Swearing in Public Places = Fine (In Australia)

arch5

arch5

Spy
Joined
Apr 18, 2009
Messages
836
Reaction score
0
http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/big-fines-for-those-who-cry-foul-20110530-1fctb.html

XeEZW.jpg


"It frees up police time for other law enforcement activities and enables them to more readily issue penalties against those offenders who deserve them," Mr Clark said.
"By providing police with as many enforcement tools as possible, Parliament is sending a strong signal that people who engage in criminal behaviour can expect to be dealt with under the law."
Click to expand...
 
I originally interpreted the "fine" in the title as synonymous with "OK".
 
Good, damn immigrants are ruining this state. It's always the immigrants!

P.S Just realised that everyone isn't me and this might need explaining.
Was listening to talk back radio and this was one of the callers opinions of the reasons for the changes, the host
agreed. Last time I listen to that station.
 
I read that as Swearing in Public Places = No Problem (In Australia). Which I think is what will be the result of this. It's giving the police a valid excuse to apprehend anyone verbally abusing the hell out of them that they may not have another direct justification to apprehend.

That being said, this is still *****ing ** with cinnamon ***** and ******* sprinkles, with a side order of **********.

Ninja edit: Damn it Monkey, you stole my synonym.
 
How do Australians put up with this shit?

Do they keep you complacent with socialized medicine and buprenorphine programs?

"Anti social behavior" is a crime? How delusional is this asshole?
 
Remus said:
Dey terk er jerbs, Australian edition.
Click to expand...

DYYY TKKK RRR JJJJJEEERRRRRBS

But seriously, a fine for that? Ridiculous.

Swearing in itself isn't Anti-Social. Perhaps if it's being violently directed at someone in an aggressive manner, yeah, but just using the language isn't. I've never understood people being offended by the mere casual use of such words myself.

This bit in particular:

Offensive language has been an offence in Victoria since 1966. Swearing — if it is deemed serious enough — can carry a penalty of up to two years' jail, and is even considered an offence if no one is present to hear it.
Click to expand...

Shit off.
 
if it is deemed serious enough — can carry a penalty of up to two years' jail, and is even considered an offence if no one is present to hear it.
Click to expand...

Whoever came up with this law is out of their mind. Also how exactly does the police determine if it is "serious enough". Sometimes I think laws are made ambiguous on purpouse.
 
"Offensive language... is even considered an offence if no one is present to hear it."
Click to expand...

So as a good citizen you're expected to turn yourself in, if something like that was to happen, yes?

This is the Onion style right here...too bad this is actually for real.
 
This is crazy. Oh my God. I swear all the time. I don't have $240. I have €2 in my purse and about €20 in the bank and that's it. If I got fined $240 for swearing, it would mess up my entire summer. I'd have to take out a goddamn loan, I mean, seriously, I have nothing. I would deserve it for littering and driving without a seatbelt but FOR SWEARING! For doing something that isn't even wrong! I mean, who is it hurting? Who in Australia really gives a ****?

(Do they have a list of certified swear words? Because my granny thinks saying "damn" is swearing).
 
I don't think I have a problem with this, nothing worse than being somewhere in public and hearing some tool who can't seem to use the english language without throwing in a swear word every few words carrying on.
 
morgs said:
I don't think I have a problem with this, nothing worse than being somewhere in public and hearing some tool who can't seem to use the english language without throwing in a swear word every few words carrying on.
Click to expand...

You should have a problem. Even though you do not appreciate swearing in public (I don't like it either) this is the government intruding upon the personal liberty of its citizens. Yea its a small intrusion but its the idea that the government can outlaw something as harmless as swearing alludes to a much more disturbing problem with the government's philosophy."First they came for the foul-mouths, and I did nothing because I did not use swear words....." Allowing this to pass unchallenged sends a message to the government that you will roll over and allow them to dictate even the most inconsequential aspects of your life. If they can do this what is stopping them from outlawing something you enjoy or even restricting your right the criticize the government because it disrupts national unity?
 
I don't think this means that if you say general swear words you'll be fined. It's more a case of fining people who are using language against someone in a case where it would lead to court, the fines saving that court time by getting it out of the way on the spot. The article is very misleading in that it makes it sound like every slight curse word is worth a fine, it isn't.
 
I'm honestly suspect of anyone who describes swearing as "anti-social."

F***ing stupid c***ing assholes.
 
morgs said:
I don't think this means that if you say general swear words you'll be fined. It's more a case of fining people who are using language against someone in a case where it would lead to court, the fines saving that court time by getting it out of the way on the spot.
Click to expand...

It did say that it was still an offence even if nobody hears it. If that's true then it is punishable even if not directed at somebody.

morgs said:
I don't think I have a problem with this, nothing worse than being somewhere in public and hearing some tool who can't seem to use the english language without throwing in a swear word every few words carrying on.
Click to expand...

