"Get back to your own countries!" Says illiterate woman on tram O_o

Dec 14, 2009
15,528
0
0
SmashLovesTitanQuest said:
Daystar Clarion said:
SmashLovesTitanQuest said:
Daystar Clarion said:
SmashLovesTitanQuest said:
imnotparanoid said:
zehydra said:
pulse2 said:
Rednog said:
Question, how do you know from the video that she is illiterate?
Chavs usually are :D If she was educated in the way I was at least, I'm pretty sure her argument would have far more structure and make more logical sense, using proper reference, possible historical proof. The only thing that made any sense was go back to your fucking countries, you fucking nicafriga, whatever or whoever that is :D
I disagree entirely. A College-level education is a far fly from just being literate.

That being said, I've never met a Chav, but I understand it to be a stereotype.

You're angry that she's stereotyping, and then you fire back with a stereotype?
Trust me, I have met a lot of chavs, they all talk just like that 'nice' 'lady' and are all thick as planks.
Trust me, I have met a lot of black people, and they are all violent idiots with low IQs and no job.

Trust me, I have met a lot of bronies, and they are all fat neckbeard virgins.

Get it?
Well, in this case, it would be more like...

All the black people I hang out with are black.

All the Jewish people I hang out with are Jewish.

A chav isn't a stereotype, it's a defining characteristic.
Well, to put it shortly, no. Its not.

A chav ( /ˈtʃæv/ chav, also charver in Yorkshire and North East England[1]) is a term that is used in the United Kingdom to describe a stereotype of teenagers and young adults from an underclass background.
The more you know, eh?
Yeah, except the defintion isn't just that anymore.

I know my own damn language, thank you very much.
It isn't? Fascinating. Please, sit down and tell me the tale of how you came to be the person that decides what means what in the English language. And while you are at it, you can extend that tale to include the story of how you came to know more about the meaning of a word than several, up to date dictionaries.

But before you do that, please explain how you can claim to know "your own damn language" that well even though you spell the simplest words wrong. FYI, its "definition", not defintion.

Its funny, because I am not even British (nor American) but I seem to have a tighter grip on the English language than you do.

imnotparanoid said:
SmashLovesTitanQuest said:
I dont get it more examples please :3
Your every post on this forum makes me more determined to find a way to filter them out.
Condescension, thy name is SmashLovesTitanQuest.

Yes, the dictionary definition is true, but the word itself has outgrown that single use.

The same way that 'gay' doesn't just mean homosexual anymore.

Also, a typo isn't the same as not knowing how to spell a word.
 

Helmholtz Watson

New member
Nov 7, 2011
2,503
0
0
Superbeast said:
Volf99 said:
Cursing people out and using racism is not in itself fighting words. Granted its subject to context, but this took place on a train. Also, here is what I mean when I say fighting words:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fighting_words#United_States
Uh...I have to ask if you look at your own links. You've been arguing that racial and derogatory expressions (even directly to someone's face) are protected under "Freedom of Speech", yet your link says this (emphasis mine):



"The fighting words doctrine, in United States constitutional law, is a limitation to freedom of speech as protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. In its 9-0 decision, Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire (1942), the U.S. Supreme Court established the doctrine and held that "insulting or 'fighting words,' those that by their very utterance inflict injury or tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace" are among the "well-defined and narrowly limited classes of speech [that] the prevention and punishment of...have never been thought to raise any constitutional problem.""

The very decision that defines "fighting words" also clearly states that insulting language, used with the intent to breach the peace (a well defined legal term, which includes hurling abuse at people on a tram) is grounds for prosecution and runs into no constitutional problems with regards to the First Amendment.

Note that the decision also includes "lewd and obscene" language; and that this case came about because "Chaplinsky...had purportedly told a New Hampshire town marshal who was attempting to prevent him from preaching "You are a God-damned racketeer" and "a damned fascist" and was arrested. The court upheld the arrest and wrote in its decision...". What this woman was yelling was an awful lot worse than that.

