Total Posts:34|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Austrailia dishes out Swearing Fine

vivalayeo
Posts: 142
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/17/2010 8:31:01 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
Just found this article, apparantly you can now be fined 100 dollar's for swearing in public. Is this a good initiative or a breach of civil liberties? Some people seem to see it as a force for good, but my response to that is, where do you draw the line? It seems that government's are trying to force us to conform to their ideal's instead of just letting us be civilised, educated adult's that most of us are. Nanny state's are the best way to describe them. I can liken this state sponsered 'swear jar' to the Uk government considering a massive price increase on alcohol to eliminate a 'drink culture'. Hell the worst one I ever saw was a UK christmas commercial telling you to make sure you cook your turkey, because if you eat it and it's not cooked, you may develope food poisoning. Wow, I really didn't grasp, I wonder if Fire is hot? Let me go stick my head in a furnace
Mirza
Posts: 16,992
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/17/2010 8:38:57 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
This seems interesting. I am in support of this.

In Germany, I think they have some similar laws. I do not think that they have banned swearing in public, but 'giving the finger' in traffic (while driving) comes with a fine of lots of Euro.
badger
Posts: 11,793
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/17/2010 8:51:24 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
i'd to pay 500 euro to the poor box for calling the cops a corrupt shower of cunts before. well, that wasn't all it was for, but 'twas fair funny when they read it out in court.
signature
Mirza
Posts: 16,992
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/17/2010 8:54:08 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/17/2010 8:46:36 AM, innomen wrote:
I doubt it would pass constitutional muster here. In a free society you have to put up with sh...stuff.
Hah.

I wonder how far they go with 'public'. Public institutions? Hospitals? Outdoors?

Sad thing for women who give birth. They can swear a lot.
innomen
Posts: 10,052
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/17/2010 8:59:33 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/17/2010 8:54:08 AM, Mirza wrote:
At 6/17/2010 8:46:36 AM, innomen wrote:
I doubt it would pass constitutional muster here. In a free society you have to put up with sh...stuff.
Hah.

I wonder how far they go with 'public'. Public institutions? Hospitals? Outdoors?

Sad thing for women who give birth. They can swear a lot.

And if all goes according to plan, that is something i will never need to know.
feverish
Posts: 2,716
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/17/2010 9:10:20 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/17/2010 8:51:24 AM, badger wrote:
i'd to pay 500 euro to the poor box for calling the cops a corrupt shower of cunts before. well, that wasn't all it was for, but 'twas fair funny when they read it out in court.

lol I called a copper a w@nker once and didn't get charged.
Rob1Billion
Posts: 1,338
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/17/2010 9:39:02 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
The concept of vulgar words is illogical. What is vulgar to one person is not to another. There is no such thing as a collective idea of vulgar; what one considers vulgar is usually something they find personally reprehensible.

How would they enforce this law? They would first have to make an official list of "swears," would they not? How would they relay these swears to the people without breaking the law of not swearing? I find this law to be illogical, unenforcable, and beyond that unethical.
Master P is the end result of capitalism.
belle
Posts: 4,113
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/17/2010 9:51:26 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
http://www.news.com.au...

its ridiculous. apparently all you have to do is offend the sensibilities of a cop.
evidently i only come to ddo to avoid doing homework...
brian_eggleston
Posts: 3,347
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/17/2010 10:35:15 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/17/2010 8:38:57 AM, Mirza wrote:
This seems interesting. I am in support of this.

In Germany, I think they have some similar laws. I do not think that they have banned swearing in public, but 'giving the finger' in traffic (while driving) comes with a fine of lots of Euro.

There are a lot of funny laws in Germany.

For example, you are not allowed to cross the street with a pram (baby stroller).

Also, you are not allowed to walk down the street in fancy dress. A Scotsman wearing his kilt and sporran etc. was actually arrested for this in some small town in Bavaria and they only let him go when the British Embassy assured the local police that he was just wearing his national dress.

