Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : The Boxing Ring Revived -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (5385)	3/10/2003 5:50:37 PM
From: Solon	Respond to of 7720

"Can you get arrested in Canada for using an ethnic slur or wearing a t-shirt with a racist slogan?" Well, anyone can make an arrest...even citizens. Conviction?? I doubt it. "will you be able to say "I don't like homosexuals", or "homosexual activity is sinful" I would think so. But it would probably be really ignorant to attempt to refuse them access to accomodation or dialysis on an irrational or an idioatic basis.

To: TimF who wrote (5385)	3/10/2003 6:32:05 PM
From: one_less	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 7720

"Peter Stock seems to imply that there is a danger of such arrests and prosecutions happening. Perhaps he is wrong." There is not much point pushing "hate crimes" legislation unless there is prosecutorial teeth behind it. It seems reasonable to me that if someone is harmed or killed as a product of someone else's speech against them, that you could prosecute the speaker as an excessory to the crime. So the question becomes how does speech result in harm being done to a person? We currently have slander and defamation laws. What does "hate crime" legislation bring to the table that existing laws do not? It brings the element of a legal "special" status to groups of individuals that may have legal recource, that is separate from what an individual has or that the population in general is afforded.