How Far Should Freedom Of Expression Go?

[TheN3rdyOutcast]

It seems to be a common debate what is considered freedom of expression, and what is considered a crime. So, How far should freedom of expression go?

I do believe that their needs to be a stopping point somewhere, because if the extension of freedom of expression was infinite, I could just imagine the chaotic nature of humans taking over. And technically everything that could be considered a form of expression, vandalism, arson, public death threats, excessive vulgarity... could be justified under freedom of expression.
On the other hand, freedom of expression must exist to allow a vocal society...

[CosmicNoodle]

It's a complex one, and my sleep deprived brain can't quite handle this right now so I'll just say this:

Freedom of expression is great, but once it breaks the law, that should be the cut off point, every law exists for a reason, yes, some are fucking stupid, but law is law, and you can't break it and use freedom of expression as a get out of jail free card. There has to be a cut off, and in my mind, thats when the law is broken.

WARNING: My opinion is likely to change once I actually get some sleep and see counter arguments from others.

[James Dean]

As long as the expression is hurting anyone mentally or physically and it's done in a peaceful way, and the expression is unjust. For example people complaining of there not being any parks for the children to play with and striking at the town building or whatever I think is fine. But people blowing up and rioting stores is not ok as we seen in recent news.

[Miserabilia]

The dillema we have here is that we want to be free but our freedom is actualy damaged when we are injured hurt or otherwise harmed.
Therefore we can not injure hurt or harm other people; and the moment we can not do something we actualy loose freedom.

This demonstrates that in order to be free we need to sacrifice one section of our freedom.
We need to sacrifice the more negative side, which is freedom of violence murder theft rape etc.
In some cultures this freedom was/is actualy a respected one.

However, it's not in our society, so it's only fair to apply the same logic to freedom of speech and freedom of expression.

It should not be free and legal to use expression and free speech to take away other's freedom by harming them in some way.
There's a very thin line between what is harm and what is not; therefore some things are strictly illegal and other things can be solved by sueing for example.

[DeadEyes]

All the way.

[dakeep18]

The fullest extent

[Gigablue]

Your right to freedom of expression ends where someone else's rights begin. Speech should be maximally free, without infringing on other people's rights. For example, expressing unpopular opinions is fine, while things like libel or death threats are not. Vulgarity, while it may be distasteful to some, is not infringing on anyone else's rights, and thus shouldn't be banned. Note, this doesn't mean that anyone has to listen to you, or provide a venue for speech, simply that they can't prosecute you for it.

The same can be said for expression on general. You can do whatever you want, as long as it doesn't hurt someone else, infringe upon their freedom, damage their property, etc.

[Miserabilia]

Your right to freedom of expression ends where someone else's rights begin. Speech should be maximally free, without infringing on other people's rights. For example, expressing unpopular opinions is fine, while things like libel or death threats are not. Vulgarity, while it may be distasteful to some, is not infringing on anyone else's rights, and thus shouldn't be banned. Note, this doesn't mean that anyone has to listen to you, or provide a venue for speech, simply that they can't prosecute you for it.

The same can be said for expression on general. You can do whatever you want, as long as it doesn't hurt someone else, infringe upon their freedom, damage their property, etc.

my god! Thank you!
This is what I tried to explain but it took me like 4 paragraphs :lol:

[DeadEyes]

For example, expressing unpopular opinions is fine, while things like libel or death threats are not.

No offense, but I think this is out of topic, there's a world of difference between expressing yourself and aggressing someone. An aggression is obviously illegal while freedom of speach may not be, but yet repressed. The latter is much more insidious.

[normalperson]

It seems to be a common debate what is considered freedom of expression, and what is considered a crime. So, How far should freedom of expression go?
in my mind freedom of expression should be just that, an EXPRESSION.(what i mean is not through actions against other individuals as some "groups" do I.E. protesters *shivers*) i think that it should either be all the way or not at all for no matter how much or how little of it we have some of us will be left out. With all out i mean really letting all people express themselves whether their opinion is racist, sexist, fascist, communist, jingoist, pacifist, nationalist or capitalist!!!.(but with other people being able to discriminate by what is said by the individual).
With not at all i just mean do it in private and do not force your opinion on others I.E. protesters *shivers again*.

I do believe that their needs to be a stopping point somewhere, because if the extension of freedom of expression was infinite, I could just imagine the chaotic nature of humans taking over. And technically everything that could be considered a form of expression, vandalism, arson, public death threats, excessive vulgarity... could be justified under freedom of expression.
On the other hand, freedom of expression must exist to allow a vocal society...
As i mentioned before the freedom of expression should only be through words, letters, signs(not graffiti), etc. vandalism, arson, public death threats, excessive vulgarity as well as protesting violently should be banned under extreme penal laws. any who if you don't agree i would love to have an intelligent conversation so feel free to message me, i don't bite... hard! :D

[omgwuut]

as long as it doesn't hurt anyone in a bad way. sad thing is that too much freedom can be abused by some people.

[DeadEyes]

as long as it doesn't hurt anyone in a bad way.

Emotionally or physically? There's nothing illegal with hurting people emotionally.

An aggression is obviously illegal while freedom of speach may not be, but yet repressed.