That depends, left wingers are much more vocal than right wingers, but most people just like to avoid politics in general. “I don’t really care” is the reaction i get when i try to talk about these things with people my age.
And how is that a good thing? You should not allow people to browbeat and threaten others into silence. You should always be free to discuss your views.
You don’t exactly have much freedom of speech over there, so i bet that’s a large factor in people staying silent.
How to make your child racist 101
(by some black dude)
“Truly powerful message” - NY Times
its not good or bad in my opinion people like to avoid confrontation for the most part in Europe .
we have the same levels as you do .
https://m.popkey.co/7840dd/rwVGW.gif
You can be criminally prosecuted in the U.K for hate speech. Meanwhile our supreme court just ruled there is no such thing as “hate speech”. Lets also not forget the countless times your police have started investigations into people over fucking tweets against Muslims.
I wont even get into countries like Germany where some “xenophobic” face book posts get you a police visit.
And so do people here.
no you cannot , however you can be prosecuted for inciting violence against someone or a group of people.
the article you posted the man had suggested we bomb mosques and burn Muslims on bonfires .
you can scream you hate muslims all you like here but you cannot scream and encourage people to murder Muslims for simply being muslim.
our police are legally obliged to investigate any "crime " that is reported .
You don’t know your own laws very well.
“Expressions of hatred toward someone on account of that person’s colour, race, disability, nationality (including citizenship), ethnic or national origin, religion, or sexual orientation is forbidden”
Except when it comes to Muslims, who openly call for the death of groups of people in Britain , and are not arrested.
And the fact that the police even respond to someone complaining about mean words, shows there is a precedent for legal prosecution against it.
Here if you call the cops over that, they laugh at you and hang up.
If you have hate speech laws, you do not have freedom of speech, period.
Selected cases[edit]
On 13 October 2001, Harry Hammond, an evangelist, was arrested and charged under section 5 of the Public Order Act (1986) because he had displayed to people in Bournemouth a large sign bearing the words “Jesus Gives Peace, Jesus is Alive, Stop Immorality, Stop Homosexuality, Stop Lesbianism, Jesus is Lord”. In April 2002, a magistrate convicted Hammond, fined him £300, and ordered him to pay costs of £395.[11][12][13]
On 2 September 2006, Stephen Green was arrested in Cardiff for distributing pamphlets which called sexual activity between members of the same sex a sin. On 28 September 2006, the Crown advised Cardiff Magistrates Court that it would not proceed with the prosecution.[14][15]
On 8 December 2009, Mr Justice Richard Clancy, sitting at Liverpool Magistrates’ Court, acquitted Ben and Sharon Vogelenzang, hoteliers, of charges under the Public Order Act 1986 and under the Crime and Disorder Act 1998. The Vogelensangs were charged after a guest at their hotel, Ericka Tazi, complained that the Vogelenzangs had insulted her after she appeared in a hijab.[16]
On 4 March 2010, a jury returned a verdict of guilty against Harry Taylor, who was charged under Part 4A of the Public Order Act 1986. Taylor was charged because he left anti-religious cartoons in the prayer-room of Liverpool’s John Lennon Airport on three occasions in 2008. The airport chaplain, who was insulted, offended, and alarmed by the cartoons, called the police.[17][18][19] On 23 April 2010, Judge Charles James of Liverpool Crown Court sentenced Taylor to a six-month term of imprisonment suspended for two years, made him subject to a five-year Anti-Social Behaviour Order (ASBO) (which bans him from carrying religiously offensive material in a public place), ordered him to perform 100 hours of unpaid work, and ordered him to pay £250 costs. Taylor was convicted of similar offences in 2006.[20]
On 20 April 2010, police arrested Dale McAlpine, a Christian preacher, of Workington in Cumbria, for saying that homosexual conduct was a sin. On 14 May 2010, the Crown decided not to prosecute McAlpine.[21] Later still the police apologised to McAlpine for arresting him at all, and paid him several thousand pounds compensation.[22]
Compare to that to the U.S
This man would be able to be criminally prosecuted in the U.K.
Ohh yes i do , try reading things in detail in the future .
A person who uses threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour, or displays any written material which is threatening, abusive or insulting, is guilty of an offence if—
(a) they intends thereby to stir up racial hatred, or
(b) having regard to all the circumstances racial hatred is likely to be stirred up thereby.
the House of Lords voted in favour of amending the Public Order Act to remove the word “insulting”.
notice the ket word in there , “threatening” , also yes you would likely be arrested if you walked down the street screaming "i hate all of you fucking niggers "
Nothing in this Part shall be read or given effect in a way which prohibits or restricts discussion, criticism or expressions of antipathy, dislike, ridicule, insult or abuse of particular religions or the beliefs or practices of their adherents, or of any other belief system or the beliefs or practices of its adherents, or proselytising or urging adherents of a different religion or belief system to cease practising their religion or belief system. Subjective descriptions of a person’s actions or behaviour, however abhorrent, crass or objectionable, may not be considered an attempt to spread hate unless the motive is clearly defined as such.
although its a law thats massively open to interpretation in my opinion , depends on the judge for most cases .
