USA Customs are policing DVD's now.....

[Drakulea]

What the hell... Is this for real?

 

[Helmholtz Watson]

I'm glad I'm in the UK, we're a bit behind you on the crazy curve.

not really, you laws on what people can and can't say(see: holocaust denial and women on train being racist).

See ACTA, SOPA, PIPA, NDDA, Patriot Act etc

We could argue all day so lets just leave it.

I didn't say that the US didn't have its own strict laws, I just stated that the UK wasn't far behind us. I know that Europeans like to bash the US for [insert "reason"], but realize that the US isn't the first or the only person to have potential laws like the ones you mentioned.

 

[Kopikatsu]

Anyway, <link=http://us-code.vlex.com/vid/immoral-articles-importation-prohibited-19194397>here's the text of the law in question, and <link=http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCODE-2010-title19/pdf/USCODE-2010-title19-chap4-subtitleII-partI-sec1305.pdf>here's a pdf of the same law from an actual government site, if anyone wants to dispute the plain text copy I found. The real question here isn't whether the law exists, but if it's actually being enforced the way the OP is suggesting. This seems to be a viral "pass it on" type thing on Facebook at the moment, so whether J. Michael Strazynski posted it or not, he probably didn't originate it. I'm really hoping this is the result of someone finding out about the law and jumping to some conclusions about how it would need to be enforced[footnote]Note: there are tons of laws on the books that just aren't enforced, but haven't been removed because that would take more time and money than it's worth. This is especially true when it's a state law that has been found unconstitutional in other states; why spend the time, money, and effort needed to repeal something when you can just decide not to enforce it?[/footnote]. I'll have to keep an eye out now to see if they really are using it the way the OP described, though.

It makes me sad that reading comprehension is barely existent in this day and age. (Not referring to your post, but referring to the people who ignored it and the people who have yet to post but will also ignore it.)

 

[Edible Avatar]

I look forward to the day when the US closes all its borders, builds a 100 ft wall right around their boundaries and promptly drowns in bullshit.

Are you a sensible American? I'd start running. Mexico is nice, I hear.

L-O-L

If you think America is bad, you REALLY need to visit northern Mexico. A drug war that has claimed 10,000 dead is not someplace i'd be fond of fleeing to.
I could, however, see Canada taking in quite a few "political refugees" if the government goes to hell.

Interesting times we live in indeed.

 

[Helmholtz Watson]

I'm glad I'm in the UK, we're a bit behind you on the crazy curve.

not really, you laws on what people can and can't say(see: holocaust denial and women on train being racist).

There are no laws against Holocaust denial here, you're thinking of Germany.

And in the UK, freedom to express yourself ends when you insight hatred or act threateningly. Which the crazy train lady was doing. I also think she was drunk whilst in charge of a minor too.

I'm not saying our country is perfect, or even sane. But we're a few carts behind America on the crazy train.

hmmm are you sure? I was watching Question Time on YouTube and they had Nick Griffin on and they asked him about why he changed his feelings about the Holocaust and if it had to do with a recent law that people thought made him denounce his previous statements. Just go to Youtube and type in Nick Griffin Question Time.

 

[Helmholtz Watson]

Sounds like the declaration you have to make when entering Australia (apparently) about whether or not you're carrying any porn - physical or digital - with you.

I'm glad I'm in the UK, we're a bit behind you on the crazy curve.

not really, you laws on what people can and can't say(see: holocaust denial and women on train being racist).

Holocaust denial isn't illegal here, and the rabid racist on the train was picked up for inciting hatred (i.e. she wasn't picked up just because she said doesn't like black people).

Inciting hatred? How does that justify arresting her? If the US can have the Neo-Nazi's marching down a heavily Jewish holocuast survivor town, then why can't the UK have one women mouth off(I don't support or agree with her) on a train? What about freedom of speech? Doesn't the UK have some equivalent?

 

[Redlin5_v1legacy]

Whoa whoa whoa. Policing any potential harmful ideas that might be negative towards the position of the state crossing the border?

WHAT THE FUCK AMERICA?

I don't like that one bit. Not one bit at all. Canadian customs, so help me god if you start doing something similar...

