[gewa]

As a German I have to emphasize that this has no support at all in Germany. The uproar was huge today and its seen as a misuse of power by the politician. Especially as he is not acting as a politician but as representative of the public office of interior. The search warrant needs to be issued by a judge and I'm sure there will be formal investigations how this happened. I would not be surprised if he will be forced to resign. There are also elections happening and misuse of power is seen very badly throughout the people.

[aerosmile]

It's still a fact that in Germany you have to be careful how you express yourself. It was a total shock to me to arrive in the States and hear my cab driver unload on the US President at the time. He really wasn't choosing his words very carefully, to the point that I had to wonder if this was some kind of a test by the INS. I still chuckle today about how my views have changed since then, and how much more comfortable I am today with criticizing people, especially those in power.

[barbazoo]

> It's still a fact that in Germany you have to be careful how you express yourself.

Is that a fact? That's news to me. You might not hear as much "unloading" in Germany simply because it's not yet as polarized as it is in the US but certainly there wouldn't be any repercussions as far as I'm aware. What exactly are you talking about?

[dzhiurgis]

I think defamation, slander or libel laws are basically non-existent in US.

[jcrites]

They exist but primarily protect private people. If the court determines that you are a “public figure” (I forget the legal term; IANAL) — such as CEOs of publicly traded companies, or politicians, etc. — then the bar for winning a case for defamation goes up significantly.

Furthermore speech that is essentially opinion or critique is a defense against defamation that can cause the case to be dismissed before trial. 1st Amendment protections from the US Constitution.

If you’re careful to word what you’re saying as a statement of your opinion rather than an assertion of fact, then a defendant has little chance at winning a defamation lawsuit from what I understand.

Lastly, if what you’re saying is factually true then that offers an absolute defense against a defamation lawsuit; you would need to be able to prove that however.

There are some country-wide precedents that SCOTUS has ruled on; otherwise laws are set by individual states from what I understand.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_defamation_law

[disgu]

People get sentenced for insulting police all the time. What are you talking about?

[jcrites]

Can you give an example? I’ve never heard of such a case. You might be thinking of scenarios where people are arrested and prosecuted for resisting arrest, making threats against police officer, or crimes of that nature.

There will be limits of what you can say to police before you also run afoul of laws against public nuisance. Just as you would not want a random person to shout epithets and slurs at you and follow you down the sidewalk talking trash at you, which may be a misdemeanor crime in some jurisdictions (like disturbing the peace), the same is likely true for police if you were to interact with them in that way.

I cannot imagine anyone being prosecuted for publishing criticism about the performance/behavior of individual officers during a police encounter after the fact, or publishing criticism of the police department in their city generally.

While interacting with police, if you are being detained, beyond providing any information you are required to provide by law, which differs by state and circumstance (such as if driving a motor vehicle) - know your rights and obligations - it is wise to say “I invoke my fifth amendment right to remain silent” in response to any questions; as a suspect there are only downsides to having a conversation with police as anything you say can be used against you in court. During an interaction with police is not a wise time for criticism of police in general, the department in particular, or the specific officers at the scene.

[rPlayer6554]

Source please?

[kevin_thibedeau]

Until recently you couldn't insult any head of state in Germany and still can't insult the German leader.

[MagnumOpus]

You still are not allowed to insult not just the German Leader (which Germany hasn't had in 84 years), but anyone at all.

Insults are a misdemeanor crime and you can and will be fined several thousand dollars for calling your local cop an asshole or whoreson, for instance. (Which is better than the US where you will likely get molested, possibly arrested, and might get shot for the unwritten crime of 'contempt of cop'.)

[majewsky]

Until someone did and everyone immediately realized how stupid this law is, and then the law was repealed.

[slightwinder]

> Is that a fact? That's news to me.

Yes, it is. Insults and defamation are pretty common law-problems in Germany, because of which most people are rather careful in what they say about specific people. Basically, if they have power or money, don't trigger them, because the one paying will likely be you at the end. Though, Online this again a bit different, as many people have not much awareness about legal situation there, and law enforcement was a bit lax. This changed with new laws recently.

[aerosmile]

Elsewhere in this thread you will find multiple references to a 150-year old law in Germany that explicitly protects "people's personal honor."

[HotHotLava]

A while ago a Berlin court decided that online posts saying "Drecksfotze"/"Schlampe"/"Knatter sie doch mal einer so richtig durch, bis sie wieder normal wird." (filthy cunt/bitch/someone fuck her hard until she becomes normal again) are still below the threshold that top politicians have to endure before they can sue for insult, so the ability to "unload" on top politicians doesn't seem to be in any danger in Germany.

Although this ruling was widely criticized, because there is some societal understanding that politicians are also humans who need some level of protection, and that unrestricted hate speech always has the potential to transform into physical violence sooner or later.

[kerng]

I'm not German, but I have noticed quite the opposite just yesterday actually:

Some non-german person posted a picture of Angela Merkel and highlighted how incredible she is and humble and all the good work she did and how she should be an example for their own (the posters) country and other politicians in the world.

The result: Lots of people agreed with the overall sentiment and applauded her achievements... well, besides German LinkedIn users, many went full "Reddit" (on LinkedIn)... Many "not nice words were written" by people using their professional profile - it was surreal to see.

[nyx-aiur]

Sorry but if you hear no one ranting about the german government you are just not going out a lot.