Furthermore, the grounds for the judicial reasoning are that "It has been well observed that such utterances are no essential part of any exposition of ideas, and are of such slight social value as a step to truth that any benefit that may be derived from them is clearly outweighed by the social interest in order and morality."

So...whilst what the woman was saying was not "fighting words" she could (though I do not know about would) be prosecuted in the United States, never mind the UK which has direct laws against this type of behaviour - though you are still free to be racist, even publicly, as long as you are not directing abuse at specific people or attempting to incite racial hatred.

Freedom of Speech is not as carte-blanche as many people think, and I'm sorry to say that your staunch defence of this woman's rights (from an American perspective) are, in fact, undercut by American law.
except that this woman's right to be a racist a**hole would be protected just like the kkk and neo-nazi's are protected to spew their bullsh*t. One particular case was when the neo-nazi's won a case in 1977 in which they were aloud to march down Skokie (a place with a high population of Jewish holocaust survivors).

Here is the case:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Socialist_Party_of_America_v._Village_of_Skokie
 

SpaceBat

New member
Jul 9, 2011
743
0
0
pulse2 said:
while she might have had an interesting opinion in regards to immigration it all just came out as pointless jabber.
It came out as pointless jabber, because it was pointless jabber. Her opinion is nothing more than ridiculously racist and flawed horseshit and is in no way interesting or noteworthy.
 
Dec 14, 2009
15,528
0
0
SmashLovesTitanQuest said:
Daystar Clarion said:
SmashLovesTitanQuest said:
Daystar Clarion said:
SmashLovesTitanQuest said:
Daystar Clarion said:
SmashLovesTitanQuest said:
imnotparanoid said:
zehydra said:
pulse2 said:
Rednog said:
Question, how do you know from the video that she is illiterate?
Chavs usually are :D If she was educated in the way I was at least, I'm pretty sure her argument would have far more structure and make more logical sense, using proper reference, possible historical proof. The only thing that made any sense was go back to your fucking countries, you fucking nicafriga, whatever or whoever that is :D
I disagree entirely. A College-level education is a far fly from just being literate.

That being said, I've never met a Chav, but I understand it to be a stereotype.

You're angry that she's stereotyping, and then you fire back with a stereotype?
Trust me, I have met a lot of chavs, they all talk just like that 'nice' 'lady' and are all thick as planks.
Trust me, I have met a lot of black people, and they are all violent idiots with low IQs and no job.

Trust me, I have met a lot of bronies, and they are all fat neckbeard virgins.

Get it?
Well, in this case, it would be more like...

All the black people I hang out with are black.

All the Jewish people I hang out with are Jewish.

A chav isn't a stereotype, it's a defining characteristic.
Well, to put it shortly, no. Its not.

A chav ( /ˈtʃæv/ chav, also charver in Yorkshire and North East England[1]) is a term that is used in the United Kingdom to describe a stereotype of teenagers and young adults from an underclass background.
The more you know, eh?
Yeah, except the defintion isn't just that anymore.

I know my own damn language, thank you very much.
It isn't? Fascinating. Please, sit down and tell me the tale of how you came to be the person that decides what means what in the English language. And while you are at it, you can extend that tale to include the story of how you came to know more about the meaning of a word than several, up to date dictionaries.

But before you do that, please explain how you can claim to know "your own damn language" that well even though you spell the simplest words wrong. FYI, its "definition", not defintion.

Its funny, because I am not even British (nor American) but I seem to have a tighter grip on the English language than you do.

imnotparanoid said:
SmashLovesTitanQuest said:
I dont get it more examples please :3
Your every post on this forum makes me more determined to find a way to filter them out.
Condescension, thy name is SmashLovesTitanQuest.

Yes, the dictionary definition is true, but the word itself has outgrown that single use.

The same way that 'gay' doesn't just mean homosexual anymore.

Also, a typo isn't the same as not knowing how to spell a word.
If we arent going by a dictionary, what are we going by? Before we continue this discussion, please answer that question. If we are going by the meanings you have thought up in your head, I guess you are right, its just that these meanings arent much to the outside world.

