If one and only one person is convicted, it's "illegal", no matter how many people get away with it. If it's so clear from the supreme court that obscenity is legal, why did Paul Little spend 2 years in jail/prison?

Or if you have heard of "digital zoom", "printing" or can afford $700 or so for a 2560x1600 monitor. Not everything is useless because we have a crappy tablet used as our only/main computer.

lots of cases

http://cdn01.androidauthority....

A lie to go with the other lies you gave.

Why are you bashing something for being different? None of your complaints are even valid, 2/3 disprovable with simple searches.

Yes, very complex. You don't have the freedom of speech, but believe you do, because you believe in the excuses given for why you don't have freedom of speech. That does make a mess.

The court ruled that the porn was "speech" and held that the obscenity laws were valid enough to convict.

As I said. Neither place has "freedom of speech" we just declare the US superior because we claim the qualities we make illegal are more justified in making speech illegal. When obscenity is illegal in the US, then we have no moral high-ground from which to lecture, not that it would stop us from lecturing anyway.

http://www.tampabay.com/news/c...

Reality proves you wrong. If obscene speech was NOT illegal, then Paul Little wouldn't have been convicted of obscenity.

OR are you arguing that reality is wrong because it contradicts your opinion?

#1 had the stupid ice world monsters. On a planet with no life, there wouldn't be massive animals. And if the bigger creature killed something, it'd likely eat it, not discard the large animal to chase a smaller one. But pointless *chase scene*. And I couldn't watch it without picturing JJ saying "Make the mining ship as scary as possible, I don't care if it's useless as a mining ship. It should be scary, like it's own character. Scarier. More personality and less practical! Muhahahahaha." every time the ship was on the screen, inside or outside shot. The ship being a "character" like JJ makes everything. It made me flash back to Lost, where JJ made a hatch. Yes, a door, unto a character with more back-story and explanation than most of the actors got. Like a big "fuck you" to everyone watching. JJ only does character development for inaninmatte objects. That's why he did Star Trek, because he could ignore the humans, as they had a back-story, and instead make "red matter", the ships, the planets, the tech and other things the characters, and not have to waste any time developing humans.

Oh, so "intending harm" isn't "unpleasant"? Sounds like you said something so general as to be wrong, and when I called you on it, you changed what you said. That's the great thing, I can look back and see that you implied that saying "something unpleasant" shouldn't be arrestable. But never is there a "I misspoke, I meant..." statement, but asserting that I mis-read your plain and direct statement.

I didn't read it that way. I read it as you should expect to get your head caved in, not that you "should" have that result and it's justified, but that you should expect it.

Funny how those who read the worst, speak the worst, and think it's always everyone else's fault for communicating poorly.

Go read the OP again. Did he say it was justified to get your head caved in, or that you should expect it? Did you imply that someone shouldn't be arrested for saying something "unpleasant"? Is a direct death threat of credible violence "unpleasant"?

I'd assert that's not what you said, even if it was what you were attempting, and that's what I was pointing out.

Same as the US. Obscene is illegal. Obscene is illegal because it's offensive. So "rude" is illegal in the US, same as the UK. But it's funny to see all the Americans assert they have more rights than those in the UK, when the rights are roughly equal, but exercised slightly differently.

I was going through security once, and the TSA agent made a bomb joke to me. I said back "I have a witty retort to that, but if I said it, you might arrest me." He looked very confused, then was a but apologetic about making a joke that I was barred by law from making.

So you think you have the right to say anything you like, even if you intend it to be harmful? Or do you have the right to do anything harmful, so long as the harm isn't both physical and permanent?

Or a racist elitist practice to give "official" backing to belittling anyone "different".

Reviews should be hidden for A/Cs. A/C's opinion is worth less than a human's.

I liked 6. Was a big improvement over 4 and 5.