Do the British have free speech?

[Anonymous]

We hear regularly about British citizens being arrested for online and otherwise speech, and recently even talks about trying to go after Americans for speech they don't like..

Both of which seems outrageous to Americans.

So here is a British and American lawyer (from Ohio) going over their respective laws:

So the question is why do British subject think they are free?

Basically free speech in the UK is very narrow compared to America.

Yes

No

[Anonymous]

In Britain you are largely free to speak your mind but most adults would understand common sense applies. Our laws don't make such an explicit big thing of free speech as in the US, I hear. Perhaps we've not really tested them until now.

Unfortunately, with the advent of online portals and social media, IQs appear to have dropped and people think it's ok to say dreadful things online that they might never say face to face.

The police and politicians are struggling to keep up, dreaming up all sorts of new 'totally appropriate' mandates, and of course there's a familiar left wing bias to their behaviour which appears to permeate many cultures at the moment.

[Asker]

As you yourself can testify, people also say honest things online that they would never say in person.

Anonymity liberates a person to say what they feel true freed from the social and political consequences imposed by hoses who would use other forms of cotnrol to prevent it.

This is why is is truthfully said: "There IS NO honesty without Anonymity."

As words being mere sounds have never harmed anyone when spoken at appropriate volumes, you are in fact risking no harm for freedom and the truth.

Argue what you like about the supposed 2ndary effects of speech but you are in fact speaking of 2ndary actions that need not have happened and can themselfs be punished instead.

[MisterWack]

America has limits on free speech (as it should) from can’t yell “FIRE!” in a movie theater when you know damn well there isn’t and is a criminal offense, schools & businesses also social media sites can implement limitations on a person’s ‘free speech’ since they own the platform for which you speak which can range from inappropriate imagery, swearing, violent / inciteful / hateful language, bigotry, doxxing, cyberbullying, harassment, sexual harassment, etc.

[purplepoppy]

Yes we do but unlike America there are limits. When you hear stories of people being arrested for posting a meme thats only the tip of the iceberg of what they've been up to but the tabloids twist it to make it look a free speech issue.

Where we differ is I'm not allowed to run a hate campaign against that black guy living at number 12 or stand outside a mosque throwing abuse at people. We believe peoples right to go about their lives in safety and without being harassed outweighs your right to be a jerk.

[Asker]

@purplepoppy If theses people had a long wrap sheet justifying their arrest you wouldn't need to charge them with a speech crime at all. Thus proving the unwarrantable of such laws in such a situation.

If your going to argue for laws against mere speech you need to argue against the mere speech being legal on it's own.

To that end I will address only your speculative "hate" campaign against your neighbor.
Words are mere sounds and letters and thou we may agree to withhold them as a condition of being in a particular place for the sake of hearing or not hearing what we need in such place. Words are otherwise harmless.

Therefore nobody's safety can be effected by your mere words, only their actions or fraud.

So why is it not more appropriate to simply enforce such setting specific restrictions as a condition of said setting?

[noohair]

They are subjects. That means subject to what the government decides. Americans are citizens, big Difference.