When you discuss the meaning of a word, the ultimate deciding factor is its definition in a dictionary. At least, thats what I thought. Maybe the entire world has moved on to some new thing that completely flew past me.

Interestingly enough, if you look up "gay" in the dictionary, it will indeed tell you that it is not just a word to describe a homosexual or happy person.

Anyhow, I did not know that I was a song by the British electronic metal band Pitchshifter. The more you know indeed.
Anyone who lives outside of Britian will only really know a chav by it's dictionary definition, and that's fine, I wouldn't expect people to know our slang if they've never heard it first hand, the same with anywhere.

For me at least, a chav is an ignorant, bigotted, anti-social and unintelligent person who can't string a sentence together without it sounding like they've just suffered a concussion. They get points if they're wearing a particular style of clothing, but it isn't essential.

Not all morons are chavs, but all chavs are morons.
 

SeeIn2D

New member
May 24, 2011
745
0
0
It's videos like this that basically make me look at all the people who say that the US is this, the US is that. Shit like this is everywhere. People just pick on the US because it's easy lol. Alright more on topic, this woman has no interesting argument as the OP suggests, she is just a racist pig and a mega *****, and I'm glad she was arrested. The people on the tram don't have to listen to her anymore, and (hopefully) the child doesn't have to be around that kind of shit anymore.
 
Dec 14, 2009
15,528
0
0
SmashLovesTitanQuest said:
Daystar Clarion said:
SmashLovesTitanQuest said:
Daystar Clarion said:
SmashLovesTitanQuest said:
Daystar Clarion said:
SmashLovesTitanQuest said:
Daystar Clarion said:
SmashLovesTitanQuest said:
imnotparanoid said:
zehydra said:
pulse2 said:
Rednog said:
Question, how do you know from the video that she is illiterate?
Chavs usually are :D If she was educated in the way I was at least, I'm pretty sure her argument would have far more structure and make more logical sense, using proper reference, possible historical proof. The only thing that made any sense was go back to your fucking countries, you fucking nicafriga, whatever or whoever that is :D
I disagree entirely. A College-level education is a far fly from just being literate.

That being said, I've never met a Chav, but I understand it to be a stereotype.

You're angry that she's stereotyping, and then you fire back with a stereotype?
Trust me, I have met a lot of chavs, they all talk just like that 'nice' 'lady' and are all thick as planks.
Trust me, I have met a lot of black people, and they are all violent idiots with low IQs and no job.

Trust me, I have met a lot of bronies, and they are all fat neckbeard virgins.

Get it?
Well, in this case, it would be more like...

All the black people I hang out with are black.

All the Jewish people I hang out with are Jewish.

A chav isn't a stereotype, it's a defining characteristic.
Well, to put it shortly, no. Its not.

A chav ( /ˈtʃæv/ chav, also charver in Yorkshire and North East England[1]) is a term that is used in the United Kingdom to describe a stereotype of teenagers and young adults from an underclass background.
The more you know, eh?
Yeah, except the defintion isn't just that anymore.

I know my own damn language, thank you very much.
It isn't? Fascinating. Please, sit down and tell me the tale of how you came to be the person that decides what means what in the English language. And while you are at it, you can extend that tale to include the story of how you came to know more about the meaning of a word than several, up to date dictionaries.

But before you do that, please explain how you can claim to know "your own damn language" that well even though you spell the simplest words wrong. FYI, its "definition", not defintion.

Its funny, because I am not even British (nor American) but I seem to have a tighter grip on the English language than you do.

imnotparanoid said:
SmashLovesTitanQuest said:
I dont get it more examples please :3
Your every post on this forum makes me more determined to find a way to filter them out.
Condescension, thy name is SmashLovesTitanQuest.

Yes, the dictionary definition is true, but the word itself has outgrown that single use.

The same way that 'gay' doesn't just mean homosexual anymore.

