7 karma · joined February 16, 2026
a case where you can argue speech can be violence would be a verbal threat to hurt or kill someone, but that has nothing to do with what we're talking about, i don't know why you're bringing up speech, are you trying to say that destroying these cameras is a form of expressing freedom of speech? (not accusing you of this btw, just genuinely curious what you meant by that)
also, i consider a security camera in a place i live to be security infrastructure, you should not be able to come into a place and do act like a vigilante imposing your view on what should and should not be recorded through force, if you have a problem with the way things work you should try to work within the law
again, this is what separates civilization from chaos
you wouldn't consider someone vandalizing your home or the infrastructure in your neighborhood to be violence? of course it is violence, an attack on the place i live (whether that's limited to just my home or to the larger community i live in) is an attack on me
is it not violence to, for example, burn down a business where people work in if you do it at a time where no one is around to get immediately hurt as a consequence? can i not call the financial damage caused both to the workers and the owners of that place violence?
that's not even remotely close to reality, you have zero understanding of what the free speech laws in america are if you believe this is covered by the first amendment
whether or not 30 arrests per day for social media posts is exclusive to the UK it is relevant to the OP link
>harassment and death threats
we both know that this is not what's being discussed here
at this point it's the #1 principle of the UK government, everything else comes second after putting people in jail for saying the wrong things
porn is ok, posts that hurt my fee fees and ideological bias bad :'( (both are ok in my opinion btw)
>>Police make 30 arrests a day for offensive online messages
>The police are making more than 30 arrests a day over offensive posts on social media and other platforms.
>Thousands of people are being detained and questioned for sending messages that cause “annoyance”, “inconvenience” or “anxiety” to others via the internet, telephone or mail.
>Custody data obtained by The Times shows that officers are making about 12,000 arrests a year under section 127 of the Communications Act 2003 and section 1 of the Malicious Communications Act 1988.
what sort of device did you type this comment from?
it's a clear cut free speech issue, you just don't want to admit it since certain data being available and spread to other people doesn't suit your political ideology