On Freedom of Speech, Rush and the Turkish viewpoint

[Don Coyote]

I'm ok with people owning weapons, but I don't really see any purpose to owning an Uzi.

They're fun.

Firing fully automatic weapons is a fucking blast. The bigger it is, more fucking awesome it is.

Also, food for thought: Twid, why own a guitar?

Apples and oranges. I don't have the soloing skills to kill a man where he stands with one yet. 

Not the point. You are not a full time musician. Your livelihood does not rely on an instrument. It is an extraneous frippery. You own it because you like making music. Or because it is fun. Yes?
Which is my point. You don't need to prove a reason why you should have a guitar, despite it not being guaranteed in our Constitution. Why then should we have to provide a reason to own a weapon, especially considering such a right IS guaranteed by the Constitution.

Well, it kinda is the point. Guns are lethal weapons. I'd like to see less shootings in the paper.

More guns would mean less shootings. Maybe. Besides most shootings are done with illegal weapons. Yes?

although i would love to support it, the first claim is a 'maybe' at best.  too many factors involved to put much value on it.

as to the second claim, how do you mean 'illegal weapon' and what are you basing this on?

My point is most gang related shootings are done with illegally acquired fully automatic weapons. It's that trite saying, "Out law guns and only outlaws have guns." And aren't most shootings gang related?
And like Dok said, freedom isn't safe, wear a hat.

[Doktor Howl]

I still want to know what happens if you call it "genocide" in public in Turkey.

Currently, nothing.... unless you say "Turks are a bunch of motherfucking sluts and committed genocide."

Article 301 of the Turkish legal code makes "denigrating Turkishness" illegal, and is the primary legal weapon used against people who claim what happend to the Armenians was a genocide. 

O DENIGRATE TURKISHNESS, REPUBLIC, AND INSTITUTIONS AND ORGANS OF THE STATE ARTICLE 301:

"1 - A person who publicly denigrates Turkishness, the Republic or the Grand National Assembly of Turkey, shall be punishable by imprisonment of between six months and three years.

2 - A person who publicly denigrates Government of the Republic of Turkey, the judicial institutions of the State, the military or security organizations shall be punishable by imprisonment of between six months and two years.

3 - In cases where denigration of Turkishness is committed by a Turkish citizen in another country the punishment shall be increased by one third.

Of course, nowadays, the preferred method is to send around far-right paramilitaries to murder someone, as in the case of Hrant Dink.

Wow.

[Don Coyote]

I still want to know what happens if you call it "genocide" in public in Turkey.

Currently, nothing.... unless you say "Turks are a bunch of motherfucking sluts and committed genocide."

Article 301 of the Turkish legal code makes "denigrating Turkishness" illegal, and is the primary legal weapon used against people who claim what happend to the Armenians was a genocide. 

O DENIGRATE TURKISHNESS, REPUBLIC, AND INSTITUTIONS AND ORGANS OF THE STATE ARTICLE 301:

"1 - A person who publicly denigrates Turkishness, the Republic or the Grand National Assembly of Turkey, shall be punishable by imprisonment of between six months and three years.

2 - A person who publicly denigrates Government of the Republic of Turkey, the judicial institutions of the State, the military or security organizations shall be punishable by imprisonment of between six months and two years.

3 - In cases where denigration of Turkishness is committed by a Turkish citizen in another country the punishment shall be increased by one third.

Of course, nowadays, the preferred method is to send around far-right paramilitaries to murder someone, as in the case of Hrant Dink.

Wow.

Whaaaaaaaaaaaat Turkey sounds full of crazy like the US. Only instead of drones it's a personal touch.

[Doktor Howl]

I still want to know what happens if you call it "genocide" in public in Turkey.

Currently, nothing.... unless you say "Turks are a bunch of motherfucking sluts and committed genocide."

Article 301 of the Turkish legal code makes "denigrating Turkishness" illegal, and is the primary legal weapon used against people who claim what happend to the Armenians was a genocide. 

