Not being funny, but you’re the one being closed minded here.
The other commenter has cited evidence that’s backed up their claims and you’re consistently responding with rhetoric.
This is a constant theme when people argue about freedom of speech being worse in the UK.
They cherry pick a couple of headlines from hugely unreliable sources like Twitter (the land of vocal twits) and the Daily Mail (which most people here have nicknamed The Daily Fail because it’s so often wrong) and overlook what’s actually happening in their own countries too.
But if it makes you feel better that your own country isn’t also going to hell in a hand-basket because you’re too busy doomscrolling the UK news, then keep at it. ;)
> The other commenter has cited evidence that’s backed up their claims and you’re consistently responding with rhetoric.
Not the way I see it.
I'm not willing to cite every single instance of a trend so a commenter can pick apart each one to try and dismiss it, when the problem is the trend itself, and not specific instances.
That user also wants to try and pretend that the issue magically stopped after the local police were apparently counseled on the matter, and yet, hark!- another instance less than 4 months old![0]
> This is a constant theme when people argue about freedom of speech being worse in the UK.
I think the bigger issue is tribalism and feeling the need to defend country (and thus tribe) instead of acknowledging hey, maybe there really is a problem?
> They cherry pick a couple of headlines from hugely unreliable sources like Twitter (the land of vocal twits) and the Daily Mail (which most people here have nicknamed The Daily Fail because it’s so often wrong) and
I'm well aware of the reliability of the DM, but when they are just posting basically an interview with someone, it's sufficient as a source. Unless you want to dispute anything factual in the DM article that was linked?
> overlook what’s actually happening in their own countries too.
I think this is mostly a whataboutism.
> But if it makes you feel better that your own country isn’t also going to hell in a hand-basket because you’re too busy doomscrolling the UK news, then keep at it. ;)
I'm deeply concerned with what is happening in many countries, but that doesn't mean I can't be more concerned and critical of a country that is doing more wrong in some contexts than others.
> Not the way I see it.
I'm not willing to cite every single instance of a trend so a commenter can pick apart each one to try and dismiss it, when the problem is the trend itself, and not specific instances.
And here lies the problem. You have formed an opinion and are unable to accept counter evidence.
> I think the bigger issue is tribalism and feeling the need to defend country (and thus tribe) instead of acknowledging hey, maybe there really is a problem?
That’s an idiotic comment given I’ve listed plenty of issues with the UK already. My opening comment even stated how I’m loathed to defend the uk government. I’ve also talked about how I’ve had literal arguments with MP over stupid policies regarding information technology.
The literal one point I’m defending is that the police don’t arrest you for thought crimes / posting memes online. And the reason I’m defending the government on that one point is because it’s flat out wrong and those who claim otherwise are spouting ignorant horseshit.
> I think this is mostly a whataboutism.
Bullshit. You’re the one making comparisons and claiming the UK is the worst offender. Then when evidence is shared about how the UK isn’t you ignore it.
Are you sure it’s not yourself who’s suffering from tribalism?
> And here lies the problem. You have formed an opinion and are unable to accept counter evidence.
Pot, kettle. Upon discussing things further, the evidence I found completely supports my point.
> That’s an idiotic comment given I’ve listed plenty of issues with the UK already.
Wow, resorting to insults. Nice. I should probably point out that's against the HN guidelines.
The issues you listed are different types of issues. You're going out of your way to deny the issue we are discussing is an issue.
> The literal one point I’m defending is that the police don’t arrest you for thought crimes / posting memes online.
Not arrested, but they show up to intimidate which itself is the problem.
> And the reason I’m defending the government on that one point is because it’s flat out wrong and those who claim otherwise are spouting ignorant horseshit.
Seems your defending against a strawman and not the actual issue being discussed.
> Bullshit. You’re the one making comparisons and claiming the UK is the worst offender. Then when evidence is shared about how the UK isn’t you ignore it.
It's not bullshit, and subsequent discussion and investigation has only strengthened my point.
I don't ignore anything, it's just that the evidence presented doesn't support your position.
Thought crime policing is still going on as of 2024, and 25% of the roughly 13,000 "non hate crime incidents", many of which are thought crimes, were incorrectly reported. [0]
Jesus, they recorded an issue as a hate incident because someone didn't want to shake hands. Ignoring and excusing that is akin to burying your head in the sand IMO.
> Are you sure it’s not yourself who’s suffering from tribalism?
Reasonably, since I'm not resorting to insults and strawmen.
This is why it’s important to show sources so that (understandable) mistakes like this can be pointed out. If you keep posting sources that have been misinterpreted or that lack important context (which again is understandable - I don’t expect people outside the UK to obsessively follow UK news) then we can’t really take your word for it that you’ve Googled and found lots of better examples.
> That’s a 2024 article about an incident that happened in 2019.
That page isn't rendering at all for me in Firefox for some reason, but I can read the text and it appears the Bindel incident was in 2024, and the Pearson incident which is referenced was in 2019. So, no, the 2024 incident happened in 2024.
I'll also note that in the Telegraph article I linked, the prominent author also describes the experience as Orwellian, so the view is hardly as niche or exaggerated as you want it to be.
> then we can’t really take your word for it that you’ve Googled and found lots of better examples.
Maybe, but at this point it seems your looking to dismiss incidents without reading them properly yourself.
Have some more links to incidents that happened after 2019 though, feel free to put each one under a microscope and find reasons to dismiss them, while continuing to ignore a trend and not see the forest for the trees:
And in case you want to continue to insist that the issue was resolved due to that one case in 2019, I'll leave you with this excerpt from an article on this very issue[0]:
----
Is the new Code better?
