Canadian fined $35,000 for hurting feelings *Update, Jokes won.

[TechyBen]

1 minute ago, PCGuy_5960 said:

He didn't doxx him though? And doxxing being a crime has nothing to do with free speech and everything to do with your right to privacy.

 

Also, not going to get into that debate again.

I have not read the court papers. Have you? Did he defame him and cause harm at his place of work/work applications?

You think the court case was "he upset my feelings"? Not "he accused me of money fraud, now I cannot get a rental car/flat deposit insurance".

[RonnieOP]

1 minute ago, TechyBen said:

Really, like threats and everything? Sounds dangerous.

Being a dick is not the same as making threats.

 

Your talking about two totally different things here.

 

I can call a cop a bitch and thats not a crime. But i am being a dick.

 

I cant tell the cop im gonna beat his ass though lol.

[PCGuy_5960]

2 minutes ago, TechyBen said:

I have not read the court papers. Have you? Did he defame him and cause harm at his place of work/work applications?

You think the court case was "he upset my feelings"? Not "he accused me of money fraud, now I cannot get a rental car/flat deposit insurance".

Well judging by the article, he wasn't sued for defamation. 

[TechyBen]

1 minute ago, PCGuy_5960 said:

Well judging by the article, he wasn't sued for defamation. 

Yes. So, in this court case. Did they go over, if this joke had a threat to the victim. That, as he was disabled, and had (possibly) social requirements (payments from social funds/job security/living expenses from charity). that this joke did or did not stop him getting those?

[steelo]

9 minutes ago, RonnieOP said:

You can be a dick to a cop and theres no charge for that.

 

Its not like they can arrest you and say "your being charged with being a dick". 

 

Now it will make life alot easier on you if you arent a dick lol

You're right...a cop typically isn't going to book you unless you assault or threaten them.

[PCGuy_5960]

1 minute ago, TechyBen said:

Yes. So, in this court case. Did they go over, if this joke had a threat to the victim. That, as he was disabled, and had (possibly) social requirements (payments from social funds/job security/living expenses from charity). that this joke did or did not stop him getting those?

This is what the judges commented:

"Two of three judges ruled Mike Ward’s comments regarding Gabriel were not justifiable in a society where freedom of expression is valued."

Doesn't sound like "the joke prevented him from getting whatever requirements he had".

[steelo]

16 minutes ago, Okjoek said:

 

Venezuela is just a poor Sweden or "third-world social democracy". The profit motive is still being employed and there has been no workers revolution.

 

 

 

 

That's nice. I could go on forever about why pure socialism doesn't work. I could also provide countless links explaining failed socialist policies in other countries, but this isn't the time or place.

 

Perhaps you should create another thread solely about how great you believe socialism to be.

[TechyBen]

1 minute ago, PCGuy_5960 said:

This is what the judges commented:

"Two of three judges ruled Mike Ward’s comments regarding Gabriel were not justifiable in a society where freedom of expression is valued."

Doesn't sound like "the joke prevented him from getting whatever requirements he had".

Yes. So, in this court case. Did they go over, if this joke had a threat to the victim. That, as he was disabled, and had (possibly) social requirements (payments from social funds/job security/living expenses from charity). that this joke did or did not stop him getting those? I guess it would be better to rule "due to physical harm", but if the law only allows for this type of ruling, then that's what it allows for. We can argue deformation/slander, or what color of blue is "real". But America has those laws (as others have tried to establish) and Quebec has gone for these ones.

[edit]

Quote

Ward was ordered to pay $35,000 to Jeremy Gabriel, who suffers from a genetic disorder that causes facial deformity and affects his hearing, due to a joke the comedian told at shows between 2010 and 2013. 

...

Ward added that he tried to drown Gabriel, but he wouldn’t die.

 

The Quebec Human Rights Tribunal ruled that the joke discriminated against Gabriel and his parents, ordering Ward to pay damages for “making discriminatory comments regarding Jéremy Gabriel, infringing his right to equality.”

Emphasis mine.

 

He publicly, joked about the persons disability, repeatedly. I wonder if they could just do a like for like ruling, and put the comedian on British TV Gameshows (but 2 wrongs don't make a right).

 

 

I really really don't bother to discuss many of these things with people. As the main error, is, they forget, life and society, people and reality, goes both ways. Just wait if some big popular/power wielding person (boss/teacher/counselor/comedian) spreads some "joke" about you having it off with someone and/or stealing from the stock cupboard, and how your bonus talks go with your next performance meeting at work etc.

 

Society has realities. I wonder if the comedian realised them too?

