couldn't even decide what to hate him for.

 

[boobatuba]

boobatuba's talk about there being a line, somewhere, is contradictory in itself. If there actually were a line, then he could clearly define it.

Wrong. The fact that a line is difficult to define doesn't mean it's not there.

Pictures of flowers are fine. Pictures of full frontal nudity are not. Somewhere in between is "the line."

The really interesting part (and the dilemna for lawmakers) is that almost everyone disagrees where "the line" is.

 

[DeafPoet]

The really interesting part (and the dilemna for lawmakers) is that almost everyone disagrees where "the line" is.

Which is just as good a reason as any to say "screw the line" and just declare that anything goes. But yeah, it is extremely problematic and it's not exactly news that this whole "free speech" thing is a lot of work and not for those who can't stomach vigilance.

 

[ares93]

Just imagine he'd have stickers of Mohammad and the Pope molesting children while saying "Queen is gay". Folks couldn't even decide what to hate him for.

The Brits would go nuts because of that one. Belfast riots, anyone?

 

[Trekker4747]

. . . If I had stickers like that on my car it would equal a 48 hour psych-hold at a bare minimum.

I got fined for a bloody sticker that said: "If you're reading this, you're losing." The guy claimed it incited reckless driving...

That sort of thing is what many, if not most Americans would define as the very essence of a “nanny state.” No, thanks.

I mean, people have driving around with Calvin pissing on things for decades and how many trucks these days have scrotums?

May I use that as a quote line?

Knock yourself out.

 

[RJDiogenes]

But as it's America, land of the gun, I'm guessing that sort of thing is considered normal over there.

You guess wrong.

 

[ShamelessMcBundy]

Yeah, if violent images alone were enough to claim "inciting violence," then there'd be no violence on TV or in movies.

I'm really disturbed by the eagerness to lock someone up who has apparently committed no crime.

You know, there are some words I’ve known since I was a schoolboy: “With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censored, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably.” Those words were uttered by Judge Aaron Satie, as wisdom and warning. The first time any man’s freedom is trodden on, we’re all damaged

This. Mostly because the sick fuck in me loves the idea of Picard implicitly defending this guy's car

And your avatar makes your statement even better!