UK's biggest welfare family have another baby

[SuburbanFarmer]

Lol ‘grossly offensive’ is your protection from overreach. That’s pretty sad.

[PartyOf5]

The guy probably should be fired, but that's up to his employer. Monty believes his excuse for the joke, but others don't. There are literally people out there who will see this guy as 61 and white and accuse him of being a racist even without that joke ever being made. Who determines his intent here?

Having a law like that is inviting more troubles than it will fix.

[clubgop]

The guy probably should be fired, but that's up to his employer. Monty believes his excuse for the joke, but others don't. There are literally people out there who will see this guy as 61 and white and accuse him of being a racist even without that joke ever being made. Who determines his intent here?

Having a law like that is inviting more troubles than it will fix.

But if Monty likes it can never be offensive. See, leftist have no standards but the desire for power.

[StCapps]

Merely offensive is not a crime. The law clearly states that it has to be grossly offensive.
Asking a Nazi saluting dog if he wants to gas the Jews 30 times is on a whole different level of offensive compared to a picture of a chimp in a top hat.
Nuances matter.

Why do you trust the law to determine what is and isn't "grossly offensive"? Like Kath says it's super subjective, and the people interpreting this law don't seem to know what the fuck "grossly offensive" actually is, and reach to apply it to people whose opinion they don't like.

Nuances don't matter, "grossly offensive" should not be illegal, you can't trust the government to know where the line is, and you want to ban free speech anyway because someone said they crossed it. Absolute faggotry.

[BjornP]

Merely offensive is not a crime. The law clearly states that it has to be grossly offensive.
Asking a Nazi saluting dog if he wants to gas the Jews 30 times is on a whole different level of offensive compared to a picture of a chimp in a top hat.
Nuances matter.

I am sure it is grossly offensive. To most British, even. But why does it also need to be criminal? Are British people socially incapable of shunning the grossly offensive people, stigmatizing the grossly offensive people, choosing not to invite the grossly offensive people over for tea? Do you think that everything that is morally wrong, should be criminalized? Should people be fined for cutting queues? What about general rudeness?

Do you really believe that the only way to socially punish or sanction someone for what they say, is to make what they say and how they say it illegal?

[Speaker to Animals]

Merely offensive is not a crime. The law clearly states that it has to be grossly offensive.
Asking a Nazi saluting dog if he wants to gas the Jews 30 times is on a whole different level of offensive compared to a picture of a chimp in a top hat.
Nuances matter.

Yes, Monty. Nuances matter. Like the fact that the guy teaching his dog to salute like a Nazi did so as a joke, and the punchline of the joke was to make this cute dog look like something completely horrible, and to claim that is offensive is to defend Nazis. Then there is the fact that the punchline of the tweet you are defending here is that blacks are not human beings.

Fucking amazing.

[Montegriffo]

Lol ‘grossly offensive’ is your protection from overreach. That’s pretty sad.

No, the courts are protection from overreach.
Sad is when you have no trust in your legal system.

[Speaker to Animals]

We should also differentiate public figures from private individuals. Punishing anonymous people for saying things some people don't like in this way is obviously wrong. A public figure, who is a public face for a major communications corporation, represents a different matter. If some IT tech at BBC tweeted, there would be no reason to fire him. But these companies, including the state media propaganda outlets like BBC, make their way in this industry by building up public personas in their radio and television talent. If you take a job like that, you have to keep that public persona clean, which is why I would never want such a job.

[StCapps]

Lol ‘grossly offensive’ is your protection from overreach. That’s pretty sad.

No, the courts are protection from overreach.
Sad is when you have no trust in your legal system.

You have far too much faith in courts to determine what is and isn't "grossly offensive", they don't protect fuck, it's a kangaroo court witch trial. Sad that you trust courts to determine what is and isn't free speech when they routinely show they don't have a god damn clue, what a dumbass.

[Montegriffo]

Merely offensive is not a crime. The law clearly states that it has to be grossly offensive.
Asking a Nazi saluting dog if he wants to gas the Jews 30 times is on a whole different level of offensive compared to a picture of a chimp in a top hat.
Nuances matter.

Yes, Monty. Nuances matter. Like the fact that the guy teaching his dog to salute like a Nazi did so as a joke, and the punchline of the joke was to make this cute dog look like something completely horrible, and to claim that is offensive is to defend Nazis. Then there is the fact that the punchline of the tweet you are defending here is that blacks are not human beings.

Fucking amazing.

Shame you are not consistent enough to have said the same thing about Rosanne Barr when she compared a black woman to an ape.