Maharashtra police to crack whip on those who ‘like’ offensive Facebook posts

[Kloitra]

That is still NO EXCUSE to infringe upon our Constitutional rights! This in no way justifies suspension of our rights. If people are stupid to incite riots over trivial/silly matters, then there is something fundamentally wrong with our society.
On one hand you people make fun of our country's founding fathers, poke fun at the politicians and religious figures, laugh at offensive/racist/religiously insensitive jokes and yet, get offended if some one 'likes' a facebook post about some long dead king, which some idiot deemed to be 'offensive' to his/her sentiments? Dont you see the irony in this?

Majority of people ARE stupid. There is nothing anyone can do about it. You would just have to wait for people to mature.

 

[wolfschanzze]

Freedom of expression means just that!
People are stupid, they say and do stupid things. Unless by their statements alone, anyone is in harm's way, there is absolutely no need to interfere with anyone's point of view! Egos and sentiments be damned! What if someday, your point of view offends someone and they pull YOU up for making, what they term as "offensive", statement? Everyone has a right to say what they please, whether you/we like it or not!

Then i will try not to make offensive statements.This move comes after too much BS by So called Left intellectuals and their ilk.Everything needs moderation,anything out of control is bad.

WTF!!?!?!

This is undemocratic at best and tyranny at worst.

Sigh! you don't understand the finer points of trolling
Btw, nothing wrong in moderating i believe.

 

[JayAtl]

I am in travelling so will be little slow to reply.

First thing - do you know how much freedom of speech the constitution if India has given to its citizens ??? Do you want me to post that part ???

I never claim I know things anout US. I have never visited. Plus I hate US

Thats difference in culture. I dare you you say same thing about Shivaji in Maharastra in SPG protection and walk out of state. Its wrong but people will react. Isnt it against their right to experssion

I am not justifing riots. I am justifying state govt's move to control riots.

we too have restrictions on freedom of speech in the US. but opinion is protected speech. why is shivaji more important than say gandhi and the RSS which killed him is now part of BJP. Indian govt needs to jail everyone of those who rioted and those in leadership of that group who rioted

alternatively if those who found it objectionable should be allowed to voice their objection as long as they don't use violence or impede laws like shutting down the city.

 

[Kloitra]

Yes to everything you said but just because the indian public is immature and police is incompetent- you don't give up on freedoms. Those rights are more dear and should be...and worthy of citizens like you and others to not give into.

I am willing to protect the right of a single person, but at what cost? For now the country is not prepared to burn just so that someone can be public about his opinion. Don't forget India is still mostly poor and illiterate.

 

[JayAtl]

I am willing to protect the right of a single person, but at what cost? For now the country is not prepared to burn just so that someone can be public about his opinion. Don't forget India is still mostly poor and illiterate.

no no my friend , the country is rich in protecting freedom... your and my forefathers did it during the british raj. laid down lives for it. All you have to do is change the mindset ... you can't give into the forces of talibanization.

this needs to be settled by the Supreme court. This arresting someone for " like" is further appalling

Then i will try not to make offensive statements.This move comes after too much BS by So called Left intellectuals and their ilk.Everything needs moderation,anything out of control is bad.


Sigh! you don't understand the finer points of trolling
Btw, nothing wrong in moderating i believe.

there is nothing left or right about protecting freedom...lack of it affects both

 

[Sergi]

we too have restrictions on freedom of speech in the US. but opinion is protected speech. why is shivaji more important than say gandhi and the RSS which killed him is now part of BJP. Indian govt needs to jail everyone of those who rioted and those in leadership of that group who rioted

alternatively if those who found it objectionable should be allowed to voice their objection as long as they don't use violence or impede laws like shutting down the city.

You are avoiding my question
Do you know how much FOS is offered in indian constitution ???
Do you know the law has been broken ???
Are you against a trial ???
What happen to land of law that you were supporting last time ???
Do you know many riots are arrested ???



Y0u still think its a single party ???

People got hurt. And they reacted. Wrongly. But they reacted.
State need to act.

