DagT, This plants the idea in immature and sick minds that killing is OK. 'Look, they are recommending it on the internet.' Or in 'Call to Duty' video games. Regards, Bob S.
On Fri, Apr 5, 2013 at 4:43 PM, DagT <[email protected]> wrote: > And also, the once who initially is censored will increase the volume until > they get attention, like children. > That was also one of the reasons our madman used after killing a lot of > children. He felt that he was censored and not allowed to speak his opinion. > > I think it is better to let them be discussed in the open. Most people will > not be mislead by their opinions, and if they did the society as a whole has > a major problem anyway. > > DagT > > 5. apr. 2013 kl. 22:54 skrev David Parsons <[email protected]>: > >> I disagree. When you censor people, it tends to lend credence to >> their paranoia about the institutions that they distrust. >> >> And when the government feels that it's okay to censor one group, >> they'll eventually feel that it's okay to censor any group. >> >> On Fri, Apr 5, 2013 at 4:29 PM, Bob Sullivan <[email protected]> wrote: >>> No Dave. >>> Censoring opinions that promote killing people is a good idea. >>> I'd rather keep access to guns and censor killing promotion. >>> Regards, Bob S. >>> >>> On Fri, Apr 5, 2013 at 3:15 PM, David Parsons <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>>> Because that leads to censorship. Censoring opinions that we don't >>>> like is fascist. >>>> >>>> Our society very much needs to tolerate the things that we don't want to >>>> hear. >>>> >>>> On Fri, Apr 5, 2013 at 4:11 PM, Bob Sullivan <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> John, >>>>> I'm with Stan. Why don't we make the world a more civil place? >>>>> No more publishing threats to harm others. >>>>> It's a sickness our society no longer needs to tolerate. >>>>> Regards, Bob S. >>>>> >>>>> On Fri, Apr 5, 2013 at 1:50 PM, John Sessoms <[email protected]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> In the U.S. this would be protected by the 1st Amendment. >>>>>> >>>>>> Calling her photo a threat is HORSE CRAP! >>>>>> >>>>>> From: Stan Halpin >>>>>>> >>>>>>> As I read it, the problem is not that she took a picture. The problem >>>>>>> is that she posted it on a public forum. >>>>>>> Think about it. Making physical threats against the U.S. President is >>>>>>> going to attract the attention of the Secret Service, making threats >>>>>>> against others is arguably an offense as well. So, say some makes a >>>>>>> serious threat, you then copy and/or photograph that threat and post it. >>>>>>> I don't see how your lack of originality makes you any less culpable. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> stan >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Apr 5, 2013, at 7:58 AM, Darren Addy wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I'm not sure about Canada, but I would love to get arrested for >>>>>>>> photographing something in the U.S. The judgment I would eventually >>>>>>>> receive for false arrest would make the proposition quite profitable. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 10:33 PM, Igor Roshchin <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> You may want to think what photos you post: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> http://hyperallergic.com/68151/artist-arrested-for-instagramming-street-art/ >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Igor > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
