Australia to deport British man charged with displaying Nazi symbols

[Tommy Tainant]

Case law. You cannot ban symbols of hate.

R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul, 505 U.S. 377 (1992)

After allegedly burning a cross on a black family's lawn, petitioner R. A. V. was charged under, inter alia, the St. Paul, Minnesota, Bias-Motivated Crime Ordinance, which prohibits the display of a symbol which one knows or has reason to know "arouses anger, alarm or resentment in others on the basis of race, color, creed, religion or gender."

Held: The ordinance is facially invalid under the First Amendment.

https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/505/377/

However, I will explain what you posted, because you're obviously a ******* idiot.

View attachment 1201555

You see that? So if a person assaults someone, or commits ANY crime in the possession of or displaying any known gang or other hate symbols, those symbols are considered 'involved' and the offense may be considered a hate crime.

BUUUUUUUUT a swastika or a noose, or a pic of a bubble-lipped ****** is PROTECTED speech.

You're welcome to go live with those slaves, though.

Your crazy laws dont apply in Australia. Maybe trump will invade.

 

[Gabe Lackmann]

Your crazy laws dont apply in Australia. Maybe trump will invade.

Wouldn't want that nightmare. Dotheads, Chinamen, and British criminal stock. Plus everything wants to kill you.

 

[jotathought]

Your crazy laws dont apply in Australia. Maybe trump will invade.

Free speech is crazy law? Unlike your country where you get arrested on subjectivity of speech?

 

[jotathought]

Tommy Tainant .. if you burned a palestine flag in England, what would happen?

In the United States .. it would be a completely different outcome since we don’t have faggoty laws like you do.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Tommy Tainant .. if you burned a palestine flag in England, what would happen?

In the United States .. it would be a completely different outcome since we don’t have faggoty laws like you do.

Tammy would NEVER do that.

He only burns anything that shows the star of David.

 

[bambu.]

Hate speech is a hoax. Just look at England where individuals are getting arrested for "offensive speech"(like saying something about muslims or the people they call 'palestinians.' Who determines what is and what is hate or offensive speech?

The law.
Courts, judges, juries.

Anyone with even half their brain working, who has been paying even glancing attention to the written or digital news, should by now know what 'hate speech' is, what 'racism [physical, written or spoken]' is.
You don't have to be 'Einstein' to understand.

 

[bambu.]

Wouldn't want that nightmare. Dotheads, Chinamen, and British criminal stock. Plus everything wants to kill you.

'Everything wants to kill you' in Australia is a myth.

Those giant spiders ...'Hunstsman' ... crawling on indoor house walls etc, the ones tourists freak out over...are 'harmless to humans'.
There's anti venom for 'Atrax Robustus', the deadly spider living in cool, damp, shaded gardens...no one has died from its bite in decades.
There aren't crocodiles roaming around city or suburban streets eating tourists [or anyone else].
Great White sharks aren't hiding in retail stores and biting tourists etc.

 

[jotathought]

The law.
Courts, judges, juries.

Anyone with even half their brain working, who has been paying even glancing attention to the written or digital news, should by now know what 'hate speech' is, what 'racism [physical, written or spoken]' is.
You don't have to be 'Einstein' to understand.

If ‘hate speech’ were truly obvious and universally understood, it wouldn’t require governments and courts to constantly reinterpret and enforce it differently across countries and cases.

 

[Tommy Tainant]

Tommy Tainant .. if you burned a palestine flag in England, what would happen?

In the United States .. it would be a completely different outcome since we don’t have faggoty laws like you do.

Why would anyone want to burn any flag ? Whichever flag it is someone will be offended. What strange people you are.
You equate free speech with burning a flag. Thats so maga.

 

[jotathought]

Why would anyone want to burn any flag ? Whichever flag it is someone will be offended. What strange people you are.
You equate free speech with burning a flag. Thats so maga.

Burning flags in the United States is free speech .. unlike England which is faggoty and you can get arrested.

 

[Deadstick]

Burning flags in the United States is free speech .. unlike England which is faggoty and you can get arrested.

So i could come to the US and burn your flag? seems minor to burning whole Countries like the US has been doing for years.

