If someone tweeted "Go out and kill a *insert colour* person*, they could get arrested for incitement to violence and we agree with that because someone could get hurt.
Someone explain the moral difference between that and the Right-wing hacks telling people to ignore the rules?
Someone explain the moral difference between that and the Right-wing hacks telling people to ignore the rules?
I saw this from Toby Young and it just got me thinking...
If enough people listened to this, many people would die.
If enough people listened to this, many people would die.
Or maybe a more direct instruction not to follow the rules, like here...
https://twitter.com/Femi_Sorry/status/1303669090586853377?s=19
If you campaign against measures that the epidemiological experts, including the World Health Organisation have promoted, knowing you've never even set foot in a medical school or biochemistry lab, you know you're rolling the dice on human lives.
And now we've lost over 80,000.
And now we've lost over 80,000.
A) The definition of murder includes doing something where you see GBH/Death as a virtually certain consequence.
B) Negligent manslaughter includes taking the opportunity to save someone (like a radio show platform during a pandemic) away from someone who would have saved them.
B) Negligent manslaughter includes taking the opportunity to save someone (like a radio show platform during a pandemic) away from someone who would have saved them.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