 

[gubbi]

Do tell me whats the constitutional right. Please post it here. The full clause from FRs

Article 19 of the Constitution of India

19. Protection of certain rights regarding freedom of speech, etc.—

(1) All citizens shall have the right—
(a) to freedom of speech and expression;
(b) to assemble peaceably and without arms;
(c) to form associations or unions;
(d) to move freely throughout the territory of India; 9 THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA
(e) to reside and settle in any part of the territory of India; and
(g) to practise any profession, or to carry on any occupation, trade or
business.

(2) Nothing in sub-clause (a) of clause (1) shall affect the operation of
any existing law, or prevent the State from making any law, in so far as such
law imposes reasonable restrictions on the exercise of the right conferred by the
said sub-clause in the interests of the sovereignty and integrity of India, the
security of the State, friendly relations with foreign States, public order,
decency or morality, or in relation to contempt of court, defamation or
incitement to an offence.
(3) Nothing in sub-clause (b) of the said clause shall affect the operation
of any existing law in so far as it imposes, or prevent the State from making
any law imposing, in the interests of the sovereignty and integrity of India or
public order, reasonable restrictions on the exercise of the right conferred by
the said sub-clause.
(4) Nothing in sub-clause (c) of the said clause shall affect the operation
of any existing law in so far as it imposes, or prevent the State from making
any law imposing, in the interests of the sovereignty and integrity of India or
public order or morality, reasonable restrictions on the exercise of the right
conferred by the said sub-clause.
(5) Nothing in sub-clauses (d) and (e) of the said clause shall affect the
operation of any existing law in so far as it imposes, or prevent the State from
making any law imposing, reasonable restrictions on the exercise of any of the
rights conferred by the said sub-clauses either in the interests of the general
public or for the protection of the interests of any Scheduled Tribe.
(6) Nothing in sub-clause (g) of the said clause shall affect the operation
of any existing law in so far as it imposes, or prevent the State from making
any law imposing, in the interests of the general public, reasonable restrictions
on the exercise of the right conferred by the said sub-clause, and, in particular,
nothing in the said sub-clause shall affect the operation of any existing law in
so far as it relates to, or prevent the State from making any law relating to,—
(i) the professional or technical qualifications necessary for practising
any profession or carrying on any occupation, trade or business, or 10 THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA
(ii) the carrying on by the State, or by a corporation owned or
controlled by the State, of any trade, business, industry or service,
whether to the exclusion, complete or partial, of citizens or otherwise.

Now tell me, what law did the facebook post or 'like' of it, break, wrt, the freedom of speech and expression?

 

[wolfschanzze]

People need to know when comparing USA constitution to India, Usa is not india nor is india same as usa,might be democracy but our views and rules are different,don't apply your laws in india and say if India doesn't stand by such US values then it's strangling free speech, it doesn't work that way, there is a thing called moderation in India, while usa has no moderation.
What about gun rights of usa, since you compare indian constitution? should india give right to bear arms to its citizens as USA does?
Whe choose what suits us best,we don't have to choose what others think is best for us.

 

[gubbi]

Majority of people ARE stupid. There is nothing anyone can do about it. You would just have to wait for people to mature.

That doesnt mean giving up our freedoms in the meanwhile! No way.

 

[Sergi]

Article 19 of the Constitution of India

19. Protection of certain rights regarding freedom of speech, etc.—

(1) All citizens shall have the right—
(a) to freedom of speech and expression;
(b) to assemble peaceably and without arms;
(c) to form associations or unions;
(d) to move freely throughout the territory of India; 9 THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA
(e) to reside and settle in any part of the territory of India; and
(g) to practise any profession, or to carry on any occupation, trade or
business.