This is almost unbelievable. More proof requested.

 

[Giftfromme]

Somehow I doubt this is true, mainly because it's word for word <link=http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002200339>this article from the Democratic Underground, which claims to have come from someone's Facebook friend -- meaning there's no real source and no accountability. If it really is true, my google search would have turned up at the very least a Daily Kos page with a link to the actual US Customs policy. The lack of original sources is a bit telling here; something like this would be a matter of public record, if anyone bothered to look into it.

Edit: Wait, no, there is a link to a primary source in the comments, and it's real. However, it looks like it's not a recent change; there's an exemption for things made before 1993, which suggests this policy is almost 20 years old.

Maybe the person who made this thread also made that post in your link too!! Surely he didn't just copy and paste and pretend it's his own story so as to create contraversy?

 

[Helmholtz Watson]

And in the UK, freedom to express yourself ends when you insight hatred or act threateningly.

That doesn't seem to hold true for some privileged groups though. I remember an extremist imam who preaches hatred being admitted to the UK to preach, same week as they refused Geert Wilders, while he hasn't said anything that can be construed as hatespeech.

Looks like a random situation where race, religion and political orientation determine the extent of things you're allowed to say, much like we have here in the Netherlands.

That's a case of our governments ridiculous racial insecurity. They seem to think it's racist to tell call people on their shit if the person isn't white.

What about the Irish Catholics? I'm curious about them because I hear that the UK has some issues when it comes to racial/ethnic tensions and the governments response to these matters have left people jaded.
However, how does the UK respond if a Irish Catholic says something insensitive that would get an English protestant in trouble?
Or what if a person who was Pakistani Muslim started bad mouthing a person who was Irish Catholic, or if a Pakistani Muslim figure was on tv on January 30th and made comments supporting Bloody Sunday or if a Pakistani Muslim leader was on television on May 5th and tried to justify the treatment of Bobby Sands? How would the UK government respond if there was outcry from Irish Catholics/Ireland/Irish government or Irish leaders? Would they make the Pakistani Muslim person apologize if they were a politician? Would the UK government call for the Pakistani Muslim person to retract his words or apologize if the man was a religious leader? Would the UK government suggest that the Pakistani Muslim person to be fired from their job if they were a radio host?
I realize that I'm giving hypothetical situations, but I'm curious as to how the UK government might handle a situation if it was a Pakistani Muslim(or any other UK determined minority group of people) politician/religious leader/tv or radio host, caused controversy/outrage/backlash by saying something controversial about Irish Catholics/Ireland/Irish history(I'm focusing on the Irish because they are White people but they have also been oppressed by the English so they seem to be in somewhat unique position).

 

[Owyn_Merrilin]

Somehow I doubt this is true, mainly because it's word for word <link=http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002200339>this article from the Democratic Underground, which claims to have come from someone's Facebook friend -- meaning there's no real source and no accountability. If it really is true, my google search would have turned up at the very least a Daily Kos page with a link to the actual US Customs policy. The lack of original sources is a bit telling here; something like this would be a matter of public record, if anyone bothered to look into it.

Edit: Wait, no, there is a link to a primary source in the comments, and it's real. However, it looks like it's not a recent change; there's an exemption for things made before 1993, which suggests this policy is almost 20 years old.

Maybe the person who made this thread also made that post in your link too!! Surely he didn't just copy and paste and pretend it's his own story so as to create contraversy?

Or maybe both the OP and the person at the other end of that link got it through facebook, like they said they did? The OP said he saw it on J. Michael Strazynski's Facebook account. The op on the other website said it came from a female friend who was spreading it around to her friends. Reading comprehension: you're doing it wrong.

 

[Helmholtz Watson]

Inciting hatred? How does that justify arresting her? If the US can have the Neo-Nazi's marching down a heavily Jewish holocuast survivor town, then why can't the UK have one women mouth off(I don't support or agree with her) on a train? What about freedom of speech? Doesn't the UK have some equivalent?

Because a logical country wouldn't Neo Nazis march down a heavily populated Jewish holocaust survivor town.