It sets a higher threshold, stating that NCHIs should only be recorded against individuals if there is "a real risk of significant harm" or crime. But problems remain: the police inspectorate HMICFRS found that 25% of recent NCHIs and hate crimes were wrongly recorded. Police reported being confused by attempts to train them in the Code; many still struggle to distinguish between a crime and an NCHI. This confusion is clear in the most famous recent case. The Daily Telegraph journalist Allison Pearson said that Essex Police visited her in November, wishing to record an NCHI against her (because on X/ Twitter she had mistakenly described two protesters as "Jew haters"). Essex Police denied it was an NCHI case, saying Pearson had been investigated for a public order offence. Either way, the case was dropped after an outcry.
One of your links is the incident that I myself already linked. I will look at the others.
Edit: Ok, the other specific incident is about a Conservative MSP who was not actually contacted by Police as part of their investigation. The Police just logged someone's report of one of his tweets under a specifically non-criminal category. They're required to do this because someone reported the tweet and they have to keep a record of that. The freespeechunion article similarly seems to be about cases where the police have correctly recorded someone's complaint and then correctly done nothing about it (as happens all the time with nuisance complaints about noisy neighbors, etc. etc.)
> The Pearson incident happened more recently but had nothing to do with trans issues
It's still what can be described as thought policing. As I keep saying this is part of a trend in your country. How many incidents would it take for you to concede that? These types of examples you are working to dismiss are flat out not happening in other western countries.
> The Police just logged someone's report of one of his tweets under a specifically non-criminal category. They're required to do this because someone reported the tweet and they have to keep a record of that.
That's still very much a problem. Now we have thought cataloging for use against people later on. His tweet was logged as a 'hate incident' - that's not nothing.
> The freespeechunion article similarly seems to be about cases where the police have correctly recorded someone's complaint and then correctly done nothing about it
They are logging incidents as 'hate incidents', again, that's not nothing.
And the fact the the police are involved at all and showing up to talk to people who shared their thoughts is the problem here. The fact that no action was taking is basically completely irrelevant to the problem of people being intimidated by cops for sharing thoughts, and yes, cops showing up is enough to count as intimidation.
"In Warwickshire, a suspect was recorded by the force for refusing to shake a person’s hand,"
That should be completely unacceptable and you should agree that that alone is Orwellian or uncomfortably close to it.
And it's not like there are not still more incidents. Gender critical feminists moved to their own platforms but still report such issues - not every issue gets a newspaper story (and I see a lot of these posts which is why I've said there were at least 20 incidents), but given 13,200 incidents were logged in the year from June 2023 to June 2024 and 25% of those were wrongly recorded, that seems like a lot of unnecessary intimidation and intrusion.
Meanwhile in your country, the police kill people just for being black.
I know what I’d consider more worrying and it isn’t the police recording things (which literally just mean they’ve investigated a complaint) and deciding those frivolous complaints don’t deserve any action.
Yes, race issues in the US are a huge issue. That doesn't mean thought policing in the UK isn't also a huge issue.
The difference is I don't deny the issues you mention, nor do I try to deflect by referring to, say, the growing bladed weapons epidemic in the UK.
For someone that said they were done when asked to provide sources, you're participating in this discussion more than I would have expected. Is this what you consider 'being done', writing low-effort fallacious comments?
> (which literally just mean they’ve investigated a complaint)
It means they showed up to grill people over thoughts, and it's baffling how you don't see that as an issue.
We’ve demonstrated how that doesn’t actually happen though. You’re the one refusing to accept the evidence.
And my point about your police force is saying perhaps you should spend more energy addressing your own country’s problems before making incorrect judgments about others.
> We’ve demonstrated how that doesn’t actually happen though. You’re the one refusing to accept the evidence.
The other user stated nothing had happened since 2019, and there was an incident in 2024. The examples you've provided are not equivalent to the examples in the UK you are trying t o map them to.
You showed no equivalent to people being arrested for white paper protests, the last examples in the US were in the 70s.
Additionally, 2500s NCHI were incorrectly reported, and you haven't addressed that as well.
That someone has to talk to cops at all for not wanting to shake hands is as scary as it is ridiculous, and its frankly bizarre you want to downplay and dismiss it.
Exactly what evidence is it you think I am refusing to accept? If you can be clear (and I expect you won't be able to because you've only been vague so far and frankly I doubt your claims have substance, which is why out of frustration your resorted to vulgarity and insults, and why when I asked you for links you claimed it was too much effort but here you still are replying...), then I can tell you exactly what issues I have with each item and there can be some productive discussion on the merits of my arguments.
> And my point about your police force is saying perhaps you should spend more energy addressing your own country’s problems
Yes, that's exactly what a whataboutism is. It's literally a perfect example.
> before making incorrect judgments about others.
So far, the evidence supports my claim, and the evidence from the both of you has the other user falsely claiming there were no incidents after 2019 and you equating unrelated non-equivalent incidents in other countries to incidents in the UK. Not at all convincing, and frankly seems rather desperate. If your searches are failing to turn up sufficient evidence, you should maybe consider that your point doesn't have the backing you assume it does.
The other commenter has cited evidence that’s backed up their claims and you’re consistently responding with rhetoric.
This is a constant theme when people argue about freedom of speech being worse in the UK. They cherry pick a couple of headlines from hugely unreliable sources like Twitter (the land of vocal twits) and the Daily Mail (which most people here have nicknamed The Daily Fail because it’s so often wrong) and overlook what’s actually happening in their own countries too.
But if it makes you feel better that your own country isn’t also going to hell in a hand-basket because you’re too busy doomscrolling the UK news, then keep at it. ;)