Also, a typo isn't the same as not knowing how to spell a word.
If we arent going by a dictionary, what are we going by? Before we continue this discussion, please answer that question. If we are going by the meanings you have thought up in your head, I guess you are right, its just that these meanings arent much to the outside world.

When you discuss the meaning of a word, the ultimate deciding factor is its definition in a dictionary. At least, thats what I thought. Maybe the entire world has moved on to some new thing that completely flew past me.

Interestingly enough, if you look up "gay" in the dictionary, it will indeed tell you that it is not just a word to describe a homosexual or happy person.

Anyhow, I did not know that I was a song by the British electronic metal band Pitchshifter. The more you know indeed.
Anyone who lives outside of Britian will only really know a chav by it's dictionary definition, and that's fine, I wouldn't expect people to know our slang if they've never heard it first hand, the same with anywhere.

For me at least, a chav is an ignorant, bigotted, anti-social and unintelligent person who can't string a sentence together without it sounding like they've just suffered a concussion. They get points if they're wearing a particular style of clothing, but it isn't essential.

Not all morons are chavs, but all chavs are morons.
I lived in Britain for 8 years. I am familiar with the slang.
Bloody double post

Disregard.
 
Dec 14, 2009
15,528
0
0
SmashLovesTitanQuest said:
Daystar Clarion said:
SmashLovesTitanQuest said:
Daystar Clarion said:
SmashLovesTitanQuest said:
Daystar Clarion said:
SmashLovesTitanQuest said:
Daystar Clarion said:
SmashLovesTitanQuest said:
imnotparanoid said:
zehydra said:
pulse2 said:
Rednog said:
Question, how do you know from the video that she is illiterate?
Chavs usually are :D If she was educated in the way I was at least, I'm pretty sure her argument would have far more structure and make more logical sense, using proper reference, possible historical proof. The only thing that made any sense was go back to your fucking countries, you fucking nicafriga, whatever or whoever that is :D
I disagree entirely. A College-level education is a far fly from just being literate.

That being said, I've never met a Chav, but I understand it to be a stereotype.

You're angry that she's stereotyping, and then you fire back with a stereotype?
Trust me, I have met a lot of chavs, they all talk just like that 'nice' 'lady' and are all thick as planks.
Trust me, I have met a lot of black people, and they are all violent idiots with low IQs and no job.

Trust me, I have met a lot of bronies, and they are all fat neckbeard virgins.

Get it?
Well, in this case, it would be more like...

All the black people I hang out with are black.

All the Jewish people I hang out with are Jewish.

A chav isn't a stereotype, it's a defining characteristic.
Well, to put it shortly, no. Its not.

A chav ( /ˈtʃæv/ chav, also charver in Yorkshire and North East England[1]) is a term that is used in the United Kingdom to describe a stereotype of teenagers and young adults from an underclass background.
The more you know, eh?
Yeah, except the defintion isn't just that anymore.

I know my own damn language, thank you very much.
It isn't? Fascinating. Please, sit down and tell me the tale of how you came to be the person that decides what means what in the English language. And while you are at it, you can extend that tale to include the story of how you came to know more about the meaning of a word than several, up to date dictionaries.

But before you do that, please explain how you can claim to know "your own damn language" that well even though you spell the simplest words wrong. FYI, its "definition", not defintion.

Its funny, because I am not even British (nor American) but I seem to have a tighter grip on the English language than you do.

imnotparanoid said:
SmashLovesTitanQuest said:
I dont get it more examples please :3
Your every post on this forum makes me more determined to find a way to filter them out.
Condescension, thy name is SmashLovesTitanQuest.

Yes, the dictionary definition is true, but the word itself has outgrown that single use.

The same way that 'gay' doesn't just mean homosexual anymore.

Also, a typo isn't the same as not knowing how to spell a word.
If we arent going by a dictionary, what are we going by? Before we continue this discussion, please answer that question. If we are going by the meanings you have thought up in your head, I guess you are right, its just that these meanings arent much to the outside world.

When you discuss the meaning of a word, the ultimate deciding factor is its definition in a dictionary. At least, thats what I thought. Maybe the entire world has moved on to some new thing that completely flew past me.

