The definition of obscenity has weakened over time but it has never been considered free speech
"A top Kiwi rapper has been arrested after singing the 1980s American rap anthem F.... the Police while police were inspecting a New Zealand club.
Singer Tiki Taane, who has played at several Australian festivals and was set to tour the eastern states next month, was cuffed and charged with disorderly behaviour for rapping the song during a police club inspection early on Sunday.
The rapper posted on his website "Freedom of speech is a human right'', but most Kiwis commenting on the incident cleary disagreed.
Source
7 comments:
"Freedom of speech is a human right". I wonder if he would have felt the same way had the cops called him a low-life nigger?
"Freedom of speech is a human right"
It absolutely is. However, not all governments are great respecters of that right, and not all legal systems recognize that Freedom of Speech is the MOST BASIC of Rights.
It sounds like this guy is bound to be a martyr to someone's "right not to be offended."
Which human right takes precedence: Your right to "Freedom of Speech" or My right to "A Peaceful Existance"?
If you do a little research, the authors of the US Bill of Rights intended the "no law... abridging the freedom of speech" clause in the first amendment to protect POLITICAL SPEECH. In other words, I can't go to jail for speaking out against the government. No one could convince me that the amendment authors (other than Ben Franklin, who was a dirty old man :), meant for it to be a "right" to scream obscenities in public, in front of children, etc.
Where "SHOULD" the line be drawn? Thoughts?
Yes freedom of speech is about opinions not yelling meaningless obscenitites.
As long as it's speech, there is no line.
SPEECH IS NOT ACTION AND ONLY ACTIONS SHOULD BE PUNISHED!
Unless someone has had their life, liberty, or property damaged in some way, then there should be no crime.
Crimes only take place when there is a victim. There is only a victim if someone's life, liberty, or property were in some way damaged.
Outside of protecting those issues the government has no place to say anything to anyone ever.
Is it disorderly for a singer at a club - presumably licenced premises which is only frequented by adults - chooses to sing a popular song from his particular musical genre which happens to contain vulgar lyrics?
It is offensive for a rapper to use vulgar words when it is a common and well known part of a rapper's repetoire.
AFAICT the patrons were invited guests. The police were not.
It seems like the only disorderly bit here is that the cops didn't like his choice of song...
Post a Comment