Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Criminal Justice (Incitement to Violence or Hatred and Hate Offences) Bill 2022 - Read OP

Options
1…6791112…143

Comments

  • Options
    #242
    RobbieTheRobber
    Registered Users Posts: 6,825 ✭✭✭RobbieTheRobber


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119798122#Comment_119798122

    Flip which side this woman is being used by here and many posters would be commenting on her hair colour as a way to discredit.

    Its all very interesting to observe.



  • Options
    #243
    xxxxxxl
    Registered Users Posts: 5,273 ✭✭✭xxxxxxl


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119798262#Comment_119798262

    no no only if your over 40.



  • Options
    #244
    Annasopra
    Registered Users Posts: 41,062 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119797102#Comment_119797102

    No. The 1989 prohibition of incitement to hatred act exists and has existed since 1989.

    It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.

    Terry Pratchet



  • Options
    #245
    xxxxxxl
    Registered Users Posts: 5,273 ✭✭✭xxxxxxl


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119798275#Comment_119798275

    And according to posters is far to robust for some reason why is that ? What is wrong with that legislation ? ofc not attacking the poster just want an answer.



  • Options
    #246
    Annasopra
    Registered Users Posts: 41,062 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119798218#Comment_119798218

    Is that a discussion on proposed laws in Ireland?

    It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.

    Terry Pratchet



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #247
    Annasopra
    Registered Users Posts: 41,062 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119798227#Comment_119798227

    Because of the failures of the 1989 act

    It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.

    Terry Pratchet



  • Options
    #248
    Annasopra
    Registered Users Posts: 41,062 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119798287#Comment_119798287

    What? Who is saying the 1989 Act is far too robust? Noone has said that here.

    It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.

    Terry Pratchet



  • Options
    #249
    xxxxxxl
    Registered Users Posts: 5,273 ✭✭✭xxxxxxl


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119798294#Comment_119798294

    What failures ? Explain in detail. It just seems to robust for some. Is posting something the crime not the motivation the thinking behind it ?



  • Options
    #250
    xxxxxxl
    Registered Users Posts: 5,273 ✭✭✭xxxxxxl


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119798299#Comment_119798299

    Because of the failures of the 1989 act

    I did not post that.



  • Options
    #251
    Annasopra
    Registered Users Posts: 41,062 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119798303#Comment_119798303

    Who is saying it is robust????

    It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.

    Terry Pratchet



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #252
    Potential-Monke
    Registered Users Posts: 13,961 ✭✭✭✭Potential-Monke


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119798287#Comment_119798287

    The 1989 act is lacking in the new gender terminology, so is updating to include that, and create the actual crime of hate speech (I think, haven't seen the actual legisation yet). I don't think anyone said the '89 act is too robust? Maybe I'm misreading.



  • Options
    #253
    xxxxxxl
    Registered Users Posts: 5,273 ✭✭✭xxxxxxl


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119798307#Comment_119798307

    A poster said the legislation failed. If so how ?



  • Options
    #254
    xxxxxxl
    Registered Users Posts: 5,273 ✭✭✭xxxxxxl


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119798308#Comment_119798308

    I know that you know that some wont admit that.



  • Options
    #255
    Annasopra
    Registered Users Posts: 41,062 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119798311#Comment_119798311

    You said posters here said its too robust.

    Now you have changed to someone said it failed.

    You're not making any sense.

    You're jumping all over the place saying X said blah blah when there is no X and noone said blah blah. Then you come up with Y said blah blah blah.

    You're just coming up with random nonsense.

    You clearly dont know what you are talking about either as you claimed earlier Ireland has no hate speech laws.

    It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.

    Terry Pratchet



  • Options
    #256
    xxxxxxl
    Registered Users Posts: 5,273 ✭✭✭xxxxxxl


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119798330#Comment_119798330

    No no. Legislation cannot fail unless some think it's language is to robust in the situation of some crank on Facebook. Everyone knows Ireland has no Hate speech law. That's what being preposed. Why is it needed we already have a set of laws that are not being used or considered to robust. Explain to the rest of the class why is this amendment needed. It does not seem to be going after General "Hate just a particular kind. That's just going on the previous incarnations of suggestions. As there not making "Hate" the crime here.



