The Phillip De Franco show.

Surprised there's not a thread on the guy.

I like him, he's very informative about stories I wouldn't have known about otherwise.

Could you elaborate further?

Perhaps link a video to save me a Google?

His most recent vid:

edited 20th Mar '18 3:56:26 PM by Demongodofchaos2

Jesus Christ the UK's courts and law enforcement are run by idiots.

edited 21st Mar '18 8:01:59 AM by GraymanofBelka

De Franco was fun once upon a time. But since the 2016 election he's gone full "both sides" hack in the name of getting views. He's nowhere near as informed as he pretends to be, and his viewpoint couldn't be more "white guy on the Internet" if he tried.

That video's a case in point. A guy with a history of anti-Semitism got in trouble for doing something anti-Semitic. The only thing newsworthy about that is the law doing what it's supposed to for once.

edited 21st Mar '18 11:24:50 AM by AmbarSonofDeshar

How would you like it if you got jail time for an edgy joke?

Emphasis on the joke bit.

He wouldn't like it. That's the point of punishment. But here is an easy way to not get punished: Don't utter bigotry. Even as a "joke". If I punch you, it doesn't matter if I did it "as a joke". Same for hate speech.

How would you like it if everyone treated threats of violence against you as a joke?

Anti-Semitism is not a laughing matter and the insistence of large parts of society on treating it like it is speaks volumes about how entrenched white supremacy and white privilege remain in that society. I'm not sorry about what happened to this guy, and De Franco's spin on it is appalling.

edited 21st Mar '18 1:10:15 PM by AmbarSonofDeshar

We should have made the Pug stand trial instead of punishing the stupid man!

but yeah,stupid dumb man goes to jail for being stupid

edited 21st Mar '18 1:12:28 PM by Ultimatum

Because teaching a dog to salute is the same as threatening people?

Violence does not mean "being a dick to me" or "being a racist idiot" or anything like that.

If I made a joke about gasing you and your parents, I'd be prosecuted for threatening you. Why should it be different when threatening larger groups?

And violence can very well mean being a dick to someone. It's called abuse. And propagating anti-semitism is abuse.

Except violence literally means physical force used to inflict injury or damage, and training a dog to do A Bad Thing isn't that.

I realize that I'm not going to change anyone's mind here about Dankula's sentencing, but I am not giving up on this one bit, as it is much more objective.

edited 21st Mar '18 1:26:00 PM by Grounder

Psychological violence is a thing.

"Also known as" among three other terms with abuse in them.

Also, a ladybird isn't a bird just because it has bird in its name.

DeFranco also defended Pew Die Pie after he turned out to be an anti-Semite. Let's not forget that.

Being a Nazi is by definition a threat to Jewish people because Nazism, by definition, is about killing Jews. You can't take the genocidaire out of the Nazi and flashing a Hitler salute is a threat to any Jewish person who sees it that you wish to do them violence.

@Grounder:

So you're saying psychological violence isn't violence? Or that it shouldn't be illegal? Or both? Not seeing your point here.

The first one, obviously?

EDIT: And no, I am not downplaying that it is a horrible thing to suffer.

edited 21st Mar '18 3:24:50 PM by Grounder

Well, then you're simply wrong. Still not seeing your point, only nitpicking semantics.

I disagree that this is a matter of semantics, and feel that there needs to be a meaningful distinction, but we're obviously going nowhere here, so I'm done.

I'm sorry.But I can't agree with the majority on this.

I disagree with the idea that this counts as Violence. There is no real intent to cause anyone any harm.Except his girlfriend and she's not the one pressing charges

I don't see how there wasn't intent to violence, Nazism like all Fascist ideologies is explicitly violent and thus advocating for it in any way[1] is a defacto threat of violence.

[1]=No the "just joking" defense does not justify anything, I have a pretty dark sense of humor and I wouldn't use racist humor mainly because it doesn't amuse me. Humor is simply another way of manifesting one's personal views and thus the "just joking" justification is patented nonsense.

Sending him to prison might be the right course of action but as we've seen it's gaining him attenion and sympathy from 'free speech' supporters,David Brent apparently supports him too,whatever,my opinion on him has soured

Again the important part here is intent and I havent seen anyone argue against his version of events.

The guy was trying to piss off his girlfriend by training the dog to do the most horrible thing he can think off. That doesn't sound like support of Nazi ideology to me.

edited 21st Mar '18 3:49:41 PM by DeanCole

Terrible people opposing something doesn't mean that it's a bad idea, often quite the opposite. They'll always use any negative legal or social sanction against bigots as evidence of oppression and thus aren't especially important.

If I tried to piss of my girlfriend by burning crosses then "I was trying to offend her" would not be a valid defense, the same should apply here. There are many ways that you can get back at someone without willingly associated with a genocidal ideology.

edited 21st Mar '18 3:50:34 PM by Fourthspartan56