Five fundemental freedoms

Casper_Fading · 22-04-2009, 01:04 AM

Now this is just for Australia, as I know it's different in other countries:

All Australians are entitled to freedom of speech, association, assembly, religion, and movement.
Freedom of speech

Australians are free, within the bounds of the law, to say or write what we think privately or publicly, about the government, or about any topic. We do not censor the media and may criticise the government without fear of arrest. Free speech comes from facts, not rumours, and the intention must be constructive, not to do harm. There are laws to protect a person's good name and integrity against false information. There are laws against saying or writing things to incite hatred against others because of their culture, ethnicity or background. Freedom of speech is not an excuse to harm others.
Freedom of association

We are free to join any organisation or group if it is legal. We can choose to belong to a trade union or to a political party. Having and debating points of view allows for a healthy and strong democracy.
Freedom of assembly

We are free to meet with other people in public or private places. We can meet in small or large groups for legal social or political purposes. Being able to protest and to demonstrate is an accepted form of free expression. Protestors must not be violent or break laws such as assaulting others or trespassing on private or public property. People can change governments in a peaceful way by elections and not by violence.
Freedom of religion

Australia does not have an official or state religion. The law does not enforce any religious doctrine, however, religious practices must conform to the law. We are free to follow any religion we choose. We are also free not to have a religion.
Freedom of movement

We can move freely to and from all states and territories. We can leave and return to Australia at any time. Some migrants may have conditions placed on their visa until they become Australian citizens.

Source

I got to thinking about this the other day when some body posted a clip on you tube of a teen being forced to the ground in a police station and, allegedly, causing 30 000 dollars worth of dental damage. The policeman has been cleared by the department but the teens parents are suing. They are syaing they have the right to put the clip up becasue of freedom of speech. But when does freedom of speech go to far? If it's impeeding someones right to a fair trial, to be innocent until proven guilty? I think freedom of speech is good, to a point. If it's being used to damage someones reputation, to put out a message that isn't true...

I know some people think people should be allowed to do whatever the hell they want becasue that's their right. but what right do people have to go and shoot 30 people becasue they have a 'right to bear arms'. Thank God Australia has strict gun laws.

It's just got me thinkng is all....

Dreamofunity · 22-04-2009, 03:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jessiwuzzle Lives

I got to thinking about this the other day when some body posted a clip on you tube of a teen being forced to the ground in a police station and, allegedly, causing 30 000 dollars worth of dental damage. The policeman has been cleared by the department but the teens parents are suing. They are syaing they have the right to put the clip up becasue of freedom of speech. But when does freedom of speech go to far? If it's impeeding someones right to a fair trial, to be innocent until proven guilty? I think freedom of speech is good, to a point. If it's being used to damage someones reputation, to put out a message that isn't true...

Within the States, you have freedom of speech, but that doesn't extend to libel and slander. Freedom of speech doesn't go too far in regards to what you're talking about, slander is already covered under the (U.S.) law. To be considered libel and slander, especially against a public official, it has to be done with malicious intent. I don't see how a video, which could be strictly given as visual evidence of the event, would be considered as such or impeed on the trial. How does visual evidence put out a message that isn't true unless its edited? It may damage the police man's reputation, but if that is done strictly from his actions caught on tape, he doesn't deserve a good reputation and it's not a false representation.

"The policeman has been cleared by the department" - of course, the like protecting their own.

"but the teens parents are suing." - good for them. I'd sue over my teenage child being slammed to the ground by a police officer causing 30k in damage. I'd also request and demand to see the video.

Do you know what the teen did to provoke this reaction?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jessiwuzzle Lives

I know some people think people should be allowed to do whatever the hell they want becasue that's their right. but what right do people have to go and shoot 30 people becasue they have a 'right to bear arms'. Thank God Australia has strict gun laws.

It's just got me thinkng is all....

I find that to be an asinine statement. The right to keep and bear arms does not extend to murder. Someone owning a gun does not mean they have the right to kill someone with it. Any action which may be performed by a firearm which would be considered wrong or immoral is already covered by previous law. The right to keep and bear arms does not allow people to use them in unlawful manners. Restrictions on the firearms themselves only correlate to people who already disregard the law to be the ones with guns and lawful owners to remain unarmed.

I think the real question to ask is not when does free speech go to far, but when does a badge and authority over step its bounds?

