Scotland’s police are on a mission to stamp out offensive speech by force.
It is Scotland now, but will it one day land on our shores?
Police Scotland and a FOIA request made at the request of the highly respected UK paper The Independent, revealed that police are looking into “offensive” comments online with the express purpose of finding possible criminality.
The police, at the behest of the politically correct crowd, are on a fishing expedition to shut down free speech they don’t like.
The Brits already have Draconian limits to their free speech. Proselytizing on the streets and almost any comment against a Muslim could get you thrown in jail. They don’t have a First Amendment.
We should get down on our knees and thank God that the Founding Fathers included the first ten amendments to the Constitution known as our Bill of Rights.
About 20,000 people in Britain were investigated over the past three years for making insulting comments online; 20 people a day were looked into by law enforcement for criminality, according to a Freedom of Information Act request by The Independent.
Police Scotland’s response to The Independent was, “Please be aware that we will continue to monitor comments on social media and any offensive comments will be investigated.”
Currently, the police in Scotland are investigating a former Apprentice star who stirs up controversy to gain attention on Twitter. Katie Hopkins recently made off-color comments online about a Scottish nurse who contracted Ebola.
She is being investigated for “racist Ebola” tweets with an eye towards arresting her. She chastised the “little sweaty jocks” for “sending us Ebola bombs in the form of sweaty Glaswegians”.
She has also been reported to the police for “hate crimes” against overweight people after making rude remarks about the overweight.
She has almost 300,000 Twitter followers who want to read her outlandish comments because they hate them or love them. She is paid to troll.
A petition from Scotland’s PC crowd demanded her comments be investigated for criminality as “vile, racist tweets.” The police have enthusiastically taken up the cause.
Detective Inspector Glyn Roberts of Police Scotland put it this way: “Inquiries are ongoing into the nature of these tweets and to establish any potential criminality.”
“Police Scotland will thoroughly investigate any reports of offensive or criminal behavior online and anyone found to be responsible will be robustly dealt with.”
The PC crowd has law enforcement on their side and their goal is to silence “offensive” opinions by force. Idiocy could put a person in jail.
Who will decide who is offensive? The PC crowd will decide.
The police have no business investigating annoying comments but they are.
It’s Shariah law for Westerners.
One of Hopkin’s offensive tweets was that David Cameron had “blood on his hands”. If we translate that to our country, how many have said Al Sharpton, De Blasio, George Bush, Barack Obama have blood on their hands? Should all these people go to jail for that?
Whatever happened to the effective practice of ignoring and shunning people who offend us?
The thought of criminalizing speech should terrify people and raise alarm bells for us here in the States. The same type of scrutiny is desired by many in this country.
Criminalizing speech is nearing fruition in Scotland. How long before it comes to our shores in our increasingly Orwellian world?
Katie Hopkins is pictured below and some of her “offensive” tweets are posted.
When asked about immigration, she said, “I’ve always said if you go into a school playground and shout Mohammad, you’ll probably get 100 children running towards you!”
In the picture below, she was speaking to Benefits Streets White Dee and said this: “Do you not feel like the patron saint of druggies and dropouts?”
Here’s another tweet about tattoos:
“Are tattoos just a badge for the stupid? For me, and for lots of people like me, when you see tatoos you think of someone who is just looking for attention, who hasn’t managed to find a way in their life through conventional means and who is just shouting ‘I want attention! I want to be looked at!”
On maternity leave:
“The difference between most mothers and me is that I didn’t sit around drinking coffee at baby group for 12 months after the birth of my baby. No, in three weeks I was back in my suit, back at my desk earning profit for my business and I don’t see why other women shouldn’t do the same.”
When asked about her affairs:
“I lied to get someone else’s husband because I wanted him. I give myself 8 out of 10 for ruthlessness for that one.”
After a Glasgow helicopter crash, she said, “Life expectancy in Scotland is 59.5. Goodness me. That lot will do anything to avoid working until retirement.”
She is boorish, crass, offensive, and insensitive to some and funny, challenging, and entertaining to many. Should that be a crime? Are controversial rants now illegal?
The Brits are looking to make it a crime and shut down her free speech by force.
Even if they don’t press charges, the fact that they investigate has a chilling effect on free speech.
Are we that far removed from such an eventuality given a president who tries to shut down an entire news channel when they offend him and given the fact that PC terrorists threaten and sue people who disagree?
It’s time to worry about where this is all going. The thought police are at our door.
Source: The Independent UK