On 20 April 2010, police arrested Dale McAlpine, a Christian preacher, of Workington in Cumbria, for saying that homosexual conduct was a sin. On 14 May 2010, the Crown decided not to prosecute McAlpine.[21] Later still the police apologised to McAlpine for arresting him at all, and paid him several thousand pounds compensation.
the above for example , pretty much identical to the below but very different outcomes
On 13 October 2001, Harry Hammond, an evangelist, was arrested and charged under section 5 of the Public Order Act (1986) because he had displayed to people in Bournemouth a large sign bearing the words “Jesus Gives Peace, Jesus is Alive, Stop Immorality, Stop Homosexuality, Stop Lesbianism, Jesus is Lord”. In April 2002, a magistrate convicted Hammond, fined him £300, and ordered him to pay costs of £395
errm actually no he wouldnt , this is where wording is massively important . He would be prosecuted if that was worded "all Homo’s should be raped " But you deserve to be raped ? no
not true at all , now you’re talking out of your arse . If they incite violence they get arrested if they promote sharia law then no they wont be arrested .
if someone accuses someone else of inciting racial hatred/violence they have to by law investigate . 99.8% of such accusations go no where . but they must acknowledge it .
please see the video , pretty much identical to yours … also note the police officer at the end "He is not preaching hate , he is preaching his belief of the bible " and the police will protect them and their giant balls to do it in the middle of a gay pride parade 
"go back to where you came from Abdul "
No it also says Abusive, either you are dyslexic or you’re ignoring it on purpose. Abusive does not have to entail threatening speech, and as the examples i listed above show, people were indeed prosecuted for free speech deemed “offensive”.
Exactly, so you do not have freedom of speech. That would get you maybe the finger, or beaten up over here, but no one could take any legal action against you.
So no, you most certainly do not have anywhere near the level of free speech we do.
So are most laws. That does not change the fact that people have been prosecuted in the past. But you are ignoring those examples.
On 13 October 2001, Harry Hammond, an evangelist, was arrested and charged under section 5 of the Public Order Act (1986) because he had displayed to people in Bournemouth a large sign bearing the words “Jesus Gives Peace, Jesus is Alive, Stop Immorality, Stop Homosexuality, Stop Lesbianism, Jesus is Lord”. In April 2002, a magistrate convicted Hammond, fined him £300, and ordered him to pay costs of £395
Nope, she was not jailed, unlike others who have for saying negative things about Muslims and gays.
Feel free to look into the shit the police have pulled on Tommy Robinson as well.
so erect right now
im not ignoring it , notice the word "insulting " was removed which is likely what you are perceiving “abuse” as meaning when in reality what they mean by that is if you are screaming at someone for example screaming someone is a "dirty nigger " on public transport , you can be arrested , that doesnt mean prison , that doesnt mean a fine but the police have the power to arrest you , calm you down, issue you a warning and send you on your way .
its not what you say its how you say it basically . im perfectly free to stand in the street and peacefully protest against islam but what i cannot do is walk into a mosque and scream they are all scum of the earth .
again its not whats being said its how its being said , you would be arrested on a public order offence , same as if you was drunk and causing a massive scene. giving a telling off and sent on your way.
ignored them ? i quoted them !
and ive shown you multiple videos of people doing the same with police protecting their right to do so .
extremely hard to get a solid case from such things on both sides . hardly any one is every sent to prison for threats made online , even the one you quoted before was 1 of only a handful of cases ever ending in a sentence .
Tommy Robinson was the leader of the EDL well known for fighting and going around to peoples houses intimidating them etc , hes a thug . hardly a beacon of free speech .
the vast majority of people in my country would agree with these laws , its our democratic right to have our society policed in this way.
I don’t agree with them. Especially since they are so broadly phrased they could mean anything is an offence “for which you can be arrested even if it is not a crime”. They are also inconsistently written and applied. It is illegal to cause offence to a woman - misogyny is a hate crime after all… but a woman can scream abuse about men and how they should be culled/castrated etc to her empathetic heart’s content and no one will blink.
It can get you into trouble to protest against Islam, yet muslim protests calling for death to infidels are tolerated in the streets.
I have a problem with the hypocrisy and the selective erosion of rights (and don’t for a second think that once there is precedent that more won’t follow behind). Right now my sport (fencing/HEMA) is threatened because the import and shipping of our equipment is going to be hindered in a misplaced attempt to prevent under 18s having access to the sort of knives which are found in everyone’s kitchen.
Only 10% of the Czech Republic is Christian.
Abusive was not removed. Saying something offensive to someone constitutes verbal abuse.
A Mosque is a private place, so that’s not a good example.
According to your own laws, if you called someone a fucking nigger to their face you could be arrested. You are wrong, period.
You quoted something that proved my point, and yet you’re still trying to argue you cannot be arrested for offensive speech. When you literally quote an example of that happening to multiple people.
Yes you’ve told me multiple times, you’re perfectly fine with doing away with basic human rights as long as the majority agree with it.
And now you’re just moving the goal posts. You’ve gone from “we have the same amount of free speech as the U.S”, to “Who cares if our speech is restricted, it’s democracy”. 
Except he was arrested for organising, and attending Anti Islam rallies. You do not have freedom of speech.