(2) Nothing in sub-clause (a) of clause (1) shall affect the operation of
any existing law, or prevent the State from making any law, in so far as such
law imposes reasonable restrictions on the exercise of the right conferred by the
said sub-clause in the interests of the sovereignty and integrity of India, the
security of the State, friendly relations with foreign States, public order,
decency or morality, or in relation to contempt of court, defamation or
incitement to an offence.
(3) Nothing in sub-clause (b) of the said clause shall affect the operation
of any existing law in so far as it imposes, or prevent the State from making
any law imposing, in the interests of the sovereignty and integrity of India or
public order, reasonable restrictions on the exercise of the right conferred by
the said sub-clause.
(4) Nothing in sub-clause (c) of the said clause shall affect the operation
of any existing law in so far as it imposes, or prevent the State from making
any law imposing, in the interests of the sovereignty and integrity of India or
public order or morality, reasonable restrictions on the exercise of the right
conferred by the said sub-clause.
(5) Nothing in sub-clauses (d) and (e) of the said clause shall affect the
operation of any existing law in so far as it imposes, or prevent the State from
making any law imposing, reasonable restrictions on the exercise of any of the
rights conferred by the said sub-clauses either in the interests of the general
public or for the protection of the interests of any Scheduled Tribe.
(6) Nothing in sub-clause (g) of the said clause shall affect the operation
of any existing law in so far as it imposes, or prevent the State from making
any law imposing, in the interests of the general public, reasonable restrictions
on the exercise of the right conferred by the said sub-clause, and, in particular,
nothing in the said sub-clause shall affect the operation of any existing law in
so far as it relates to, or prevent the State from making any law relating to,—
(i) the professional or technical qualifications necessary for practising
any profession or carrying on any occupation, trade or business, or 10 THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA
(ii) the carrying on by the State, or by a corporation owned or
controlled by the State, of any trade, business, industry or service,
whether to the exclusion, complete or partial, of citizens or otherwise.

Now tell me, what law did the facebook post or 'like' of it, break, wrt, the freedom of speech and expression?

The bolded part !!!
Thats why you bold it right ???

security of the State, friendly relations with foreign States, public order,
decency or morality, or in relation to contempt of court, defamation or
incitement to an offence.

 

[JayAtl]

You are avoiding my question
Do you know how much FOS is offered in indian constitution ???
Do you know the law has been broken ???
Are you against a trial ???
What happen to land of law that you were supporting last time ???
Do you know many riots are arrested ???



Y0u still think its a single party ???

People got hurt. And they reacted. Wrongly. But they reacted.
State need to act.

I am not avoiding your question, you are just understanding what I've submitted to you.

go ahead mr. constitutional attorney , tell me where opinion was stifled in your constitution.
I am not against trial but I am against false arrest.
what do mean by " What happen to land of law that you were supporting last time ???"
I don't know how many were arrested but I know the leadership was not
what does single party multi party have to do with this...it does not matter to me. arrest everyone who was behind the riots

 

[gubbi]

What about gun rights of usa, since you compare indian constitution? should india give right to bear arms to its citizens as USA does?
Whe choose what suits us best,we don't have to choose what others think is best for us.

Gun rights in US are enshrined in their constitution. 2nd Amendment, fyi. Indian Constitution has no such gun rights, but Article 19 clearly states what rights, as citizens of Republic of India, we all have. And that is what we, here, are defending.

 

[Kloitra]

no no my friend , the country is rich in protecting freedom... your and my forefathers did it during the british raj. laid down lives for it. All you have to do is change the mindset ... you can't give into the forces of talibanization.

this needs to be settled by the Supreme court. This arresting someone for " like" is further appalling

@gubbi I do agree that arresting someone for "like" is beyond ridiculous. But the original post itself, an education and economical revolution is needed. It will come, with time. Till than, it is better to make people sensible about their society regarding what, when and where to express.

Ideally, even dragging them to court is wrong, but unfortunately India is far away from that utopia.

 

[wolfschanzze]

no no my friend , the country is rich in protecting freedom... your and my forefathers did it during the british raj. laid down lives for it. All you have to do is change the mindset ... you can't give into the forces of talibanization.

this needs to be settled by the Supreme court. This arresting someone for " like" is further appalling




there is nothing left or right about protecting freedom...lack of it affects both

This not USA and nor do we have to live in our democracy according to what USA wants.Our freedom of speech is valid as long as you dont hurt others sentiments,while Usa cares a damn about anybodys sentiments.There were many cases where freedom of speech was misused to incite riots, leading to deaths,it might be ok in Usa but not here.

 

[gubbi]

The bolded part !!!
Thats why you bold it right ???

Read it again. It pertains that these rights shall not interfere with the country's ability to pass laws or enforce existing laws. Nowhere does it say that the Rights are limited in nature.
This is all law gobbledygook, you need to understand the language of the lawyers to really interpret what is written. uninformed minds have known to and will always misinterpret this language.