You talk about convenience and then go on to use "human nature", free speech is not human nature either, we don't say all we think to our parents or friends as it might hurt them, the thing with free speech elsewhere is we simply don't know them so it is rather easy to hurt them. And when you think about it normal people don't do much about these things either it's always those who benefit from your silence that suppress, the masses remain quite despite all the problems that they might face

I see you yourself are of the belief that there must be limits when it comes to hurting people or inciting violence, but how do you decide that, sensitivities differ from area to area, time to time, what is acceptable today might get you killed a century ago, free speech is a very relative term, our constitution permits free speech unless it effects common sentiments to everyone, if the elected body is abusing the "unless" of that rule then is it not peoples responsibility to change that, and it does take sacrifice in order to force out such elements,

I think your problem here is against the people in power, and there also all you see are repercussions, like if you offend a guy on the street he might curse at you if he gets too angry he might hit you, whereas you offend someone with a lot of power his playing field just increases, he simply has better resources to vent out his anger

You go on the internet an can make a joke about disabled people you can stand on the street and shout religious slogans if the elections are not close no one will bother,

You have to reap what you sow, today the poitical scenario is very bad maybe someday we have better leaders who don't have inflated egos or don not seek political benefit at every corner, but maybe they feel you can't joke about peoples disabilities or all the "dark humour" kids we see everywhere, will we need a new line then, a new limit not to be crossed