If someone appears to be repeatedly personal, lean towards patience as they might not mean offense. If you are sure, however, then do not deepen the problem by being negative; instead, simply place them on ignore by clicking the unhappy yellow face to the right of their name.
- Manlobbi
Halls of Shrewd'm / US Policy
No. of Recommendations: 4
...for what they post online.
The UK is experiencing a fair number of protests turned riot over immigration. The Rozzers are arresting people who post footage of the riots, criticize police tactics or other things generally associated with free speech. The UK does not have the same kind of free speech protections that Americans have and over the past several years have seen their rights degrade significantly.
But now they're upping the ante...and want to lock up
Americans who are making comments:
https://www.foxnews.com/media/uk-police-commission...
Media
UK police commissioner threatens to extradite, jail US citizens over online posts: 'We'll come after you'
'Being a keyboard warrior does not make you safe from the law' the police commissioner warnedSorry, pal. The First Amendment and all that. Now I wish I was on Social Media so I could post the Don't Tread On Me flag.
No. of Recommendations: 6
The First Amendment and all that.
First Amendment doesn't apply to other countries, though. In the literal sense, that is - most OECD countries have some analog to the First Amendment in their own national basic laws. But the specific protections of our First Amendment do not restrict foreign governments from imposing criminal penalties on speech in circumstances that would not be permissible in the U.S.
You get into some pretty complicated jurisdictional reach questions when it comes to posts on a message board, of course. Generally speaking, Country X can't impose civil or criminal liability on a citizen of Country Y for acts committed entirely in Country Y. But that gets really messy when it comes to activity on the internet, which can cross international boundaries. When you post something on Twitter, are you publishing that content - but are you publishing that content in every nation where it might be read?
UK and Wales were notorious hotspots for libel tourism for a while, because their civil laws on speech did not previously differentiate between foreign and domestic speakers. So if a U.S. citizen said something libelous under UK law that ended up being published in the UK (among many other places), they could be sued in the UK even if they had little connection to the jurisdiction. That's since been amended to create a much higher standard for suits against people that aren't domiciled in the UK/Wales.
I'm not sure that would protect against criminal matters, though. And if you publish something in England that's a criminal offense in England, and they issue an arrest warrant in England, the English courts aren't going to recognize the First Amendment as being relevant.
No. of Recommendations: 3
First Amendment doesn't apply to other countries, though. In the literal sense, that is - most OECD countries have some analog to the First Amendment in their own national basic laws. But the specific protections of our First Amendment do not restrict foreign governments from imposing criminal penalties on speech in circumstances that would not be permissible in the U.S.
The UK could swear out an arrest warrant, hold a trial, reach a verdict and pronounce a sentence against any US citizen they want, all in absentia. While that US citizen would be in hot water if they ever dropped in the UK - where they would be subject to arrest - no sane US government would extradite on such a request. All that is true because the 1A applies to Americans on American soil. Its writ does not extend out past the borders.
Well...until Harris gets in office, that is.
No. of Recommendations: 2
The UK could swear out an arrest warrant, hold a trial, reach a verdict and pronounce a sentence against any US citizen they want, all in absentia. While that US citizen would be in hot water if they ever dropped in the UK - where they would be subject to arrest - no sane US government would extradite on such a request.
True - and the UK likely wouldn't request extradition from the US, either. Most extradition treaties only permit extradition for actions that are a crime in both countries. I think they would recognize that the consequences for Musk would be relatively limited, and mostly serve to declare him persona non grata in the UK and any other countries that have reciprocal agreements with the UK that would be affected.
No. of Recommendations: 2
True - and the UK likely wouldn't request extradition from the US, either. Most extradition treaties only permit extradition for actions that are a crime in both countries.
That appears to be changing. These locals seem to think they're going to be able to lock up anyone they want.
They're also not talking about Musk; they're talking about anyone who dares to talk about this at all.
No. of Recommendations: 3
SNIP A Sky News reporter asked Commissioner Rowley to further explain his warning, arguing that high profile figures have been "whipping up the hatred," and that "the likes of Elon Musk" have been getting involved. She then asked what the police force’s plan will be "when it comes to dealing with people who are whipping up this kind of behavior from behind the keyboard who may be in a different country?"
OooooOOOOoooohhh. That would be entertaining. Please extradite Elon Musk, Enquiring minds want to know.
On the flip side, the Philippines warned expats not to participate in political movements, rallies, etc. Most American expats were MAGA and they were too afraid to even talk about normal events. So I looked up the EO, showed it to them, and told them that an Australian sister (catholic) had come to the Philippines exclusively to participate in a communist/socialist movement and had been deported, but normal folks - no worry. They were still too afraid, so that left me only Filipinos and a few expats to talk to about politics. But even then it was only in messenger, not posted online. I would get threatened at times by Filipinos on the internet and I would explain to them I am violating no law. I was simply not allowing false and biased criticisms of the US to go unchallenged.
According to some Filipinos, the USA killed 3 million Filipinos, stole all of the gold, made trade laws that were favorable to the US, and then left. The 3 million figure is traced back to a typo in the census, and the war killed ~200,000 people including the cholera victims. The company that exported all the gold was owned by Americans for 2 years, went bust, a Philippine bank took it over and made it profitable - so it was the Philippines that shipped it all out and it wasn't a lot anyway. We did make favorable laws for our companies before we left, seems normal.
No. of Recommendations: 1
That appears to be changing. These locals seem to think they're going to be able to lock up anyone they want.
They're also not talking about Musk; they're talking about anyone who dares to talk about this at all.
What the locals think doesn't change the content of international treaties.
As for locking up other folks (presumably people that are in the jurisdiction), not all countries have the same laws as the US. If someone violates UK criminal law by engaging in speech that is criminalized there, then they can be locked up. The Brandenburg v. Ohio test used in the US is a really, really high bar. It would not surprise me if speech that would be protected here might be subject to criminal penalties if made in other countries.
No. of Recommendations: 1
I like Britain. It's frankly the only place in Western Europe where - while I laugh about the demographic payback they are getting, I don't cheer and desire more "explosive" acts of opposition from the oppressed.
BUT. no. Nobody takes Americans to prosecute despite Leftists long wanting to serve up Americans to places like the International Criminal Court or whatever.
Message to UK
1.)Go to *every* nation you colonized, whose resources you stole. whose regions you set up for war, whose women you raped and apologize publicly.
2.)Make them whole. Pay them back all the monies and resources, plus inflation and interest.
Once you've done that, then talk about what to do with Americans.
Fun Fact: I said a quick. 25 second hello to Iain Duncan Smith on the street, in London a few weeks ago. I was sporting massive geek wood :)
No. of Recommendations: 3
It would not surprise me if speech that would be protected here might be subject to criminal penalties if made in other countries.
Absolutely. The 1st Amendment doesn't apply in the UK, as you pointed out. I remember a few decades ago that a British production/documentary about Jack the Ripper was not allowed because it implicated a member of the royal family. That couldn't happen here, but it did there.
John Oliver violated Canadian law in one of his shows, commenting on Canadian elections. I don't recall the details now, but evidently foreign nationals are not allowed to do that in Canada. If they chose to enforce, he wouldn't be able to travel there for the foreseeable future.
And that's just two examples off the top of my head involving 1st-world countries that are our allies. You have to play by the rules of any country you choose to visit. Our Constitution does not apply there (except as it pertains to actions by the US government against citizens, according to you a few years ago).