 

[Tommy Tainant]

Burning flags in the United States is free speech .. unlike England which is faggoty and you can get arrested.

Well we can speak coherently over here. We dont need to express ourselves by burning flags, But Im still not sure what flags I cant burn. Maybe you can link to that list ?
Taje some time to interrupt your flag burning.

 

[jotathought]

Well we can speak coherently over here. We dont need to express ourselves by burning flags, But Im still not sure what flags I cant burn. Maybe you can link to that list ?
Taje some time to interrupt your flag burning.

For some context .. it's the faggoty Americans, like the purple hair, gay, or trans testicle groups that do this ..

 

[jotathought]

So i could come to the US and burn your flag? seems minor to burning whole Countries like the US has been doing for years.

yes .. come on over and burn your flag .. what's your flavor of flag? Trans-testicle flag? Rainbow? Other?

 

[Mac-7]

Australia to deport British man charged with displaying Nazi symbols

The immigration minister said the man is an unwelcome "guest" in Australia.

www.bbc.co.uk

This looks to be good news on the face of it. Although its another vote for reform.
Australia seems to be going out of its way to upset musk. Deporting nazis is sure to rile them.
Calling for death to jews is hate speech and should be punished.
Maybe trump will let him settle in the US with his South Africam brothers ?

When it comes to anti speech laws the heart may be in the right place but it often goes too far

Most of the time it means the powers that be think that the serfs are too stupid to think for themselves and must be shielded from impure thoughts

If the man was promoting actual violence he should be stopped

But short of that beware of good intentions that go haywire

 

[Captain Caveman]

Case law. You cannot ban symbols of hate.

R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul, 505 U.S. 377 (1992)

After allegedly burning a cross on a black family's lawn, petitioner R. A. V. was charged under, inter alia, the St. Paul, Minnesota, Bias-Motivated Crime Ordinance, which prohibits the display of a symbol which one knows or has reason to know "arouses anger, alarm or resentment in others on the basis of race, color, creed, religion or gender."

Held: The ordinance is facially invalid under the First Amendment.

https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/505/377/

However, I will explain what you posted, because you're obviously a ******* idiot.

View attachment 1201555

You see that? So if a person assaults someone, or commits ANY crime in the possession of or displaying any known gang or other hate symbols, those symbols are considered 'involved' and the offense may be considered a hate crime.

BUUUUUUUUT a swastika or a noose, or a pic of a bubble-lipped ****** is PROTECTED speech.

You're welcome to go live with those slaves, though.

You fat faced idiot.

 

[bambu.]

No, they were denied the ability to own guns to protect themselves, but somehow, aliens who weren't citizens, were allowed by the government to obtain guns. Even after they were known to associate with Islamic terror groups.

A thinking person would wonder how something like that could occur.

But we all know you don't think.

Imagine...imagine...in capital letters...how many more dead people not living free there would be if everyone were allowed to tote guns everywhere, including hand guns.
They were, in Australia...once upon a time. But, after the Port Arthur massacre the People, absolutely horrified by what just happened, cried out for gun reform, "nobody needs to carry a machine gun or any other gun around society." So the Prime Minister at the time obliged with a gun buyback scheme and an amnesty for illegal weapons.

Port Arthur massacre came after the Strathfield massacre in Sydney and the Hoddle St massacre in Melbourne.

The People basically cried out "too many massacres, STOP THE MASSACRES!"

The 'gun reform' People won!

 

[westwall]

Imagine...imagine...in capital letters...how many more dead people not living free there would be if everyone were allowed to tote guns everywhere, including hand guns.
They were, in Australia...once upon a time. But, after the Port Arthur massacre the People, absolutely horrified by what just happened, cried out for gun reform, "nobody needs to carry a machine gun or any other gun around society." So the Prime Minister at the time obliged with a gun buyback scheme and an amnesty for illegal weapons.

Port Arthur massacre came after the Strathfield massacre in Sydney and the Hoddle St massacre in Melbourne.

The People basically cried out "too many massacres, STOP THE MASSACRES!"

The 'gun reform' People won!

Only the massacres never stop do they?

Nope, bad people still get guns, but the good people are denied them, so they just get to be targets.

Remember skippy, an armed society, is a polite society.