Interestingly enough, if you look up "gay" in the dictionary, it will indeed tell you that it is not just a word to describe a homosexual or happy person.

Anyhow, I did not know that I was a song by the British electronic metal band Pitchshifter. The more you know indeed.
Anyone who lives outside of Britian will only really know a chav by it's dictionary definition, and that's fine, I wouldn't expect people to know our slang if they've never heard it first hand, the same with anywhere.

For me at least, a chav is an ignorant, bigotted, anti-social and unintelligent person who can't string a sentence together without it sounding like they've just suffered a concussion. They get points if they're wearing a particular style of clothing, but it isn't essential.

Not all morons are chavs, but all chavs are morons.
I lived in Britain for 8 years. I am familiar with the slang.
Really?

Which area and what year?
 

Something Amyss

Aswyng and Amyss
Dec 3, 2008
24,759
0
0
SeeIn2D said:
It's videos like this that basically make me look at all the people who say that the US is this, the US is that. Shit like this is everywhere.
A handful of videos sure proves equity.
 
Dec 14, 2009
15,528
0
0
SmashLovesTitanQuest said:
Daystar Clarion said:
SmashLovesTitanQuest said:
Daystar Clarion said:
SmashLovesTitanQuest said:
Daystar Clarion said:
SmashLovesTitanQuest said:
Daystar Clarion said:
SmashLovesTitanQuest said:
Daystar Clarion said:
SmashLovesTitanQuest said:
imnotparanoid said:
zehydra said:
pulse2 said:
Rednog said:
Question, how do you know from the video that she is illiterate?
Chavs usually are :D If she was educated in the way I was at least, I'm pretty sure her argument would have far more structure and make more logical sense, using proper reference, possible historical proof. The only thing that made any sense was go back to your fucking countries, you fucking nicafriga, whatever or whoever that is :D
I disagree entirely. A College-level education is a far fly from just being literate.

That being said, I've never met a Chav, but I understand it to be a stereotype.

You're angry that she's stereotyping, and then you fire back with a stereotype?
Trust me, I have met a lot of chavs, they all talk just like that 'nice' 'lady' and are all thick as planks.
Trust me, I have met a lot of black people, and they are all violent idiots with low IQs and no job.

Trust me, I have met a lot of bronies, and they are all fat neckbeard virgins.

Get it?
Well, in this case, it would be more like...

All the black people I hang out with are black.

All the Jewish people I hang out with are Jewish.

A chav isn't a stereotype, it's a defining characteristic.
Well, to put it shortly, no. Its not.

A chav ( /ˈtʃæv/ chav, also charver in Yorkshire and North East England[1]) is a term that is used in the United Kingdom to describe a stereotype of teenagers and young adults from an underclass background.
The more you know, eh?
Yeah, except the defintion isn't just that anymore.

I know my own damn language, thank you very much.
It isn't? Fascinating. Please, sit down and tell me the tale of how you came to be the person that decides what means what in the English language. And while you are at it, you can extend that tale to include the story of how you came to know more about the meaning of a word than several, up to date dictionaries.

But before you do that, please explain how you can claim to know "your own damn language" that well even though you spell the simplest words wrong. FYI, its "definition", not defintion.

Its funny, because I am not even British (nor American) but I seem to have a tighter grip on the English language than you do.

imnotparanoid said:
SmashLovesTitanQuest said:
I dont get it more examples please :3
Your every post on this forum makes me more determined to find a way to filter them out.
Condescension, thy name is SmashLovesTitanQuest.

Yes, the dictionary definition is true, but the word itself has outgrown that single use.

The same way that 'gay' doesn't just mean homosexual anymore.

Also, a typo isn't the same as not knowing how to spell a word.
If we arent going by a dictionary, what are we going by? Before we continue this discussion, please answer that question. If we are going by the meanings you have thought up in your head, I guess you are right, its just that these meanings arent much to the outside world.

