Enough with the faux morale outrage!

To post in this sub-forum you must have made 100 posts or have Trust status or have completed our ID Verification

Forums › Politics › Enough with the faux morale outrage!

networkn

Networkn
32362 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#227442 7-Jan-2018 13:44

I don't often agree with HDP, but in this article, I couldn't agree more with the general sentiment. In the past couple of years, it' seems that some will get wound up over the smallest things. It's almost like they are looking for an excuse. Maybe a need to be heard?

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11969362

The lipstick on a pig thing was an excellent example. JA herself said she wasn't offended. If she wasn't offended, did we need a pitchfork-wielding crowd marching the streets?

1 | 2 | 3 | 4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#1931724 7-Jan-2018 13:52

Are you saying that only one side has freedom of speech?

Rikkitic

Awrrr
18667 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1931743 7-Jan-2018 14:32

I have to say I agree with this. There is far too much preciousness and offense taken these days. (Some) people need to chill out and develop thicker skins.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

Rikkitic

Awrrr
18667 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1931745 7-Jan-2018 14:36

On re-reading, it may be unclear what I am agreeing with. I am agreeing with the OP, but I would add that freedom of speech also means freedom to be offensive - within certain bounds. The most easily offended should not be the arbiter for everyone else. As with most things, there is a common sense middle ground.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

networkn

Networkn
32362 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1931798 7-Jan-2018 17:59

MikeB4: Are you saying that only one side has freedom of speech?

Well, it depends. Do you think it's reasonable for someone to get outraged because of their inability to comprehend a simple phrase?

If one gets upset because one thinks GM called JA a pig for example, rather than the lipstick, then surely the person who gets upset as a result, is in fact WRONG.

Lias

5590 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1931890 7-Jan-2018 22:26

I think noone has the right not to be offended, that free speech is more important than almost anything else in society, and should have very few limits placed on it. I think the entire concept of defining, let alone outlawing "hate speech" is stupid, I think our libel/slander laws are overly broad and need paring back (Joe Bloggs shouldn't have to understand the fine points of differentiating between "In my opinion Jane Doe is a slut" vs "Jane Doe is a slut" when simply intending to insult someone) , and the HDCA needs to be removed from law, screw the geniuses that decided that telling someone to go kill themselves online is a jailable offence but saying the same words to them in person isn't. I don't believe the OFLC should exist, nor do I believe the government should censor anything other than child porn.

I'm a geek, a gamer, a dad, a Quic user, and an IT Professional. I have a full rack home lab, size 15 feet, an epic beard and Asperger's. I'm a bit of a Cypherpunk, who believes information wants to be free and the Net interprets censorship as damage and routes around it. If you use my Quic signup you can also use the code R570394EKGIZ8 for free setup.

TLD

902 posts

Ultimate Geek

#1931900 8-Jan-2018 00:12

Sort of like this lady who goes ape-poo when a man says hello to her.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OdPblCjiQNo

Trevor Dennis
Rapaura (near Blenheim)

6FIEND

774 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#1931949 8-Jan-2018 09:17

networkn:

I don't often agree with HDP, but in this article...

I'm going to employ a technique that I've learned from many people here whose views differ from my own...

HDPA was herself full of faux moral outrage when she broke numerous laws to trick a firearms dealer into selling her a rifle that she was not licensed for. Hence, nothing she has to say about this topic holds any weight whatsoever... No matter how correct she may be. ;-)

PS. Happy New Year everyone :-)

Quic Broadband

Move to New Zealand's best fibre broadband service (affiliate link). Free setup code: R587125ERQ6VE. Note that to use Quic Broadband you must be comfortable with configuring your own router.

networkn

Networkn
32362 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1931952 8-Jan-2018 09:21

Yeah, hence one of the reasons I don't like her! It was a stupid stunt and she was lucky to avoid prosecution.

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#1932053 8-Jan-2018 11:02

WRT HDPA's actions, try looking at it another way:

HDPA may have broken laws, but the end result of that was that Section 43A of the Arms Act 1983 was changed to close the loophole she exposed.