[RonnieOP]

2 minutes ago, TechyBen said:

Yes. So, in this court case. Did they go over, if this joke had a threat to the victim. That, as he was disabled, and had (possibly) social requirements (payments from social funds/job security/living expenses from charity). that this joke did or did not stop him getting those? I guess it would be better to rule "due to physical harm", but if the law only allows for this type of ruling, then that's what it allows for. We can argue deformation/slander, or what color of blue is "real". But America has those laws (as others have tried to establish) and Quebec has gone for these ones.

[edit]

Emphasis mine.

 

He publicly, joked about the persons disability, repeatedly. I wonder if they could just do a like for like ruling, and put the comedian on British TV Gameshows (but 2 wrongs don't make a right).

 

 

I really really don't bother to discuss many of these things with people. As the main error, is, they forget, life and society, people and reality, goes both ways. Just wait if some big popular/power wielding person (boss/teacher/counselor/comedian) spreads some "joke" about you having it off with someone and/or stealing from the stock cupboard, and how your bonus talks go with your next performance meeting at work etc.

 

Society has realities. I wonder if the comedian realised them too?

If anyone in society cant tell the difference between a joke and truth thats on the person not the joke teller.

 

 

[PCGuy_5960]

9 minutes ago, TechyBen said:

Yes. So, in this court case. Did they go over, if this joke had a threat to the victim. That, as he was disabled, and had (possibly) social requirements (payments from social funds/job security/living expenses from charity). that this joke did or did not stop him getting those?

I really don't get your point. He didn't sue the comedian for defamation. If he could prove that this joke caused him financial harm, then yes, this case would make more sense, as it would quite clearly be defamation that caused him financial harm. 

 

It is also highly unlikely that people took what a comedian said during one of his performances seriously.

[steelo]

5 minutes ago, RonnieOP said:

If anyone in society cant tell the difference between a joke and truth thats on the person not the joke teller.

 

 

Unfortunately, we as a society must kowtow to the lowest common denominator. That includes, those who are offended by anything and everything.

[RonnieOP]

Just now, steelo said:

Unfortunately, we as a society must kowtow to the lowest common denominator. That is, those who are offended by anything and everything.

I dont think we must do that at all. I certainly wont.

 

Canada will never let me in even for a visit. And after reading about situations like this i no longer care that ill never be able to visit lol.

[steelo]

2 minutes ago, RonnieOP said:

I dont think we must do that at all. I certainly wont.

 

Canada will never let me in even for a visit. And after reading about situations like this i no longer care that ill never be able to visit lol.

We always have that choice. However, there are some very powerful people who stand behind those who are easily offended. Special interest groups use banning questionable 'hate' speech as a power grab. It's a dangerous road we're heading down.

[JZStudios]

2 hours ago, spartaman64 said:

No theres an expectation that there's exaggeration in comedy but not outright making stuff up because that's a terrible joke then. And i said saying something bad about someone is at the least a call for people to dislike that person and that alone can cause damages like the person losing his friends and family or his job

Why does the quality of the jokes matter? Aside from the fact that most jokes are... oh right. MAKING STUFF UP. There's a show, perhaps you've heard of it, called Whose Line is it Anyway. There was an American version, with pretty much the only Canadian I like, and a British version. Perhaps you've heard of Improv Comedy.

 

2 hours ago, Okjoek said:

 

OK boomers
I'm not going to reinvent the wheel so these are easily digestible:

 

 

Stop it, this isn't a debate about capitalism or socialism.

 

2 hours ago, steelo said:

Ah, random youtube videos probably created by people who hate everything the free world stands for.

 

Very enlightening.

Ditto

2 hours ago, Okjoek said:

What is the free world?

Ditto

2 hours ago, steelo said:

For one, nations that don't jail and torture its people for speaking against the 'system'

 

Socialist Venezuela wouldn't be a good example of a 'free' nation where people are generally happy to live.

Ditto. Not interested in talking political parties, make a different thread to be shut down for that. I don't even know why it was brought up as it has no relevance. Don't explain, I don't care.

 

 

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________

2 hours ago, TechyBen said:

So you recon, as a moderator of this forum... I can say anything about you, LTT and Linus, just say "lol joke" at the end, and never, ever, ever say something I should be told not to, have economic recompense from (a fine) or stopped from posting/publishing? Huuuuuh!?

Yes. Fire away. The forum can ban you, it's a private forum with it's own rules and regulations, it's not the government. Any fines levied would be from an individual and would have to go through a court system, but considering it's a stupid internet argument most wouldn't go that far because they have common sense. And there's nothing fine worthy about it.

2 hours ago, PCGuy_5960 said:

Privately owned tech forum=/=Public spaces and government. Plenty of people criticize Linus and none of aren't banned for it.

There's a few threads talking about how annoying he is and why people are unsubscribing. I've never been a big fan of him. His nose is too big, I hate his face, his voice sucks, his thumbnails are irritating and off-putting, his jokes are stupid, etc.