How is it a bad thing that a country lets you have your own opinions and say what you want but draws the line at something that might seriously hurt somebody or incite hatred?

A persons right to express themselves ends at someone else's suffering.

hmmm are you sure? I was watching Question Time on YouTube and they had Nick Griffin on and they asked him about why he changed his feelings about the Holocaust and if it had to do with a recent law that people thought made him denounce his previous statements. Just go to Youtube and type in Nick Griffin Question Time.

No, the UK is definitely not listed as a country that outlawed holocaust denial.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laws_against_Holocaust_denial

So the US is illogical because we follow what Voltaire said about a persons right to speak?

Your country might not be a bad thing if they applied the rules to everyone, but from what I've seen, this [http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=london%20muslim%20protest&gs_sm=e&gs_upl=1442l9667l0l9836l34l31l6l2l3l1l393l3315l6.15.1.1l23l0&um=1&ie=UTF-8&tbm=isch&source=og&sa=N&tab=wi&ei=XIUcT5r4EYizgwf7y-n1Cw&biw=1366&bih=623&sei=XYUcT_CLOo_CgAej16yeCw] is not the case, so your government just ends up letting some people say what they want while suppressing other people from saying what they want.


As for "A persons right to express themselves ends at someone else's suffering", I have ask what do you mean when you type "suffering"? Assuming you don't mean physical, what kind of suffering are you suffering to?

 

[Exocet]

Well, people who aren't from the USA can't really do anything, but if I were from there, I would do something about the rapid growth of civil surveillance laws and bills, stripping you little by little of basic privacy.
First, phone calls, now the internet and trying to control the dvds you can watch?
Yeah, that shit wouldn't roll with me.

 

[SageRuffin]

Looks like I'll have to wait an extra couple of days for my Sonic Generations soundtrack then. :/

 

[Helmholtz Watson]

And in the UK, freedom to express yourself ends when you insight hatred or act threateningly.

That doesn't seem to hold true for some privileged groups though. I remember an extremist imam who preaches hatred being admitted to the UK to preach, same week as they refused Geert Wilders, while he hasn't said anything that can be construed as hatespeech.

Looks like a random situation where race, religion and political orientation determine the extent of things you're allowed to say, much like we have here in the Netherlands.

That's a case of our governments ridiculous racial insecurity. They seem to think it's racist to tell call people on their shit if the person isn't white.

What about the Irish Catholics? I'm curious about them because I hear that the UK has some issues when it comes to racial/ethnic tensions and the governments response to these matters have left people jaded.
However, how does the UK respond if a Irish Catholic says something insensitive that would get an English protestant in trouble?
Or what if a person who was Pakistani Muslim started bad mouthing a person who was Irish Catholic, or if a Pakistani Muslim figure was on tv on January 30th and made comments supporting Bloody Sunday or if a Pakistani Muslim leader was on television on May 5th and tried to justify the treatment of Bobby Sands? How would the UK government respond if there was outcry from Irish Catholics/Ireland/Irish government or Irish leaders? Would they make the Pakistani Muslim person apologize if they were a politician? Would the UK government call for the Pakistani Muslim person to retract his words or apologize if the man was a religious leader? Would the UK government suggest that the Pakistani Muslim person to be fired from their job if they were a radio host?
I realize that I'm giving hypothetical situations, but I'm curious as to how the UK government might handle a situation if it was a Pakistani Muslim(or any other UK determined minority group of people) politician/religious leader/tv or radio host, caused controversy/outrage/backlash by saying something controversial about Irish Catholics/Ireland/Irish history(I'm focusing on the Irish because they are White people but they have also been oppressed by the English so they seem to be in somewhat unique position).

Honestly I don't know. That's way too many hypothetical questions and I couldn't honestly answer any of them.

Our government is retarded when it comes to issues of race. I'm not sure how to answer any of those questions.

sorry about all the questions, just give this one question your best guess then... what if on January 30th, a Muslim Pakistani community/religious leader went on the News on tv and tried to justify Bloody Sunday? What would be the UK governments response if his comments caused outraged/backlash amongst the Irish Catholics in the UK/Ireland/Irish government?