  • Options
    #257
    Annasopra
    Registered Users Posts: 41,062 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119798340#Comment_119798340

    You are literally talking random nonsense; noone said its too robust.

    We have had a hate speech law in Ireland since 1989.

    "everyone knows blah" is just not true. The 1989 Act does regulate Hate Speech.

    https://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1989/act/19/enacted/en/print.html


    It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.

    Terry Pratchet



  • Options
    #258
    xxxxxxl
    Registered Users Posts: 5,273 ✭✭✭xxxxxxl


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119798354#Comment_119798354

    ctrl + f speech nowhere in there.



  • Options
    #259
    Annasopra
    Registered Users Posts: 41,062 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119798362#Comment_119798362

    And? You were looking for detail. Read the Act.

    It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.

    Terry Pratchet



  • Options
    #260
    xxxxxxl
    Registered Users Posts: 5,273 ✭✭✭xxxxxxl


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119798372#Comment_119798372

    No need to ctrl + f for speech was all that was needed. It's why we are getting amendments. Law is black and white it's how lawyers get around stuff technically all the time. You can argue sound but a good lawyer will argue speech is not mentioned or could be reasonably covered. It's a general law dealing with "Incitement" to hatred.



  • Options
    #261
    Hodger
    Registered Users Posts: 235 ✭✭Hodger


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119798291#Comment_119798291

    In post #226 you asked .

    " Can you actually point me to a credible source that says criticism or objections to trans ideology will now be prosecutable? "


    In another country where they have hate speech laws and someone ended up being investigated for trans critical tweets the high court ruled

    " Police officers unlawfully interfered with a man’s right to freedom of expression by turning up at his place of work to speak to him about allegedly “transphobic” tweets, the high court has ruled. "

    https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/feb/14/transgender-tweet-police-acted-unlawfully

    Real life example of someone being Investigated for daring to disagree with trans ideology, even the judge stated

    " Hate speech policing is Orwellian, warns judge in trans tweets case "

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/dont-behave-like-gestapo-over-transphobic-tweets-warns-judge-zc9fpw3k8



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #262
    Annasopra
    Registered Users Posts: 41,062 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119798386#Comment_119798386

    So. The answer is no.

    It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.

    Terry Pratchet



  • Options
    #263
    Annasopra
    Registered Users Posts: 41,062 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119798381#Comment_119798381

    So you dont want detail. You just want to assert your own opinion (which is wrong) as a fact. 😶

    Theres some descriptions out there of that.

    It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.

    Terry Pratchet



  • Options
    #264
    xxxxxxl
    Registered Users Posts: 5,273 ✭✭✭xxxxxxl


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119798394#Comment_119798394

    How did the FB lad get off then ? It's nothing to do with Detail. It's there in Black and white. Law Is black and White. It's also designed to be impenetrable to lay people why you higher a lawyer and never advised to represent yourself.



  • Options
    #265
    Annasopra
    Registered Users Posts: 41,062 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119798398#Comment_119798398

    So you dont want detail then. So why did you ask for detail? You want the detail until you get the detail then you dont want the detail.

    Why are you asking about the court case when you claim you know all the answers.

    Yeah not falling for it.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sealioning


    It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.

    Terry Pratchet



  • Options
    #266
    xxxxxxl
    Registered Users Posts: 5,273 ✭✭✭xxxxxxl


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119798407#Comment_119798407

    post #219

    We have had hate speech laws in Ireland since 1989. It hasnt adversely affected free speech.

