Hate speech is an overt expression of prejudice against a vulnerable group based on gender, sexual orientation, race, disability, etc. Characterizing a crime with consistency, clarity and certainty has always been a subjective practice and only the court should be designed to do it. Limiting hate speech has become a way to address issues of incitement or intimidation. There is no consistency in hate speech laws across the world. Britain bans speech that is hurtful, irritating and incapacitating. Denmark and Canada blacklist irritating and demeaning speech. India and Israel blacklist comments that are insulting and incite racial and religious contempt. In the Netherlands, it is a crime to deliberately attack a particular social issue. Australia prohibits speech that aggravates, mortifies or panics individuals or social occasions. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get the original essay Although we should condemn hate speech, it should not be used as a means to deprive people of the opportunity to express themselves freely. JSMill has views on freedom of speech and states that no matter how immoral a doctrine may be, there should be freedom to discuss and profess that doctrine and the only case in which a person can be denied the power to expropriating one's power of speech is when one's speech is intended. harm others. Every society should have the right to freedom of expression. Free speech helps us consider the truth when we have a false belief about something and the opinion on that issue is true. Additionally, free speech helps us grasp a true belief regarding an issue in question, when the view of that issue is not true. The only way to believe that something may be true or false is to discuss it. Therefore, excluding this discussion is preventing people from believing the truth. a discussion helps us take into account the points of view of others and it helps us to adjust our confidence regarding the points of view we hold. Freedom of expression is one of the many rights enjoyed by a democratic nation. It should not be restricted in extreme and compelling circumstances. Furthermore, criminalizing offensive and objectionable opinions is a slippery path to censorship and censorship of the door to open debate. This risks preventing the real solution to hate speech, namely mass education and open debate. Therefore, hate speech must be challenged and protested, not criminalized. Harmful speech must be restricted. Harm occurs when we are hurt, when our well-being is disrupted, offended, and when our opinions are significantly limited. Any speech that may lead to a reduction in self-esteem, increase the risk of discrimination and violence, or thwart the interests of others may be considered hate speech. But then many things can lead to loss of self-esteem and therefore blaming the speech for loss of self-esteem can be subjective and biased. Additionally, if someone practices discrimination and violence, we must punish those acts. Hate speech is an act of expressing hatred and mere hateful opinions should not be criminalized. The most effective way to combat hate speech is to raise awareness about the effects of hate speech..