 

2 hours ago, TechyBen said:

But that's exactly the point. IF it is regulated "business are allowed to", it is done so, through government. Or, what do you think a business is, and a government is? Like... Do they both have rules, or not?

 

Both Apples and Oranges are eaten.

The hell? Do you live under communism? A business is not the government. Freedom of speech only directly applies to public space and the government. I don't understand what's so hard to understand about this, it's very simple. A business can also fire you for having sex in a broom closet. I don't understand what point you think you're trying to make.

 

2 hours ago, TechyBen said:

PS, try doing that with a cop...

...waiting for response from a friend for a video link...

Here it is;

There's a thing that people call 1st amendment audit, and they go around within their rights filming stuff and telling people to fuck off when they try to prevent them from doing what's legally acceptable.

It's 100% legal, and if they get rough with you it's an offense you can charge them with. As long as you don't give them a reason to believe you're a threat, yelling things like "I'll kill you" you can call them pigs, bacon, tell them fuck off, etc.

2 hours ago, PCGuy_5960 said:

He didn't doxx him though? And doxxing being a crime has nothing to do with free speech and everything to do with your right to privacy.

 

Also, not going to get into that debate again.

Don't you understand that actually murdering someone is the same thing as making fun of him? What's your problem, it's like... so simple you must be really dumb.

[RonnieOP]

1 minute ago, steelo said:

We always have that choice. However, there are some very powerful people who stand behind those who are easily offended. It's a dangerous road we're heading down.

Which is why freedom of speech is so important.

 

I will accept that i cant say alot of things i normally say when im on forums (i am not a pc person. I dont care to offend) but when it comes to real life i will never accept the same conditions.

[PCGuy_5960]

1 minute ago, JZStudios said:

I've never been a big fan of him. His nose is too big, I hate his face, his voice sucks, his thumbnails are irritating and off-putting, his jokes are stupid, etc.

Ok man, that is too far. I will ban you and fine you $1000, which you will send to my paypal.

[steelo]

2 minutes ago, RonnieOP said:

Which is why freedom of speech is so important.

 

I will accept that i cant say alot of things i normally say when im on forums (i am not a pc person. I dont care to offend) but when it comes to real life i will never accept the same conditions.

I edited my OP a bit prior to seeing your reply.  

 

There are special interest groups who use labeling questionable 'hate speech' as a power grab.

[RonnieOP]

Just now, steelo said:

I edited my OP a bit prior to seeing your reply.

 

I also said there are special interest groups who use questionable 'hate speech' as a power grab.

Yeah and thankfully those groups will be shut down in my country (US).

 

They can scream about hate speech all they want but itll never be a law here.

[wasab]

31 minutes ago, RonnieOP said:

You can be a dick to a cop and theres no charge for that.

 

Its not like they can arrest you and say "your being charged with being a dick". 

 

Now it will make life alot easier on you if you arent a dick lol

The thing is, cops can be a dick to you in return and unlike him, you cant bend his arms and body slam on him. 

[Drak3]

What it's boiling down to.

[steelo]

4 minutes ago, RonnieOP said:

Yeah and thankfully those groups will be shut down in my country (US).

 

They can scream about hate speech all they want but itll never be a law here.

I wouldn't be so sure. I'm also in the US and I think it's already starting to happen...I mentioned NYC earlier implementing a law that fines individuals $250,000 for purposefully misidentifying a transgender person.

 

The LGBT alliance is very strong and has a lot of influence, especially over Liberal lawmakers.

[PCGuy_5960]

3 minutes ago, RonnieOP said:

Yeah and thankfully those groups will be shut down in my country (US).

 

They can scream about hate speech all they want but itll never be a law here.

Personally, I hope that more countries follow the US's example. (doesn't seem so likely unfortunately)

[Drak3]

2 minutes ago, steelo said:

I'm also in the US and I think it's already starting to happen...I mentioned NYC earlier implementing a law that fines individuals $250,000 for purposefully misidentifying a transgender person.

The "mis"identifying transgendered people thing seems to be limited to a few shit hole cities, and with the current SCOTUS, I don't think it'll stand to scrutiny.

[steelo]

1 minute ago, Drak3 said:

The "mis"identifying transgendered people thing seems to be limited to a few shit hole cities, and with the current SCOTUS, I don't think it'll stand to scrutiny.

I agree, NYC and LA have become a shit hole cities...especially with the people they've elected

[RonnieOP]

5 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

The "mis"identifying transgendered people thing seems to be limited to a few shit hole cities, and with the current SCOTUS, I don't think it'll stand to scrutiny.

Tbh theres no way they will ever be able to enforce that law. The second they try scotus will shut it down.

 

Not to mention "misgendering" isnt the same thing for everyone.

 

For some calling a transwoman a man is misgendering but for others like me calling a transwoman a woman is misgendering. But lets not get into that topic lol.