If she'd broken laws to expose a loophole which could be used by paedophiles to carry out their activities, I expect many of the same people condemning her for what she did would instead have been praising her for breaking the law.

Police say they're satisfied the firearm was not purchased for any sinister purpose and that's why the investigation's only resulted in the issuing of warnings.

Yes - there should have been a better way to draw the authorities attention to the loophole.

Given the reasonable outcome, I'm surprised by the "faux moral outrage" against HDPA's actions - which could have actually saved lives.

networkn

Networkn
32362 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1932057 8-Jan-2018 11:07

Fred99:

WRT HDPA's actions, try looking at it another way:

HDPA may have broken laws, but the end result of that was that Section 43A of the Arms Act 1983 was changed to close the loophole she exposed.

If she'd broken laws to expose a loophole which could be used by paedophiles to carry out their activities, I expect many of the same people condemning her for what she did would instead have been praising her for breaking the law.

Police say they're satisfied the firearm was not purchased for any sinister purpose and that's why the investigation's only resulted in the issuing of warnings.

Yes - there should have been a better way to draw the authorities attention to the loophole.

Given the reasonable outcome, I'm surprised by the "faux moral outrage" against HDPA's actions - which could have actually saved lives.

Really?! She could have just raised it with an MP and police commissioner and the current police minister and saved all the trouble, but she sensationalised it for profit and fame, just like Turei did during the election. They should both have been punished more severely.

Rikkitic

Awrrr
18667 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1932061 8-Jan-2018 11:15

Good to see you back to your old self. How do you feel about bringing back hanging?

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#1932063 8-Jan-2018 11:17

networkn:

Fred99:

WRT HDPA's actions, try looking at it another way:

HDPA may have broken laws, but the end result of that was that Section 43A of the Arms Act 1983 was changed to close the loophole she exposed.

If she'd broken laws to expose a loophole which could be used by paedophiles to carry out their activities, I expect many of the same people condemning her for what she did would instead have been praising her for breaking the law.

Police say they're satisfied the firearm was not purchased for any sinister purpose and that's why the investigation's only resulted in the issuing of warnings.

Yes - there should have been a better way to draw the authorities attention to the loophole.

Given the reasonable outcome, I'm surprised by the "faux moral outrage" against HDPA's actions - which could have actually saved lives.

Really?! She could have just raised it with an MP and police commissioner and the current police minister and saved all the trouble, but she sensationalised it for profit and fame, just like Turei did during the election. They should both have been punished more severely.

I'd rather police resources were used to fight real crime where real harm is being done.

Not to prosecute victimless crime to placate all the snowflakes crying moral outrage and baying for vengeance.

networkn

Networkn
32362 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1932065 8-Jan-2018 11:19

Rikkitic:

Good to see you back to your old self. How do you feel about bringing back hanging?

Ditto.

Hanging isn't required, but a fine and or some home detention would have been suitable.

networkn

Networkn
32362 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1932067 8-Jan-2018 11:20

Fred99:

I'd rather police resources were used to fight real crime where real harm is being done.

Not to prosecute victimless crime to placate all the snowflakes crying moral outrage and baying for vengeance.

Good Grief, give me a break!

How much time was spent on HDPA over her stunt that could have been used to solve "real crimes"?

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#1932107 8-Jan-2018 11:28

networkn:

Fred99:

I'd rather police resources were used to fight real crime where real harm is being done.

Not to prosecute victimless crime to placate all the snowflakes crying moral outrage and baying for vengeance.

Good Grief, give me a break!

How much time was spent on HDPA over her stunt that could have been used to solve "real crimes"?

Give you a break?

You're still crying moral outrage about something that happened years ago - and had a satisfactory conclusion (closing a loophole which could allow criminals to acquire guns with which to commit "real crimes").

In a thread you started on "faux moral outrage" - that's quite hilarious.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4