One Lawyer once told me something that opened my eyes to a lot of political problems from that day on…

“If you change the laws, you change it for the people you oppose as well, and they’ll be just as ready to use those new laws as you will be.” (paraphrased)

So, since the topic of Trump came up in the article, as much as a loath the man… we’re talking about closing down on hate speech. As a wanna-be dictator-of-the-world’s-strongest-military-power, how do you think egotistical ‘glorious leader’ Kim Jong Trump would respond to just my post here? Oh, obviously it’s hate speech against Trump.

Bam, we now have the grounds for Dictator-like thought police under “Hate Speech” controls.

Although that’s just a big picture problem. On a more personal level, if people don’t engage in hate speech, that means other people can’t respond to them. If you clamp down on hate speech, it doesn’t get rid of the ideas behind it, and those ideas may still be acted upon. However, allowing it to be spoken means that cooler heads can respond to them. Even if it doesn’t change the opinion of the speaker, it can often temper their position a bit, not to mention when there’s an obvious cooler head in a discussion, people have a tendency to see the reason of that side as well.