UK Locks Up Citizens for Social Media Posts

[Oldcarpy2]

Spot on.

[Oldcarpy2]

I don't think anyone from Private Eye magazine has been arrested for being highly critical of the Govt:

https://www.private-eye.co.uk/current-issue

[Oldcarpy2]

The charges against those two "praying" were dropped and I think they got compensation:

BBC News - Abortion clinic charges dropped against Wolverhampton priest - BBC News
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-bi...m-64668114

"Father Sean Gough and charity volunteer Isabel Vaughan-Spruce were facing four charges at Birmingham Magistrates' Court.

But prosecutor Ekene Pruce said both cases had been judged not to meet the "full code test" for prosecutors.

"Everyone has the right to pray in their mind," Fr Gough said.

The pair were due at separate hearings at the court on Thursday accused of failing to comply with a Public Spaces Protection Order (PSPO) on dates in October, November and December.

Ms Vaughan-Spruce, from Malvern, Worcestershire, and Fr Gough, of the St Peter and St Paul Catholic Church in Wolverhampton, were both accused of "protesting and engaging in an act that is intimidating to service users" of a Birmingham clinic."

[sahgwa]

Ok I’ll be brave and make this my first non intro post. There was a spate of people getting arrested after the riots that happened after those poor kids where mudered in Southport last year, but from what I can gather there was more to most of the arrests, there was more than just some twitter posts. It became a line championed by the right that you could get arrested for social media posts and we were living under some sort of fascist state, but I have seen no real evidence of this. If I was to post that kier starmer is a kiddie fiddler apologist who has no clue what he is doing and is running the country into the ground (but in stronger language than I’d use here of course), I am quite within my rights as a Brit to do so. There are differences between sharing an opinion and actual hate speech though and if you cross over into inflammatory or potentially incendiary stuff though so if I posted something racist that could be seen to be a call to harm someone or start a riot, then yes I’d also expect a knock on the door. But as a whole, free speech is alive and kicking, regardless of what the more right leaning propagandists might what you to believe.

If anything, from this side of the pond, it seems like our American cousins are the ones who need to watch what they say or think, but I have learnt that these things are normally spread by people what have an agenda to push themselves. I’d hazard a guess that both Americans and brits are as free as they’ve always been………..oh that’s odd, there’s a knock at the door…….hello………no wait…….you can’t take me away…………no I’m sure kier starmer is a great man……..no I didn’t mean it officer, don’t beat me……..aurghhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!

Thank you for your response, you hit the nail on the head with 'actual hate speech- crossing the line into incendiary speech' . And that's what ideomotorprisoner hits on as well.
Governments , as controlling bodies, love to find ways to limit expression if it threatens the status quo and their existence.  
I am for total free speech in all times places and contexts.  
Because the whole label 'hate speech' is nothing more than a convenient sticker to place on speech the government doesn't like, or X group personally doesnt like, in order to shut it down and censor it.  Its too slippery. 

The LINE shouldnt be in speech. The LINE already exists in daily life.  Say what you want, just dont beat people up about it or harm them.

[Kurokage]

I am for total free speech in all times places and contexts.  

Can I ask you a question?

So if you over heard a person talking about young children in a 'certain way', would think its acceptable and 'free' speech?

[sahgwa]

Can I ask you a question?

So if you over heard a person talking about young children in a 'certain way', would think its acceptable and 'free' speech?

Acceptable - not at all
Freedom to speak -yes

You see how that works? Freedom is freedom.  It's just speech. 

If anything, that would be a good thing, as you would know who to watch out for.  Much worse if it was someone who didn't telegraph their evil, so that you could stop it.

[Kurokage]

....as you would know who to watch out for

So you're saying it's 'free speech' but it's ok to watch someone for their comments? Thats not really free speech then is it?

[UltraBudgie]

In the United States, this has been privatized. Say the wrong thing on social media, and you may find yourself unable to get a job, or more recently, an education.

This isn't an infringement of "free speech", according to current law, because it's not the government doing it, but to the extent that the government by their actions creates a "chilling effect", a case could be made that constitutes de facto infringement. But that argument probably won't fly in the current political environment.

[sahgwa]

So you're saying it's 'free speech' but it's ok to watch someone for their comments? Thats not really free speech then is it?

Let's be real here, everyone is being watched all of the time. And yes, free speech is a verbal or textual communication that is 'allowed', that utters. Goes forth, with no impediment.
In my opinion there is no accoutrement expectation of any other treatment after the speech has been uttered or written, which would suddenly negate it's free-ness, such as recording or monitoring. 
If I say what I want, it's free speech, if someone wants to follow me around afterwards, then that's their problem, as long as I can continue my free speech unabated.  It only becomes unfree if I am locked up for said speech. 
Which obviously, I would be against. 
You notice here the obvious? The line is never crossed into abhorrent or illegal action.   I am for free speech, not anarchy.

[Maxmars]

It's true, our older cousins over the horizon seem to be very concerned with whether people are thinking about God.

Perhaps in time, we too, will become fixated on what people "may" or "may not" silently think in our (individual or collective) presences... but here in the US we have not encountered that tendency.  And it may never come to that here anyway... seems like an 'effect' and not a 'cause.' [apologies, if off-topic]

I think I understand the objections from both sides, just not the actions that follow them, (and who is actually making a living out of it.)