It is also illegal to do a Nazi salute. You have to be careful about this when waving to someone or hailing a cab as people can easily mistake your gesture.
Visit the burglars' bulletin board: http://www.break-in-news.com...
badger
Posts: 11,793
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/17/2010 10:43:48 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/17/2010 9:10:20 AM, feverish wrote:
At 6/17/2010 8:51:24 AM, badger wrote:
i'd to pay 500 euro to the poor box for calling the cops a corrupt shower of cunts before. well, that wasn't all it was for, but 'twas fair funny when they read it out in court.

lol I called a copper a w@nker once and didn't get charged.

lucky you. mine were female guards. the worst kind.
signature
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/17/2010 11:15:41 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
Whoever came up with this needs to get maimed.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
ournamestoolong
Posts: 1,059
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/17/2010 11:57:11 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/17/2010 11:19:51 AM, Mirza wrote:
At 6/17/2010 11:15:41 AM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
Whoever came up with this needs to get maimed.
Why maimed?

Yes, why would you maim them? It would be much more ironic if you fvcked up the motherfvcker.
I'll get by with a little help from my friends.

Ournamestoolong

Secretary of Commerce

Destroy talking ads!
ournamestoolong
Posts: 1,059
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/17/2010 12:03:07 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/17/2010 12:01:51 PM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
Lol, we have a blasphemy law over. here. Top that.

-cue North Korea-
I'll get by with a little help from my friends.

Ournamestoolong

Secretary of Commerce

Destroy talking ads!
Xer
Posts: 7,776
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/17/2010 12:51:48 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
Nobody can top this one.

http://www.mass.gov...

PART IV. CRIMES, PUNISHMENTS AND PROCEEDINGSIN CRIMINAL CASES

TITLE I. CRIMES AND PUNISHMENTS

CHAPTER 272. CRIMES AGAINST CHASTITY, MORALITY, DECENCY AND GOOD ORDER

Chapter 272: Section 36. Blasphemy

Section 36. Whoever wilfully blasphemes the holy name of God by denying, cursing or contumeliously reproaching God, his creation, government or final judging of the world, or by cursing or contumeliously reproaching Jesus Christ or the Holy Ghost, or by cursing or contumeliously reproaching or exposing to contempt and ridicule, the holy word of God contained in the holy scriptures shall be punished by imprisonment in jail for not more than one year or by a fine of not more than three hundred dollars, and may also be bound to good behavior.
InsertNameHere
Posts: 15,699
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/17/2010 12:58:04 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/17/2010 10:35:15 AM, brian_eggleston wrote:
At 6/17/2010 8:38:57 AM, Mirza wrote:
This seems interesting. I am in support of this.

In Germany, I think they have some similar laws. I do not think that they have banned swearing in public, but 'giving the finger' in traffic (while driving) comes with a fine of lots of Euro.

There are a lot of funny laws in Germany.

For example, you are not allowed to cross the street with a pram (baby stroller).

Also, you are not allowed to walk down the street in fancy dress. A Scotsman wearing his kilt and sporran etc. was actually arrested for this in some small town in Bavaria and they only let him go when the British Embassy assured the local police that he was just wearing his national dress.

What about if somebody is wearing Lederhosen? Can they get arrested for that too.

It is also illegal to do a Nazi salute. You have to be careful about this when waving to someone or hailing a cab as people can easily mistake your gesture.

With good reasoning I suppose. Germans despise that part of their past for obvious reasons...
innomen
Posts: 10,052
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/17/2010 1:19:39 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/17/2010 12:51:48 PM, Nags wrote:
Nobody can top this one.

http://www.mass.gov...

PART IV. CRIMES, PUNISHMENTS AND PROCEEDINGSIN CRIMINAL CASES

TITLE I. CRIMES AND PUNISHMENTS

CHAPTER 272. CRIMES AGAINST CHASTITY, MORALITY, DECENCY AND GOOD ORDER

Chapter 272: Section 36. Blasphemy

Section 36. Whoever wilfully blasphemes the holy name of God by denying, cursing or contumeliously reproaching God, his creation, government or final judging of the world, or by cursing or contumeliously reproaching Jesus Christ or the Holy Ghost, or by cursing or contumeliously reproaching or exposing to contempt and ridicule, the holy word of God contained in the holy scriptures shall be punished by imprisonment in jail for not more than one year or by a fine of not more than three hundred dollars, and may also be bound to good behavior.

Still on the books? Unbelievable, of course i think they just took sodomy off the books last year in Mass, wasn't it after gay marriage? By the way what the heck is contumeliously - a new word for me.
Xer
Posts: 7,776
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/17/2010 1:33:15 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/17/2010 1:19:39 PM, innomen wrote:
Still on the books? Unbelievable, of course i think they just took sodomy off the books last year in Mass, wasn't it after gay marriage? By the way what the heck is contumeliously - a new word for me.