When you discuss the meaning of a word, the ultimate deciding factor is its definition in a dictionary. At least, thats what I thought. Maybe the entire world has moved on to some new thing that completely flew past me.

Interestingly enough, if you look up "gay" in the dictionary, it will indeed tell you that it is not just a word to describe a homosexual or happy person.

Anyhow, I did not know that I was a song by the British electronic metal band Pitchshifter. The more you know indeed.
Anyone who lives outside of Britian will only really know a chav by it's dictionary definition, and that's fine, I wouldn't expect people to know our slang if they've never heard it first hand, the same with anywhere.

For me at least, a chav is an ignorant, bigotted, anti-social and unintelligent person who can't string a sentence together without it sounding like they've just suffered a concussion. They get points if they're wearing a particular style of clothing, but it isn't essential.

Not all morons are chavs, but all chavs are morons.
I lived in Britain for 8 years. I am familiar with the slang.
Really?

Which area and what year?
Lived in Wales near Aberystwyth (I still have to google the name to make sure im spelling it correctly, even after all these years), from about 1999 till 2003, or something like that.

Then moved back to Germany for a few years, and then came back to England again, to Hereford, which is a town in the midlands near Birmingham. You might have heard of it, there are three points of interest: the cathedral, the cattle market and the cider. The cathedral is nice, as is the cider, but its a rather dull, average English town. Lived there from about 2004 to 2007 or 2008, im not too sure, we moved around quite a bit so the exact dates get a bit muddled up.

But yeah, Hereford a shitload of chavs, emos, hipsters, you name it, and I spent a good bit of time with all of them at one point or another, so thats where I became familiar with all of that.
Never been to Wales, but I live in Nottingham, which close enough to Hereford.

I think we can agree that the bloody chavs are bloody annoying.
 

pulse2

New member
May 10, 2008
2,932
0
0
Monoochrom said:
pulse2 said:
Monoochrom said:
pulse2 said:
I do feel sorry for her, and while she might have had an interesting opinion in regards to immigration it all just came out as pointless jabber.
2 things.

1. Where did you get the idea that she might have a interesting opinion? Surely not out of that incoherent rambling in the video.

2. How are you any better if you are stereotyping aswell.

You fail.
There's a little more to my stereotype then you might believe and based on her behavior and rant my stereotype isn't far from the truth. Its very difficult to say that all blacks eat chicken for example, as I know quite a few who are vegetarian, but I called her a chav, why? Because she swears in front of children and has little regard for who might be listening, she has little or no idea of what she is talking about considering nicafriga is neither a country or race.

The term "chav" doesn't have to refer to ones clothes, hobbies, tastes etc, those are baseless stereotypes, but one's behavior at that moment can be assessed. The 'typical' chav hurls insults, shouts and behaves inappropriately in public places and there's more, but I'm sure you can look up the word if you really cared enough.

Its no different from calling her a hooligan, antisocial, a public disturbance because the way in which she behaved at THAT time demonstrated all of these.

You say I fail, but unless you can prove to me I'm wrong, you don't have much of a leg to stand on.
Chav? Who said anything about Chav? I'm refering to claiming her to be illiterate in the Threadtitel. As you know this commonly refers to someone a lack of education in general, however, and more importantly, it suggests that the person cannot read or write.

So, in other words, because she was rude on the Tram, while I personally don't see if there was any action that caused this reaction from her, you just decided that makes her too stupid to read or write.

Also, no, I don't have to disprove you, you made a blind statement without actually knowing the person, not me, so I would suggest you go hold up a piece of paper and ask her to read it while filming her. Sure, she might be ignorant or racist, that however doesn't necessarily make her stupid. Saying something like Nigafrica (thats what I understood) also means practically nothing in that regard, she is obviously flustered.

Therefore, I hold my ground, you are also being ignorant and have for that reason failed.
I think you are simply looking at the word illiterate from a very strong literate point of view, like you said yourself, illiterate means the inability to read or write, but it also denotes lack of education, lack of ability to use and / or process information and construct it into something meaningful.