O DENIGRATE TURKISHNESS, REPUBLIC, AND INSTITUTIONS AND ORGANS OF THE STATE ARTICLE 301:

"1 - A person who publicly denigrates Turkishness, the Republic or the Grand National Assembly of Turkey, shall be punishable by imprisonment of between six months and three years.

2 - A person who publicly denigrates Government of the Republic of Turkey, the judicial institutions of the State, the military or security organizations shall be punishable by imprisonment of between six months and two years.

3 - In cases where denigration of Turkishness is committed by a Turkish citizen in another country the punishment shall be increased by one third.

Of course, nowadays, the preferred method is to send around far-right paramilitaries to murder someone, as in the case of Hrant Dink.

Wow.

Whaaaaaaaaaaaat Turkey sounds full of crazy like the US. Only instead of drones it's a personal touch.

Leaving out the paramilitary bit, the fact is that a Turk does not have the right to speak the truth as he or she sees it, on at least one subject, unless his belief is in line with the Turkish government.

Therefore, there is no freedom of speech in Turkey.

[Cain]

Turkish history has included more than a few years of military rule, often backed up by neofascist elements.

Remember the assassination attempt on the last Pope, where he was shot pretty badly?  That was the fascist Grey Wolves, a paramilitary organization linked to the MHP political party.

Fascists were also organized by the military into paramilitary groups to aid in their war against Communists (a "stay-behind" army to "prevent internal subversion", which invariably meant assassinating prominent trade unionists, socialists etc) and later against the Kurdish rebels.

Opinion is divided as to whether the Turkish "deep state" still exerts an influence on a national level, but it certainly did as recently as 1996.  What generally unified Turkish fascist is nationalist mysticism and extreme antipathy towards Communists, Greeks, Kurds and Armenians in particular.

[Doktor Howl]

Come to think of it, Canada and the UK have a similar problem, with "hate speech" laws.

[Scribbly]

I still want to know what happens if you call it "genocide" in public in Turkey.

Currently, nothing.... unless you say "Turks are a bunch of motherfucking sluts and committed genocide."

Article 301 of the Turkish legal code makes "denigrating Turkishness" illegal, and is the primary legal weapon used against people who claim what happend to the Armenians was a genocide. 

O DENIGRATE TURKISHNESS, REPUBLIC, AND INSTITUTIONS AND ORGANS OF THE STATE ARTICLE 301:

"1 - A person who publicly denigrates Turkishness, the Republic or the Grand National Assembly of Turkey, shall be punishable by imprisonment of between six months and three years.

2 - A person who publicly denigrates Government of the Republic of Turkey, the judicial institutions of the State, the military or security organizations shall be punishable by imprisonment of between six months and two years.

3 - In cases where denigration of Turkishness is committed by a Turkish citizen in another country the punishment shall be increased by one third.

Of course, nowadays, the preferred method is to send around far-right paramilitaries to murder someone, as in the case of Hrant Dink.

Wow.

Whaaaaaaaaaaaat Turkey sounds full of crazy like the US. Only instead of drones it's a personal touch.

Leaving out the paramilitary bit, the fact is that a Turk does not have the right to speak the truth as he or she sees it, on at least one subject, unless his belief is in line with the Turkish government.

Therefore, there is no freedom of speech in Turkey.

Its any subject which is seen to bring Turkey into disrepute.

Turkey has conscription and does not accept conscientious objection. Turkey also has awful anti-terrorism laws (like many western nations) but has actually used them to curb the rights of the press.

Another amendment extends the use of bail or probation rather than detention for defendants facing trial for crimes with a five-year maximum prison sentence. This should cut down the widespread use of pretrial detention in Turkey, particularly for those charged with more minor terrorism offenses, Human Rights Watch said. The measure would not, however address the situation of hundreds of people facing sentences of five to ten years, such as journalists, charged with membership of an armed organization (article 314/2 of the Turkish Penal Code), a charge frequently leveled despite the absence of any evidence of their involvement in violence or in plotting violent activities.