Casper_Fading · 22-04-2009, 04:20 AM

From the clip on the net (it was shown on the news) the teen was kicking his shoes off and trying to kick the officer. In one move the cop put the kid on the ground. He didn't bang him on the ground or anything. He put him down, that was all. Looking at the clip there, I would have cleared the cop too, it doesn't like he did anything wrong. And 30 000 dollars worth of damage? I can't even think of what would be needed to be done, unless they knocked all his teeth out? There was no blood on the clip either. And as to the cops protecting there own, i know of a case in Tas where a cop got charged and dismissed for using excessive force on a drunk teen. I don't know about the states, but that's what happened here.

blondiebear · 22-04-2009, 04:57 AM

Unlike the case with the cops that subdued Rodney King? Two of the officers were tried twice, which is absolutely against the constitution, to pacify the black community. To prevent another series of riots.

We don't know all the facts when things like this happen.

Stress Free Anxiety · 22-04-2009, 05:52 AM

Coming form the US:

Yes, you have rights HOWEVER when your rights are infringing on another's is when the law gets involved. You may have the right to freedom of speech, but, as stated before, if you're spreading libel or slander you're infringing on another's rights. You have the right (in the US) to keep and bare arms but once you use that firearm to harm others (and therefore infringe on their right to life) it is illegal.

Abintra · 22-04-2009, 06:35 AM

haha freedom in this country is a bloody joke
we are free to do what we want as long as they say it is ok
freedom to wear what we like unless it is black then you can wear it but you will just get pulled up by the cops every 5 minutes
we dont have freedom of speech at all because if you speak your mind you can be charged with public nesence or how ever that is spelt,
and this innocent untill proven guilty is a load of horse piss
more so in queensland then other states
one of the laws in this s**t hole is 'if it is written so it is law' which basicly means that if a cop charges you for what ever even if it is not a law inplace that cop can make a law on the spot
you tell me how that is freedom
f--k the law f--k the police and f--k anyone who lives in a fanticy world beliving that we are free do say as we like f--k is still illegal to say in public
freedom of religion ha yeah right
people are still getting hounded for pagan beliefs in queensland
it is against the law to live in a gay relationship in some states
freedom yeah right

Casper_Fading · 22-04-2009, 12:07 PM

as far as i'm aware it's not against the law to be in a gay relationship in any state. Some people in some states are less tolerant (e.g. NT) but it isn't illegal. And Tasmania had the harshest laws regarding gays. It is not illegal to say **** in public. I've actually said it to a police officer and they did nothing. What the heck? "Oh you swore, i'm going to arrest you now". O.o There are country places and stuff in QLD that are less tolerant. That isn't to do with the law, that's to do with the people.

Abintra · 22-04-2009, 05:13 PM

just because you did not get charged doesn't mean it is legal,
and with the gay couples it is a law that is very rarely inforsed but still the law itself has still not been emended
the police *more so in queensland* have far to much control and it is something that should be taken away, i have seen cops in brisbane use batons on kids as young as 13 for refusing to give there name (which is not against the law unless you have commited a crime) seen cops drag an elderly lady to the ground at a peaceful protest then shove there knee in to her back whilst they put her in coffs, seen police bang someone head on the roof of a car while putting them in the back of the panel van and then laughed saying "wash your head' i've been drag in to a van when i was 17 and had the ****ers spray it with pepper spray after they had put me in there, and all i was doing at the time was sleeping in a park because i had no where else to go, it may not be a crime to be homeless but the cops sure as hell treat it like that,
i've seen more violence from cops then i have watched on the news with clips of wars,
watched cops hold someone to the ground and beat in to them with batons for refusing to give up there friends names after a petty crime has been commited i personly have been jailed for busking with out a permit, had cops hunt me down on a day that i was meant to be in court just so they could make me miss the court hearing so they could again charge me for failing to apper queensland is a police state where the police run most things, people get bullied for the clothes they wear the music they listen to and the colour of there skin and for males having long hair. i personly have been charged for crimes i have not done even after having my work mates tell the police that i was at work at the time it had happend.
i've had my bag search and been strip search in public all because i refuse to be pushed around by the gang that were blue. we are not free to believe what we want to believe dress how we want to dress

Casper_Fading · 22-04-2009, 10:54 PM

Well I don't know anyone else who has had those probelms, so i'm very sorry that you go through that. I lived in qld for a while and I have alot of family and friends there (some who have been involved in illegal activities). There is no where in the law that says that it is is illegal to swear, and I challenge you to find me the law that says it is. The law in tasmania has also been amended as per gay rights and the same in new south wales. I dont' have time right now, but i'm pretty sure it's been amended all over Australia and I'll have a look later on the government sites. It is illegal to sleep in certain areas and you cna be arrested for that. But it's not often reinforced, but then, it also depends on the area. But yeah. I'm sorry you get treated that way, but I certainly don't think it is the norm.