A person who has read, researched and listened to constructive judgement would have been able to sustain a far better argument then she did. I'm not talking about her writing ability in particular but quite often your writing is impacted by what you read and how well you can read, this all comes out in what you say and how you say it. I can tell someone is well educated by their ability to construct decent understandable sentences, hold an argument that may not be to everyone's tastes but at least has a point or is what we call an "opinion". That doesn't mean that all those who can speak well make the greatest writers, but writing is very much dependent on basic literary skills. I should know, I write, I have writer friends, I enter writing competitions and meet other writers, they may not all be GREAT at what they do, but they ALL read and it always comes out in the way they speak, not their accent or their personal slang, those are different things entirely and don't define a person's intellect, but their "knowledge", because as you know, knowledge is power.

Her "opinion" consists of mostly swearing (which she does VERY well throughout that video), melodrama, and talking nonsense, yes immigration is a problem, but its pretty obvious she has no idea what she is talking about which only makes her look stupid, had she read more, she would have discovered quite an array of information to back up her radical claim. Further reading would have revealed more information about immigration that includes even herself and her ancestors.

If you make a stupid claim without "knowing" what you are talking about people WILL believe you were too foolish to do more research aka "READING". Its not that she "can't" read, its that she "didn't" read, and considering that illiteracy has been the biggest issue here in Britain over the last few months, with radical reforms within the educational sector said to be on the way, it's no surprise that the first word people will relate her to is illiteracy, not because all illiterate people "can't" read, some are more than capable of doing so, its that they "don't want to" read, you only have to listen to some of the reasons rioters had for burning down shops, their radical comments which came off as rants revealed that they were illiterate, not by me, but by the government. Learning is free, computers are everywhere, books are everywhere, we are hardly living in a deprived country, even the poorest people here have access to free information across the internet, even if they have no computer at home. Furthermore, had she actually been poor her rant would have had even lesser value.

Flustered? No, simply stupid. She's only flustered because she started an argument which she didn't need to start in the first place and then didn't even have the basic mental capacity or relevant proof to back up her abuse, instead of arguing her case, she just told people to "fuck off", fuck off isn't constructive criticism or relevant information, its just abuse, abuse that wasn't needed because no one had abused her yet, they just kindly asked her to stop using foul language in front of children. Maybe she was drunk, maybe she was simply fed up with blackies and brownies, whatever the reason, it didn't make her seem more intelligent, nor did it give off the vibe that she had done any research whatsoever.

So no, I haven't "failed", whatever that means, even if you don't agree with my use of the word, because you've just proven that you have the intellect to be able to argue with me and have even done your research enough to be able to tell me your interpretation of the word "illiterate", which all in all is a farscape from what she did.
 

Superbeast

Bound up the dead triumphantly!
Jan 7, 2009
669
0
0
Volf99 said:
except that this woman's right to be a racist a**hole would be protected just like the kkk and neo-nazi's are protected to spew their bullsh*t. One particular case was when the neo-nazi's won a case in 1977 in which they were aloud to march down Skokie (a place with a high population of Jewish holocaust survivors).

Here is the case:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Socialist_Party_of_America_v._Village_of_Skokie
I keep looking through various documents and cannot draw the same conclusions that Wikipedia does - I must be missing something in the legalese. Regardless, here is my take/argument from case scripts.

The judgement from National Socialist Party of America v. Village of Skokie, 1977 is that:

"It finally determined the merits of petitioners' claim that the outstanding injunction will deprive them of rights protected by the First Amendment during the period of appellate review which, in the normal course, may take a year or more to complete. If a State seeks to impose a restraint of this kind, it must provide strict procedural safeguards...including immediate appellate review...Absent such review, the State must instead allow a stay. The order of the Illinois Supreme Court constituted a denial of that right."
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=432&invol=43

The Skokie script is regarding the fact that the Illinois Appellate Court and Supreme Court refused a stay, which it was legally obliged to do, and thus its decisions were overturned.

