UHND.com - Notre Dame Football, Basketball, & Recruiting

I think that is probably accurate.

(no message)

(no message)

(no message)

from the attached link..
-------------------
I can't speak for the exactness of the figure, but it certainly seems plausible. According to this article about arrests for online posts in London 857 arrests were made in 2015 in London alone as a result of online activity. However this can include emails as well as social media. The reason is:

The Communications Act 2003 [which] defines illegal communication as “using public electronic communications network in order to cause annoyance, inconvenience or needless anxiety”.
That's a very wide definition.

Offences include:

alleged sexual offences, including grooming, as well as complaints of stalking, racially aggravated conduct and fraud.

Note that there is no suggestion that any of the arrests are solely for posting things that disagree with the government. BY CONTRAST IN RUSSIA YOU CAN BE ARRESTED FOR SAYING ONLINE THAT CRIMEA DOES NOT BELONG TO RUSSIA. This is useful information because the claimant (Kisin) is clearly trying to compare UK and Russia.(emphasis mine)
-------------------

Anyone in the UK can...and they do...say online that 'Brexit' is the dumbest decision on modern British history...and not get arrested...iMO, the UK, and the EU, are ahead of us in how to handle obvious misuse of social media.


Link: https://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/54123/were-over-3000-persons-arrested-in-britain-for-social-media-posts-in-2018

That comes later.

arrest people for such "Offenses"...just for such things that you'd be familiar with...like "Harassment" ;-).

He didn't need to make the distinction you wanted him to make. It's irrelevant.

media...everyone can understand the rationale behind stopping aggression against innocent citizens, but stopping "Free Expression of CLEARLY POLITICAL opinions?...that's the real problem...at least for citizens of Russia...and you know it.

You are wrong to think that suppression of speech is only facist if it's suppression of government criticism.

But, like KK, he’s obfuscating.

It's not relevant that people in the UK don't get arrested for criticism of the government because both KK and I are pro free speech and we don't think arresting someone for words on the Internet is appropriate.

It's amazing how difficult this is for you.

You know it’s so he can imply “if you think Russia is bad then wait until you hear about the UK!”

Otherwise, Russia completely superfluous to the discussion, at least without the context of the party(ies) at which the speech is directed.

Rather than arguing semantics? Your point is irrelevant to the core theme. I don't know why this is what you've decided to focus on a meaningless comparison when the point is that people are being arrested for thinge they've said on the Internet.

Conor would be spending life in prison if they put those laws in place here.

If you are just trying to win some competition that I'm not aware of, rake the win. I'm not going to argue about something that is completely unrelated to the core idea in this discussion. I may be goofy, but I'm not silly.

I agree with his core theme (sic).

But he leaves out incredibly relevant information (that it’s based on law) and starts with a ridiculous implication (if you think Russia is bad..). This he comes across as hackish.

You win. It's a terrible argument. That guy sucks. Next time I'll only post information that is new to me if the person giving me that information states his point perfectly.

(no message)

oh..not a vaccine

out for no reason at all?...like a Michigan State Senator accused fellow Senator, Mallory McMurrow of being...another ND Alum.

btw, you still haven't defined what YOU THINK a "Vaccine" is...what is it?...help us all out here...it's important that we get set straight in our thinking by someone with your assumed knowledge...Warning: this will cost you your trolling meme.

And you openly support a policy that would allow teachers to have conversations about sex with children and keep those conversations secret from parents. Don't play stupid.

grooming and pedophelia.
Not a vaccine.
Now run along groomer

woodshed countless times over his sick affliction, and Ty would slither off and hide. Pathetic

what did she, or I do?...the quick answer is nothing...we're just impediments to your hate speech...comes with the territory.

Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iLWo8B1R0MY

well aware of your strange propensities. Dog collars on kids is not normal in most venues

your accusations...take your time...get 'em all...

(no message)

Link: https://forum.uhnd.com/forum/index.php?action=display&forumid=2&msgid=102743

because they do it in Japan. I didn’t know Joe was Japanese and that still doesn’t make it right.

Link: https://forum.uhnd.com/forum/index.php?action=display&forumid=2&msgid=102664

your past history. Let's see who you got on the pedo/ groomer team. Should be interesting. Waiting

btw, until you and others do that, I'll keep reminding you now and then. In the meantime, how about we discuss 'policy' details...take your pick.

none. You and your strange,creep attitude have been hung out to dry. Puppy handling is not acceptable by normal people

(no message)

(no message)

the picture of the Babe and 50 golf clubs. Find that yet?
And not a vaccine.

Before he released the iPhone, he wanted to develop a multimedia app. He planned on inserting a camera into his phone but didn't have the software.

Lo and behold, along comes Eastman Kodak who is bleeding red ink. They had already developed the s/w for taking photos and video that could easily satiate Jobs desires.