I'm really glad Rat is having a good time out in Turkey. I'm sure lots of people are genuinely happy. I would not describe Turkish society as 'free' as we would understand the term to have any meaning, though. From what I've heard about the shifting priorities of those in government at the moment, 'democratic' might be a problematic term to apply to the country, too, soon enough.

[Doktor Howl]

Its any subject which is seen to bring Turkey into disrepute.

The subject in question isn't relevant.  Either you can speak your mind, or you can't.

Turkey has conscription and does not accept conscientious objection.

Conscription or lack thereof isn't a hallmark of freedom or the lack thereof.

Most countries have conscription, or at least - as in the US - a conscription plan in place, for which all eligible people must register.  In our case, this is written into our constitution as a power of government, and no provision is made for conscientious objection.  That is a matter of federal law, and carries with it a large burden of proof to be supplied by the objector to prove that he is in fact an objector.

But the government can eliminate provisions for conscientious objection with no constitutional issues.

[Elder Iptuous]

My point is most gang related shootings are done with illegally acquired fully automatic weapons. It's that trite saying, "Out law guns and only outlaws have guns." And aren't most shootings gang related?
And like Dok said, freedom isn't safe, wear a hat.

I certainly agree with the truism given.
i would believe that most gang related shootings are done with illegally acquired weapons. (stolen)  but, fully automatic?  i'm a bit skeptical of that.  and as to whether most shootings in the US are gang related, i have no idea.

i am an avid gun rights supporter, but i try to avoid arguments that are (or, sometimes, would even seem to be) unsteady, because the bottom line argument, as said by Dok, that the right should be preserved in order to pose threat to an overbearing state should be paramount IMO, and the others often serve as distraction from that.

[Doktor Howl]

I'm really glad Rat is having a good time out in Turkey. I'm sure lots of people are genuinely happy. I would not describe Turkish society as 'free' as we would understand the term to have any meaning, though. From what I've heard about the shifting priorities of those in government at the moment, 'democratic' might be a problematic term to apply to the country, too, soon enough.

Democracy and rights are not necessarily connected, as the ancient Athenians could tell you.

[Nephew Twiddleton]

Wasnt another snag in turkey joining the eu that they still have capital punishment on the books?

[Doktor Howl]

i am an avid gun rights supporter, but i try to avoid arguments that are (or, sometimes, would even seem to be) unsteady, because the bottom line argument, as said by Dok, that the right should be preserved in order to pose threat to an overbearing state should be paramount IMO, and the others often serve as distraction from that.

The real fact is, no argument is necessary.  James Madison did that shit for us.

[Scribbly]

Its any subject which is seen to bring Turkey into disrepute.

The subject in question isn't relevant.  Either you can speak your mind, or you can't.

Turkey has conscription and does not accept conscientious objection.

Conscription or lack thereof isn't a hallmark of freedom or the lack thereof.

Most countries have conscription, or at least - as in the US - a conscription plan in place, for which all eligible people must register.  In our case, this is written into our constitution as a power of government, and no provision is made for conscientious objection.  That is a matter of federal law, and carries with it a large burden of proof to be supplied by the objector to prove that he is in fact an objector.

But the government can eliminate provisions for conscientious objection with no constitutional issues.

I'm not sure how this works in the US, but in Europe, Turkey is one of only three nations which does not recognize the right of an individual to refuse to assist in taking the lives of other individuals on religious or ethical grounds.

Not to get too bogged down in this, but it certainly is considered another 'black mark' against their human rights record on this side of the pond.

Wasnt another snag in turkey joining the eu that they still have capital punishment on the books?

Turkey does not have capital punishment any more.

[Doktor Howl]

Wasnt another snag in turkey joining the eu that they still have capital punishment on the books?

How is that relevant to freedom?

[Cain]

In defence of the UK laws, I will point out that they have to be considered threatening statements, and that in particular exemptions are made for expressions of opinion and mockery.