Now read the judgement from Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire, 1942 again:

"There are certain well-defined and narrowly limited classes of speech, the prevention and punishment of which have never been thought to raise any constitutional problem. These include the lewd and obscene, the profane, the libelous, and the insulting or "fighting words" those that by their very utterance inflict injury or tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace. It has been well observed that such utterances are no essential part of any exposition of ideas, and are of such slight social value as a step to truth that any benefit that may be derived from them is clearly outweighed by the social interest in order and morality."
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=case&court=us&vol=315&page=568

Her "right" to be a racist arsehole, when directed at individuals and with the intent breach the peace, is not protected even bearing in mind the Skokie decision.

By the way, the definition of a breach of the peace is: "disturbing others by loud and unreasonable noise...or using offensive words or insults likely to incite violence"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disturbing_the_peace

The main point is that whilst she is legally entitled by the First Amendment to hold her views (arguably in light of National Socialist Party of America v. Village of Skokie, 1977), by expressing them as she did she is also legally liable to suffer consequences from those actions on charges of "breach of the peace" (particularly in light of Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire, 1942). The two judgements do not clash as much as you think they do.

I may be reading it all horrifically wrong, but from the notes I am looking at (sourced above) I cannot see anything in the "Skokie Affair" that runs into much conflict with the Chaplinsky case.
 

pulse2

New member
May 10, 2008
2,932
0
0
The Valet said:
Thats not cause for celebration, thats cause for panic.

I am both for and against immigration. Foreign people have every right to come here to work, play and mingle with the culture. But they should also abide by our laws, and integrate into our culture, language, ect to a reasonable extent. What people are seeing instead, however, is one rule for them and another for us, when we should be living in (relative) societal harmony.

Now Vladamir and his three children and wife can come to Poland all they want, sure, as long as they work, pay their taxes, and try to meld with the area around them. When Vladamir and his family refuse to learn English-or speak it very poorly- and/or do not work for a living, then I think they should be kicked back to their own country, and hang the excuses. Because when that happens, you aren't migrating to another country; you are basically using it as a hotel.

And the worst part is immigration is such a lightly debated issue; everyone is afraid of offending evwybodys delikat widdle feelwings that we can't even debate it openly, come flat out and say "immigrants who contribute nothing and do not try to become part of the nation should be sent back.*" At the same time, radical Islamic clerics are free to spew bile and pour poison into the ears and minds of young Muslims, whilst recieving benefits and happily flipping the rest of Britain the bird.

Immigration is a very big issue, but until people learn to grow up, and grow a pair, and stop worrying about insulting somebody accidently, it will continue to be the elephant in the room, ignored until it is big enough to crush everyone flat beneath it.

*This is not my opinion; it's just an example.
I don't think that's so much the issue though, if anyone feels strongly about immigration, I do, while there are plenty of benefits to healthy immigration, it really pisses me off when people use tactics to get into this country, such as marrying a British person for example, a sham marriage to get a visa (not those genuinely in love). And then once here having the nerve to complain about the way we do things.

I'm black and very bloody patriotic towards my flag. But even I think this woman is just an idiot ¬_¬ She has no idea what she is talking about and the way she speaks you could swear she was a representative of this country, yet, I have yet to find anyone who wants to associate themselves with her.

She can barely speak proper English herself and certainly doesn't act in a manner I'd like to be associated with, she's an embarrassment, there are foreign students who have no desire to live here who speak better English then she does :/ Civilized is the way I do things, I express my opinion quite strongly, I have no reserves, but I don't need to shout and swear on a tram to do it.

That's just not the way to get heard, its a fast track to becoming the most hated person in Britain.
 

DarthFennec

New member
May 27, 2010
1,157
0
0
Yeah, unfortunately a small portion of the world is still like this ...
Best we can do is ignore them. They'll shut up or die soon.

Arresting her seems a bit excessive though, to me ...
 

Total LOLige

New member
Jul 17, 2009
2,123
0
0
To be honest I've seen worse in a bus station, I didn't have a camera to film it though. It's not right, what she said. People shouldn't make a big deal about it she's going to jail, racism happens.