As much as I agree with you that throwing in a swear word every few seconds is annoying, I think so for probably different reasons.

I did English Language as one of my A-Levels in college and we did a whole project on 'Taboo' language. I'm one of those people who thinks that it's just a part of language progression and that as time goes on these words will probably become less and less offensive anyway.

I have a habit of swearing quite a lot but not to the point where it detracts from the rest of my Lexis. Like you, I don't like it when people replace every pause and other word with "F**king" and use the words considered swearing with reckless abandon but I think it's fine to use them when in the right circumstance. They serve to enforce sentences... make points... they're very emphatic.

Besides, these words are simply a part of our language, a cultural heritage that has been taken on and grown through the development of our very speech, just like every other word we use.

To try and ban them from being spoken, in my opinion, is just pointless and silly. Victoria's law is making a mountain out of a mole hill.
 
The older I get and the more I learn of the world, the more and more weird Australia seems.

The-Rescuers-Down-Under-the-rescuers-5013888-720-480.jpg
 
Stylo said:
I have a habit of swearing quite a lot but not to the point where it detracts from the rest of my Lexis. Like you, I don't like it when people replace every pause and other word with "F**king" and use the words considered swearing with reckless abandon but I think it's fine to use them when in the right circumstance. They serve to enforce sentences... make points... they're very emphatic.
Click to expand...

I do agree with this. Sometimes it's the only way to get across what you're trying to say with the right impact. It annoys me when people just use it as filler.
 
Australia is home to some of the most radical prudes in the free world. Shit, we're not even that crazy here.... though we are in other ways.
 
Australians, get a real ****ing constitution please or better yet move elsewhere. Your ancestors did their time, there is no reason to stay in that shithole:p
 
"It frees up police time for other law enforcement activities and enables them to more readily issue penalties against those offenders who deserve them,"
"By providing police with as many enforcement tools as possible, Parliament is sending a strong signal that people who engage in criminal behaviour can expect to be dealt with under the law."

Both of these sentences make no sense at all.
 
This is a police convenience law. It's highly unlikely that you'll be arrested after stubbing your toe on a lamp-post and muttering "fuck!", nor banged up for inserting an emphatic expletive into an otherwise ordinary sentence, But the police will be one more tool available to put you away or clear you off the streets if they already want to do that. It'll give them excuse to make their own lives much easier, and of course give certain officers an excuse to pick up ethnic minorities. That is always the actual effect of impractically criminalising continual everyday behaviour.
 
Sulkdodds said:
This is a police convenience law. It's highly unlikely that you'll be arrested after stubbing your toe on a lamp-post and muttering "fuck!", nor banged up for inserting an emphatic expletive into an otherwise ordinary sentence, But the police will be one more tool available to put you away or clear you off the streets if they already want to do that. It'll give them excuse to make their own lives much easier, and of course give certain officers an excuse to pick up ethnic minorities. That is always the actual effect of impractically criminalising continual everyday behaviour.
Click to expand...

Police are abusive, seems about once a month I hear about them getting grabby with strippers or excessive force. They dont need "tools" like this, they have plenty of leeway to take a person of interest in. All this will lead to is fund raising by the city(they will absolutely raise money this way, all they do over here is traffic stops for exactly that reason) and cops trying to mess with people instead of being vigilant
 
Oh, well, of course there's also the money, yeah.

I'm not saying the police "need" this kind of thing. Obviously they don't and it's ludicrous that they get it. It's just that would appear to be the actual effect of the law, if not necessarily its intended purpose. It's in the nature of abusive authority that its hunger for convenience is never satisfied.
 
Any country that is full of massive tarantulas deserves the right to swear.
 
I don't think Australia has tarantulas.
 
morgs said:
I don't think I have a problem with this, nothing worse than being somewhere in public and hearing some tool who can't seem to use the english language without throwing in a swear word every few words carrying on.
Click to expand...

Profanity is a beautiful thing you prude. Though there are those stupid mother ****ing cocksuckers out there who don't do anything but ****ing swear excessively that causes the rest of us god damn profaniacs to look like pieces of shit for our usage of the words. Those ****s.
 
is it just me and my ignorant American nature, or is Australia kind of insanely oppressive in the victimless crimes department?
 
Erestheux said:
is it just me and my ignorant American nature, or is Australia kind of insanely oppressive in the victimless crimes department?
Click to expand...

They are in pretty much every way imaginable. Does a disservice to their criminal ancestors!

I kid I kid. Those prisoners were probably sent there for lambasting the king's use of foul language.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

V-Man339
ACTA active in 6 months
Replies
4
Views
973
V-Man339
V-Man339
Tyguy
Massachusetts Marijuana Law
2 3 4
Replies
122
Views
10K
No Limit
No Limit
J
NSA snooping on it's citizens
Replies
10
Views
1K
willyd
willyd
Back
Top