Cross-posted from: https://feddit.de/post/8243678

A Chinese music student was convicted on Thursday of U.S. charges that he harassed an activist who posted fliers at the Berklee College of Music in Boston supporting democracy in China and threatened to report her activities to Chinese law enforcement. A federal jury in Boston found Xiaolei Wu, 25, who sent the activist online messages saying he would chop off her hands and demanding she tear down her “reactionary posters,” guilty at the end of a four-day trial.

  • BlameThePeacock@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    8 months ago

    This has nothing to do with “free speech” and people need to stop misusing that concept. Free speech only protects you from the government impairing your speech, not other people or even businesses.

    For example, If a mall decided to say “you’re not allowed to say bad things about China on our property” they could eject you from their property if you did say something bad about China. You don’t have the right to free speech on their property. Just like websites can ban you from saying specific things on their sites as well.

    This is about threatening other people, you’re not allowed to do that for any reason, speech or otherwise. That’s why this asshat’s conviction is for cyberstalking and threat charges.

      • BlameThePeacock@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        8 months ago

        You’re wrong. This has absolutely nothing to do with 1a. The legal right to free speech has nothing to do with other individuals, or other governments.

          • BlameThePeacock@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            8 months ago

            They aren’t exercising their right to free speech unless the US government would like them not to say it but is restricted from preventing them.

            If the government doesn’t care, it’s just called talking.

            • GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              8 months ago

              If I have a gun but the government doesn’t care, am I not exercising my 2a rights?

              The government can’t restrict your right to free speech until you exercise it. They didn’t, which is why this isn’t a 1a case, but that doesn’t mean they weren’t exercising their rights.

              • GiveMemes
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                8 months ago

                The fact of owning a gun isn’t a 2nd amendment issue as your comment would imply… The government coming to take that gun in some way? Second amendment issue. Government tries to impede your purchase of that gun? 2nd amendment issue.

                Whether or not the Chinese student didn’t like what she was saying has nothing to do with it being about or not being about freedom of speech.

                • GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  8 months ago

                  So you’re proposing that bearing arms, the right guaranteed by the second amendment is not exercising of said right unless the government tries to stop you? So rights are like Schrodinger’s laws, where they only exist when we try to violate them?