    The case where a Kerry man set up a facebook to "promote the use of knacker babies as sharkbait" should have been prosecuted but the 1989 law made that impossible. In this case there was a promotion of murdering traveller young children because they were travellers. A very clear case of hate speech and incitement to hatred that should have been easily prosecutable. A very clear case showing the 1989 law is unworkable and needs to be updated.

    It did not meet that bar so obviously hate speech is not covered but Incitement to hatred is ? also did not meet that bar. I don't need detail I "read" the law. Now arguing that amendments are needed is a completely different kettle of fish.



  • Options
    #267
    Potential-Monke
    Registered Users Posts: 13,961 ✭✭✭✭Potential-Monke


    This, this is why it is being updated:

    From the 1989 act:

    “hatred” means hatred against a group of persons in the State or elsewhere on account of their race, colour, nationality, religion, ethnic or national origins, membership of the travelling community or sexual orientation;

    No mention of gender so that's being included.

    TO CLARIFY: Ireland has not had "hate speech" legislation. It had legisation prohibiting someone from inciting hatred, which is in the act defined as above. That will now include gender (and maybe others, I don't know exactly) and be merged into the new "Criminal Justice (Incitement to Violence or Hatred and Hate Crime) Bill 2022" once it becomes an Act (which will then be called Criminal Justice (Incitement to Violence or Hatred and Hate Crime) Act 2022).

    Hate speech is an umbrella term that people are saying when they mean the Incitement to Hatred Act in Ireland. Ok, so no, there was never hate speech legisation, nor will there be, it's called Hate crime here. But it's the same thing. IMO, it's main purpose is to specifically add gender so they don't have to try and wrap that around the current "secual orientation" term and thus make it slightly easier to prosecute.



  • Options
    #268
    xxxxxxl
    Registered Users Posts: 5,273 ✭✭✭xxxxxxl


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119798420#Comment_119798420

    Makes perfect sense. Why the FB guy got off with the hate speech angle.



  • Options
    #269
    naughtyboy
    Registered Users Posts: 191 ✭✭naughtyboy


    I have been warned and posts removed

    No debate allowed and no differing of opinion

    But hey this new law is good for Ireland



  • Options
    #270
    Potential-Monke
    Registered Users Posts: 13,961 ✭✭✭✭Potential-Monke


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119798423#Comment_119798423

    I thought that was coming, so I went off and searched and found this article:

    https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/arid-20169325.html

    He got off, basically, because he set up the page after being confronted by 11 travellers who refused to leave the pub he was working in until he sold them takeaway afterhours. They threatened to break up the place and him. So when he got home he did the, in his own words, "cowardly" act of setting up this facebook page out of anger and annoyance (knowing nothing would be done if reported, as appears to be the case and well know by barman, especially back in 2011!). He made 2 posts, taking material from online, shared it with 2 friends. Within a couple of days it went to 644 and he forgot about it until months later when he got a message from Facebook to take it down.

    The complaint was taken by 2 travellers from Killarney who felt afraid for their kids, but as there were no witnesses in court to contest that they (travellers I assume) were subjected to hatred as a result, coupled with no further posts, no previous, an immediate admittance and apology, the judge saw (rightly, imo) in this case it was a moment of frustrated madness that had no real intent behind it.

    Mainly, because no witnesses though. However, that's already covered in the Incitement to Hatred Act, membership of the travelling community. Gender isn't, so new legisation to make it easier to prosecute on grounds of gender, rather than try and convince a court it falls under the sexual orientation umbrella, which depending on what you want to believe, it does or doesn't.

    I'm also of the opinion that if he did that today, 2022, even with the current Incitement to Hatred Act, he would 100% have been prosecuted, even without witnesses. Whether that's a good or bad thing, who knows. Unless he's come to the attention of the Gardai in relation to travellers again since, I think it was the right call.



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #271
    xxxxxxl
    Registered Users Posts: 5,273 ✭✭✭xxxxxxl


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119798427#Comment_119798427

    Thanks for the research. Unfortunately falls under he said she said. No doubt a heated exchange and the judge took that into account.



Advertisement