 

[Aidinthel]

Anyway, <link=http://us-code.vlex.com/vid/immoral-articles-importation-prohibited-19194397>here's the text of the law in question, and <link=http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCODE-2010-title19/pdf/USCODE-2010-title19-chap4-subtitleII-partI-sec1305.pdf>here's a pdf of the same law from an actual government site, if anyone wants to dispute the plain text copy I found. The real question here isn't whether the law exists, but if it's actually being enforced the way the OP is suggesting. This seems to be a viral "pass it on" type thing on Facebook at the moment, so whether J. Michael Strazynski posted it or not, he probably didn't originate it. I'm really hoping this is the result of someone finding out about the law and jumping to some conclusions about how it would need to be enforced[footnote]Note: there are tons of laws on the books that just aren't enforced, but haven't been removed because that would take more time and money than it's worth. This is especially true when it's a state law that has been found unconstitutional in other states; why spend the time, money, and effort needed to repeal something when you can just decide not to enforce it?[/footnote]. I'll have to keep an eye out now to see if they really are using it the way the OP described, though.

Quoting this excellent bit of fact-checking in a futile attempt to show it to future posters who won't even bother to read the first page.

 

[Giftfromme]

Somehow I doubt this is true, mainly because it's word for word <link=http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002200339>this article from the Democratic Underground, which claims to have come from someone's Facebook friend -- meaning there's no real source and no accountability. If it really is true, my google search would have turned up at the very least a Daily Kos page with a link to the actual US Customs policy. The lack of original sources is a bit telling here; something like this would be a matter of public record, if anyone bothered to look into it.

Edit: Wait, no, there is a link to a primary source in the comments, and it's real. However, it looks like it's not a recent change; there's an exemption for things made before 1993, which suggests this policy is almost 20 years old.

Maybe the person who made this thread also made that post in your link too!! Surely he didn't just copy and paste and pretend it's his own story so as to create contraversy?

Or maybe both the OP and the person at the other end of that link got it through facebook, like they said they did? The OP said he saw it on J. Michael Strazynski's Facebook account. The op on the other website said it came from a female friend who was spreading it around to her friends. Reading comprehension: you're doing it wrong.

Maybe, but so much shit is made up for the sake of sensationalism, that I laugh at a lot of threads such as this. It's just hard to believe this story is true, but maybe it is. I will reserve 1% of my belief that this may indeed have happened

 

[Canadish]

Snip

Different poster, but I'm also in the UK.

They'd probably do very little. Then the inevitable storm of controversy comes, which brings the xenophobes out the wood work.
The media paints a bad picture of the Muslims, and the Muslims try defend themselves, and some get angry and say more stupid things.

Everyone starts fighting with each other and it takes over the news for 3 weeks. Meanwhile, a helicopter crashes and kills 6 soldiers, but that gets ignored because it might drum up the anti-war sentiment.

The whole affair gets people angry at Muslims and makes the wars in the middle east seem more palatable.
War with Iran becomes more likely, and the government's buddies in Israel are chuffed.
As a bonus, the old men up top get to have a laugh at the Irish Catholics, who've had bad blood with the UK government for years.

The wheel turns and the same shit will probably happen within 6 months.

 

[ElPatron]

So Americans can't order "Four Lions" DVDs?

Are they asking Americans to pirate even more?

Looks like I'll have to wait an extra couple of days for my Sonic Generations soundtrack then. :/

You'll never have it. We all know Sonic is immoral and incites hatred.

 

[Ironic Pirate]

I look forward to the day when the US closes all its borders, builds a 100 ft wall right around their boundaries and promptly drowns in bullshit.

Are you a sensible American? I'd start running. Mexico is nice, I hear.

No it isn't. Canada would be the more sensible choice, although sensible is relative.


Anyway, the law is so poorly worded I highly doubt it's ever been enforced. If it has, then yeah there's a problem.

 

[ShindoL Shill]

I'm glad I'm in the UK, we're a bit behind you on the crazy curve.

if you look closely, we're further ahead. we just had the repression in the dark ages, before all the internets and dvds and gadgets. then we had DORA, which at least worked at what it was trying to do while being dickishly restrictive.