Yup. I did some research. It's based on this statute from 1697 -- http://upload.wikimedia.org.... Google says contumeliously is like showing contempt. I highly doubt anyone has been prosecuted for this law, at least in the last 60 or so years, but the fact that it is still on the books is amazing.
innomen
Posts: 10,052
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/17/2010 1:54:29 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/17/2010 1:33:15 PM, Nags wrote:
At 6/17/2010 1:19:39 PM, innomen wrote:
Still on the books? Unbelievable, of course i think they just took sodomy off the books last year in Mass, wasn't it after gay marriage? By the way what the heck is contumeliously - a new word for me.

Yup. I did some research. It's based on this statute from 1697 -- http://upload.wikimedia.org.... Google says contumeliously is like showing contempt. I highly doubt anyone has been prosecuted for this law, at least in the last 60 or so years, but the fact that it is still on the books is amazing.

Be proud that we are from a state that simultaneously has blasphemy laws and gay marriage. Pluralism.
Xer
Posts: 7,776
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/17/2010 2:01:29 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/17/2010 1:54:29 PM, innomen wrote:
Be proud that we are from a state that simultaneously has blasphemy laws and gay marriage. Pluralism.

Indeed. Taxachusetts has it all.
I-am-a-panda
Posts: 15,380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/17/2010 4:13:52 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
Nags, although that exists, it is probably not enforced and forgotten about in Massachusetts law. It's the same with all the crazy laws states have, they're rarely, if ever, applied.
Pizza. I have enormous respect for Pizza.
annhasle
Posts: 6,657
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/17/2010 7:56:33 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
Back to the original topic... LOL

I think this would be considered a HUGE infringement of rights if someone ever attempted to pass it through Congress in the U.S. but in Australia, I don't exactly know. Of course I will apply the opinions I have to this and my first reaction was, "Are you serious? Do they know what 'Freedom of Speech' is?!" but then I realized; it's pointless to apply American values to a foreign government. If the majority of the people in Australia feel that this is appropriate and are fine with this regulation to rights, then go for it. Just keep it away from my country.

The previously mentioned laws in Germany are RARELY enforced in Bavaria but are not enforced in Prussia. Bavarians are naturally more..... conservative. I say that as a Prussian though, so it may be slightly biased. Although I think many would agree that Prussians have become more liberal throughout the years while Bavaria stayed in it's "Conservative Lil' Town" atmosphere. And they're the ones that came up with the ridiculous so I place the blame on them. :D

Anywhoo, Germans have minds of their own and their intentions appear to lack logic at times but they never enforce laws "for the hell of it". They are way too calculating for that to ever happen.
I'm not back. This idiot just upset me which made me stop lurking.
vivalayeo
Posts: 142
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/17/2010 8:21:14 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
Once you start censoring word's that our spoken in public, then it's hard to draw the line. Does someone write up a charter saying what word's are acceptable and what aren't? Do they also add that certain word's are appropriate in certain context's? Like someone saying 'bitch' by actually referring to a pregnant dog.

It just sound's to me like another stepping stone to new-speech, double think and thought crime.
Veridas
Posts: 733
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/21/2010 8:23:08 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/17/2010 8:31:01 AM, vivalayeo wrote:
Just found this article, apparantly you can now be fined 100 dollar's for swearing in public. Is this a good initiative or a breach of civil liberties? Some people seem to see it as a force for good, but my response to that is, where do you draw the line? It seems that government's are trying to force us to conform to their ideal's instead of just letting us be civilised, educated adult's that most of us are. Nanny state's are the best way to describe them. I can liken this state sponsered 'swear jar' to the Uk government considering a massive price increase on alcohol to eliminate a 'drink culture'. Hell the worst one I ever saw was a UK christmas commercial telling you to make sure you cook your turkey, because if you eat it and it's not cooked, you may develope food poisoning. Wow, I really didn't grasp, I wonder if Fire is hot? Let me go stick my head in a furnace

Well f*ck that sh!t.

There was me thinking Australialand was politically less retarded than England, what exactly is wrong with a person's right to say "f*ck you?"

For the most part I believe that anyone can say anything they want provided it doesn't deliberately offend, but sometimes you really do want to tell someone to f*ck right off and on those occasions you should be able to, and seriously what will this accomplish? Does the Australian government honestly believe they'll put an end to profanity?

F*ck you Australia.

Wait...I wonder how this'll affect Yahtzee...
What fresh dickery is the internet up to today?