Kodak wanted $525 million for this technology, to help them get by, financially. Apple and Google put together a consortium to acquire Kodak's Digital Imaging patents.

This technology should have never left the IT Department. Instead, we have political and racial divides due to Joe Blow recording bad behaviors.

I never liked Apple to begin with. That platform was for the design and publishing industries. Mainstream business was fueled by IBM and eventually Microsoft.

PHEW...my rant is over now.
Thx.

I like to make meaningless mistakes in my posts so that LanceHarbour can feel useful by pointing them out.

politics, especially less on their political stand and views than people in those so-called autocracy countries like Russia and China. People in the west are more cautious in talking about politics in person-to-person situation, primarily fear offending or ruining relationship with neighbors, co-workers and friends. Social media provides a channel for them to express their otherwise hidden political views.

If you listen to talkshows in China you would be shocked to hear so many talks which are deemed political incorrect in the west and so many things that westerners don't talk about in public.

(no message)

Has this always been the case? It’s understandable on an internet message board with things like lmcdonald’s athlete posts that are stupid. It’s another thing for someone with a large media following and/or public profile to do it.

I know the answer, of course, is that the people who they are trying to enrage won’t check what they are saying. Still, it’s odd.

(no message)

(no message)

This is what Conor and Ty want. This is why Conor doesn't want an investigation into the relationship between Twitter and DHS. They want to be able to take legal action against people that say things they don't like.

We just have to keep DJT from being in charge of the no-no word list, am I right?

Also, the vast majority of the details of the case he states incorrectly and he fails to mention that it was overturned on appeal.

Outrage bait.

Let's start first with the fact that Russell was arrested and prosecuted. The fact that she won her appeal doesn't dismiss the ridiculous fact that she was arrested and prosecuted in the first place.

Your claim that he should work to overturn the law is exactly what he's doing. He's gaining support. As it relates to the US, it's an example that we can look to as we grapple with our social media laws.

(no message)

Of course, he doesn’t because that would actually explain things a bit. As would providing correct fscts

I don't see the point of your nitpicking.

Legal action is being taken against people for words that they post on social media. He doesn't like that. Neither do
I. Spending time and effort to dissect the 30 second clip beyond that point is simply tedious.

Oh no, Russia had a few hundred while the UK had thousands! No context given. Nothing about the differences in the reasons (autocracy for the former and a (bad) law for the latter).

He’s good at what he does.

In this instance, the UK seems fairly oppressive as well. That's the point of the comparison.

Of course you and I know that Russians have been restricted for so long that they are well conditioned to watch their speech. That's probably the true reason for the disparity. I don't know why you didn't point that out. Again, that's irrelevant to the discussion. People are being arrested for words. That's the point. You are arguing semantics. Why? I dont know but I'd be interested in the answer.

You think they are meaningless because you have no answer for them.

Notice that this entire time, you haven't commented at all on you opinion of people being arrested for saying words on the Internet. You've used this as a distraction so you can argue around the issue. It's bullshit.

I'm going to say this again. The point you are arguing is meaningless as it relates to the core theme. It was a tool to get people's attention. I actually don't have an issue with you not liking the fact that he used the comparison. I do take issue with the fact that you've decided that this is the important part of the conversation. I know you aren't stupid so it feels like you are just trying to manipulate the board with a distraction tactic.

Because he’s hurting his own argument.

(no message)

Link: Brits are alarmingly hateful.

Are you hung up on the number he reported, or are you skeptical that people are arrested and fined for things they posted on social media?

"The Police and CPS have formulated a definition of hate crimes and hate incidents, with hate speech forming a subset of these. Something is a hate incident if the victim or anyone else think it was motivated by hostility or prejudice based on: disability, race, religion, gender identity or sexual orientation. A hate incident becomes a hate crime if it crosses the boundary of criminality.[7]"

You are capable of looking at the bigger picture and not allowing yourself to get bogged down in semantics, right?


Link: https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2021/08/05/football/hate-crime-arrests-euro-2020-final-spt-intl/index.html

and told to pay costs of £500 and an £85 victim surcharge for posting rap lyrics on her insta page.

Legal action was taken on her for posting rap lyrics on the Internet. For posting rap lyrics for a rap that you can find on the Internet.


Link: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-merseyside-43816921.amp

Weird. KK sounded so sure.

Fuck me.

That's a hilarious gap.

Link: https://www.justice.gov/hatecrimes/hate-crime-statistics

(no message)

Here in Rochester we haven't really had a Winter. Next Wed. it will be 55 and 60 on Th.

It's been more like April.

(no message)

They offer great grooming, as I remember.

I love Ellicottville.

Used to ski Holiday Valley and Kissing Bridge, back in High School.