Non-crime hate incidents - yet another not-at-all-Orwellian reality

[PureX]

Even though such highly subjective "public services" can be used by prospective employers?

Given the amount of information being collected on ALL OF US that any prosopective employer could get access to for a few bucks I really don't see any of this as being a particularly egregious policy. Especially when it's very unlikely that these 'reports' go anywhere at all.

 

[icehorse]

As a mother of mixed race children i am really quite pleased that overt, insulting racist speech can be prosecuted.

Racism sucks - we should fight it.

But not via censorship.

 

[Alien826]

That's funny, many brits think the same about America.

I don't think either society can be regarded as particularly "free", historically and (to perhaps a lesser extent) currently. There have always been people in positions of power limiting the freedoms of those that are less powerful.

 

[ChristineM]

Racism sucks - we should fight it.

But not via censorship.

Fight it any way that works

 

[icehorse]

Given the amount of information being collected on ALL OF US that any prosopective employer could get access to for a few bucks I really don't see any of this as being a particularly egregious policy. Especially when it's very unlikely that these 'reports' go anywhere at all.

I would agree that we've lost a lot of privacy over the last several decades.

But it seems like you're saying "since it's not perfect, why not make it worse" ??

 

[PureX]

I would agree that we've lost a lot of privacy over the last several decades.

But it seems like you're saying "since it's not perfect, why not make it worse" ??

What I’m saying is their way of “policing” is not our way. They are serving, first, not enforcing, first and always. So it makes sense that they would provide the public this avenue of complaint. So citizens feel they have some recourse when they’ve been insulted. Even if it comes to nothing. In the moment, they made a report! And they feel vindicated.

Our police couldn’t care less how we feel. They only care about enforcing laws. Catching the bad guys. I like that the Brit police provide a way for people to be heard when they feel disrespected. Instead of running for their guns.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

For the last 9 or 10 years in the UK, if a citizen is offended by the speech of another, they can file a report with the police who might log a permanent "non-crime hate incident" into their records. It is estimated that around 200,000 such reports have been logged to date.

Here's an excerpt from one of the links below:



In 2023 the guidelines were revised, but remain largely as vague and subjective and disruptive as before.

UK police’s speech-chilling practice of tracking ‘non-crime hate incidents’

Non-crime hate incidents: code of practice

"Hate speech" shouldn't even be a thing, legally.

 

[PureX]

"Hate speech" shouldn't even be a thing, legally.

Here in the US people kill each other every day over the insult of “disrespect”. Every day. “Free speech” kills in this country. Every day, often many times a day. So let’s stop pretending that it’s harmless. And let’s stop pretending we couldn’t use some mitigating solutions.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Racism sucks - we should fight it.

But not via censorship.

Agree. People can say any vile crap that they want.

Actions should be prosecuted, not speech if one values a free society.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Here in the US people kill each other every day over the insult of “disrespect”. Every day. “Free speech” kills in this country. Every day, often many times a day. So let’s stop pretending that it’s harmless. And let’s stop pretending we couldn’t use some mitigating solutions.

People kill over sneakers and other dumb things every day as well.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Here in the US people kill each other every day over the insult of “disrespect”. Every day. “Free speech” kills in this country. Every day, often many times a day. So let’s stop pretending that it’s harmless. And let’s stop pretending we couldn’t use some mitigating solutions.

That's rather hysterical. People kill each other over pretty much anything. You can't have a free society if people can't legally speak their mind. Free speech also helps prevent individuals who have extremist beliefs from being driven further underground and possibly further radicalized. Censoring their speech only proves them right, that they're being attacked.

 

[icehorse]

So citizens feel they have some recourse when they’ve been insulted.

Nonsense!

Life is hard. You might "feel" insulted, but that does not give you the right to besmirch another citizen's record. This UK policy is an end-around innocent until proven guilty. ugh.

 

[icehorse]

Fight it any way that works

Nope. Free speech is too important. It's the foundation upon which all of our other liberties are built.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

That's funny, many brits think the same about America.

It's that realization that free countries more free than America also have hate speech laws made me realize this idea we must protect all speech at all cost is rather silly. All you have to do is not be an ******* and acknowledge words too are actions and being held accountable for our actions (including the consequences of those actions) is actually a normal thing in the legal world.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Nonsense!

Life is hard. You might "feel" insulted, but that does not give you the right to besmirch another citizen's record. This UK policy is an end-around innocent until proven guilty. ugh.

You say that but it's been shown that isn't the case.
Where else have we seen you display such behaviors?

 

[Secret Chief]

Agree. People can say any vile crap that they want.

Actions should be prosecuted, not speech if one values a free society.

How utterly idiotic. Goebbels would have loved you.

 

[Secret Chief]

Nonsense!

Life is hard. You might "feel" insulted, but that does not give you the right to besmirch another citizen's record. This UK policy is an end-around innocent until proven guilty. ugh.

Ugh yeah. Stay out of this Marxist hellhole.

 

[Debater Slayer]

In the first link (the American organisation) it says
"Innocuous statements may be reported, like a soccer fan sarcastically asking a referee, “Are you blind?” "

yet in the second link (the guidance) it explicitly states

"debate, humour, satire and personally-held views which are lawfully expressed are not, by themselves, grounds for the recording of an NCHI
....
sets out that an NCHI should not be recorded if the report is deemed by the police to be trivial, irrational, malicious, or if there is no basis to conclude that it was motivated by intentional hostility"

which suggests the organisation's rightwing* agenda is being pushed irrespective of actual facts.

*courtesy of Wikipedia

Thanks. I'm not surprised that an organization using the excessively lax definition of "free speech" that pervades US politics would overreact to or misrepresent the British procedure.

Cheers to countries that recognize that hate speech is a real and harmful phenomenon that needs to be properly addressed legally. That includes most countries in the developed world—indeed including the numerous ones that criminalize Nazi expression and other forms of hate speech.

 

[icehorse]

How utterly idiotic. Goebbels would have loved you.

really? can you explain that?

 

[icehorse]

Thanks. I'm not surprised that an organization using the excessively lax definition of "free speech" that pervades US politics would overreact to or misrepresent the British procedure.

You can find other people and organizations who are also concerned. And really, who cares who reported on it? It's either true or it isn't, correct?

Cheers to countries that recognize that hate speech is a real and harmful phenomenon that needs to be properly addressed legally. That includes most countries in the developed world—indeed including the numerous ones that criminalize Nazi expression and other forms of hate speech.

Yes of course, hate speech can be harmful. But not as harmful as censorship.