[nautilius]

‘Be careful how to express yourself’ is needlessly conspicuous. Never in my life have I seen anyone hold back to criticize politicians or people in power, most certainly not in some cab.

As I wrote somewhere else, if you think the first amendment gives you the possibility to say what you want to whom you want, without any consequences, go to the nearest policeman, start insulting him and his family. I am sure there will not be a problem, and he’ll sit through it for hours, if you just make clear you’re exercising your first amendment rights.

[y4mi]

When is the last time you were in Germany? Was it perhaps in the 80th around Berlin?

The only reason why it's rarely a topic is because people just don't care enough to start talking about it.

[foepys]

To expand on this: the politician is defending himself by saying that it is standard procedure for a case like this but I can assure you it is not.

The police is not taking insults seriously, especially not being called "dick". On Twitter some semi-famous people stated that they routinely go to the police because people threaten their lives but the police won't do anything.

One interesting fact that the politician is not mentioning is that he as a Senator des Innern (senator of interior of the state of Hamburg) can actually order the attorney general of their state to investigate something. This has been criticized by law experts multiple times in the past because it makes the judiciary branch not strictly independent from the legislative branch in Germany. No attorney general will deny a request of their boss and will instead push hard for a judge (who are independent) to sign a search warrant. Plus the Landgericht Hamburg (lowest court in Hamburg) has made some very, very questionable rulings in the past related to technology.

Everything here has written abuse of power all over it. It's a systemic failure that is being exploited and Andy Grote tries way too hard to deny it.

[kybernetyk]

As a German I have to say: this happens all the time. By this I mean police raids for minuscule infractions.

[thunfischbrot]

While it does happen, "all the time" seems to suggest it happens every week. I believe instead police raids on private homes for e.g. smaller drug related charges happen occasionally. This is the first case I hear of which is such an abuse of power about an insult online.

[disgu]

A spokesperson for the Hamburg Police said that they've carried out a ~50 raids of homes of people for insults/hate speech. And that's just one city. So more than once a week in a single city.

Source: https://www.heise.de/news/Du-bist-so-1-Pimmel-Hamburgs-Innen...

[slightwinder]

This claim is disputed. And they are talking about hate speech, which usually is significant stronger than this case.

[disgu]

They're talking about both and what's your source for the fact that this claim is disputed? Who would even have such data if not the police. Please link your source as well as I've linked mine, which supports what I said.

[slightwinder]

Your own link is saying it's disputed. And the Police claiming something, doesn't mean it must be true. Especially if we are talking about someone from public relation, which are notorious for 'miscommunication happening' with such details.

[AmericanChopper]

> I'm sure there will be formal investigations how this happened

It happened because you allowed your politicians to pass laws that regulate allowable speech, as many other countries have done. I’m sure it was controversial, but most likely also had a considerable amount of support from people who didn’t like the kinds of speech they thought this would criminalize. A distinctive feature of this case is that it has created a public controversy, but if this has happened you can be sure many people have already fallen victim to this injustice without drawing any sympathy from the general public. Even if there is no prosecution, the police have already succeeded in intimidating the victim, their children, and disrupting their life. This type of speech criminalization will always lead to this type of outcome. It is not a mistake, or an outlier, it is an unavoidable consequence of these policies.

[gewa]

It doesn't seem like you are very familiar with German politics or culture, but this is definitely an outlier. Freedom of speech is a central part of our constitution. Defamation is one of the very few ways and enforcement and interpretation is mostly restricted to defamation of policemen. This is the reason why this has resulted in an outcry as the proportionality does not respond to the interpretation how defamation is treated legally.

[disgu]

> restricted to defamation of policemen

This is 100% completely wrong. There's §185 and that applies to all citizens. That's the law, there's no such thing as Beamtenbeleidigung or other stuff that gets quotes often. We have to work on educating people that insulting the police is no different than insulting your neighbor. Such a law just doesn't exist and it never did.

[slightwinder]

> but this is definitely an outlier.

It's an extreme case, but not an outlier. Especially since new laws and regulations for online-activity became active recently.

[AmericanChopper]

I’m sure as a member of that culture, your opinions are opinions are not at all influenced by any number of different political, nationalistic or cultural biases. But from the perspective of an outsider, you have all of the same criminal statutes against speech that most other western democracies have been gradually implementing. The only thing that’s slightly different about Germany, is that you also have defamation laws that are more typical of 3rd world country, like say Thailand.

I’m sure the values of free speech are important to Germans, but much like in the UK or any number of other of places, those values haven’t been preserved in legislation, and you’ve let yourself slowly compromise them away over a number of decades.

[thunfischbrot]

You argue that the Germans have let the lawmakers erode the law of free speech over time. This does not make sense, since the laws and the system allowing for the abuse of power by this minister are very old. The fact that this could have been abused for the last 50 years and happened only now seems to strongly suggest that your argument does not hold true.

[AmericanChopper]

Whether this particular case would have been enforceable 50 years ago or not doesn’t undermine my point at all. Germany (like almost every other western democracy) has been slowly eroding freedom of expression liberties. However restrictive the country was 50 years ago, it’s more restrictive now, both as existing laws as applied to novel new speech suppression scenarios, and as new laws are created. As recently as 2017 (as far as I’m aware) Germany has been legislating new speech criminalizations (with the Network Enforcement Act), which was rather widely criticized for suppressing freedom of expression and the press.