Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

1929crash

Time To Stop Jailing People For Offensive Remarks

Recommended Posts

About two years ago I recall some idiot posted a disgusting comment after a footballer - a black footballer - had a heart attack on live telly.

I did not approve of what he said. However, I was even more appalled by the fact that he was jailed, thrown out of university and has probably got no future job prospects. The law as it relates to posting offensive remarks online is way over-balanced against free speech. And free speech by its nature offends. If I posted what i truly think of David Cameron and Nick Clegg I'm sure I would be sent down for life.

Anyway, here is another example of Plod misusing their powers to get easy publicity.

A 17-year-old girl has been arrested on suspicion of making a "grossly offensive" comment on Facebook after the sudden death of a boy in Swansea.

The girl from south Wales was questioned on Saturday before being released on police bail.

The teenage boy, whose body was found in woods near Hendrefoilan student village, has been named locally as Olchfa school pupil James Lock, 15.

His body was found on Thursday and his death is being treated as unexplained.

South Wales Police said they were not looking for anybody else in connection with the Facebook allegation.

In a statement, they added: "The public are reminded about their responsibilities to keep comments on social media within the law.

"Offensive posts can cause great distress and harm to those individuals and families who are targeted at very distressing times in their lives."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We're being set up for total enslavement. Already Red Ed has said he will make denying the army entry to pubs/clubs a crime like racial and religious laws. I expect in time, he will apply the same anti-free speech laws that prohibit negative talk about racial and religious matters to the army too. Dare to speak out against war, its prison for you.

You either have free speech, or you dont. There is no middle ground.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Back to the topic at hand, ive seen numerous stories like this where comments in the DM demand the agitators are treated as murderers! Disturbingly, they get plenty of green arrows.

Obviously we dont have free will anymore, if you must take your life it someone criticizes you.

I remember a little while back the totalitarians were demanding a chat site be shut down because

Turned out she was sending the messages to herself.

Im not trying to criticize suicidal people, but obviously they are in an unstable state of mind.Should the law really be set around the mentally unstable?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Locking them up is no answer, neither is society having complete tolerance for obnoxious ****s.

the path to hell is paved with good intentions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the path to hell is paved with good intentions.

I didn't say that I know what the solution is, but just as locking them up is unacceptable neither should it be expected for decent people to just have to put up with obnoxious morons whose idea of a good time is to put as much effort as possible into making people miserable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't say that I know what the solution is, but just as locking them up is unacceptable neither should it be expected for decent people to just have to put up with obnoxious morons whose idea of a good time is to put as much effort as possible into making people miserable.

clearly there is more than free speech at play where a person has died, and some ******* decides to spit on their grave in a public and offensive manner...this behaviour would start a fight in a pub..

So yes, the person is free to say it, but they are not free to be immoral...what should happen is the "community" should make it clear to this person to stop and shun them.

Im not sure where the Police should come in here..breach of the peace?....over the internet?

There is a clear common sense difference between making a point, that might offend some idiots sensibilities, and simply insulting and indecent behaviour. not sure how you can define the difference with a law...so the well intentioned law leads to stupid arrests carried out by jobsworths responding to the latest news item.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

clearly there is more than free speech at play where a person has died, and some ******* decides to spit on their grave in a public and offensive manner...this behaviour would start a fight in a pub..

So yes, the person is free to say it, but they are not free to be immoral...what should happen is the "community" should make it clear to this person to stop and shun them.

Im not sure where the Police should come in here..breach of the peace?....over the internet?

There is a clear common sense difference between making a point, that might offend some idiots sensibilities, and simply insulting and indecent behaviour. not sure how you can define the difference with a law...so the well intentioned law leads to stupid arrests carried out by jobsworths responding to the latest news item.

What can the "community" do though to someone who doesn't give a damn, particularly if it's not their community that they're winding up?

I totally agree that bringing the law in doesn't work and has all the hallmarks of "here come the thought police", but unfortunately no alternatives seem to either. We've got people who'll do whatever the hell they feel like unless they're physically stopped from doing so (or the threat of it is great enough). The cases where any reasonable response will simply be ignored and any other response is heavy-handed and questionable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What can the "community" do though to someone who doesn't give a damn, particularly if it's not their community that they're winding up?

I totally agree that bringing the law in doesn't work and has all the hallmarks of "here come the thought police", but unfortunately no alternatives seem to either. We've got people who'll do whatever the hell they feel like unless they're physically stopped from doing so (or the threat of it is great enough). The cases where any reasonable response will simply be ignored and any other response is heavy-handed and questionable.

nutters exist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What can the "community" do though to someone who doesn't give a damn, particularly if it's not their community that they're winding up?

I totally agree that bringing the law in doesn't work and has all the hallmarks of "here come the thought police", but unfortunately no alternatives seem to either. We've got people who'll do whatever the hell they feel like unless they're physically stopped from doing so (or the threat of it is great enough). The cases where any reasonable response will simply be ignored and any other response is heavy-handed and questionable.

The community can do something about people who annoy and harass people. there are ASBOs (or whatever has replaced them)and criminal convictions available for such things.

what I am concerned about is someone saying something - it only has to be once - on facebook or Twitter - and without possibility of recall is arrested. I don't think the student who welcomed the footballer's heart attack was being anything other than stupid when he posted what he did. It was done once and his career is wrecked.

The logical conclusion is next time a comedian makes a joke in poor taste, he is going to be arrested. Comics only get arrested under dictatorships.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And the choice for them appears to be to leave them to it or over-reaction. Surely there must be something better?

we put nutters in prison..they come out, they are still nutters.

Best thing is for everyone to "unfriend" the offender...and tell them why...they should get the message...unless, they are a nutter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

nutters exist.

they do.

Don't know what the answer is. Ringing the police when someone calls you names in the street isn't on. Should I ring their landlord and complain about their behaviour?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I realise some people could be offended, by some of my remarks, which is why I label myself as a "mild irritant". :blink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Locking them up is no answer, neither is society having complete tolerance for obnoxious ****s.

Sadly the best way is to wait...until they evolve. :unsure:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I realise some people could be offended, by some of my remarks, which is why I label myself as a "mild irritant". :blink:

Is that the skull and crossbones?

Or the black cross?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I realise some people could be offended, by some of my remarks, which is why I label myself as a "mild irritant". :blink:

****** off sooty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

****** off sooty

"Romani eunt domum", or to put it another way "Romans go the house"! :huh:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone got an opinion on all this collective grieving? Mass outpourings of grief in the media for celebrities etc that people didnt even know personally? I think its this that draws some people to go the oposite way and post inflamatory / troll posts.

think about it one wouldnt exist without the other in social media land

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We're being set up for total enslavement. Already Red Ed has said he will make denying the army entry to pubs/clubs a crime like racial and religious laws. I expect in time, he will apply the same anti-free speech laws that prohibit negative talk about racial and religious matters to the army too. Dare to speak out against war, its prison for you.

You either have free speech, or you dont. There is no middle ground.

red ed is on the wrong side of this argument.

winston churchill warned us about his type 70 odd years ago, and ed is absolute stereotype.

he doesn't belong here.end of.

on a concialiatory note, churchill also said we would be getting thoroughly pissed with them(and I'm inclined to agree)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It simply needs to be made clear to people that they do not have a right to not be offended.

You're offended? So what? Get over yourself.

As old holborn has mentioned 'Offense is taken, not given'

I dont know what will offend you, you dont know what will offend me. No law can thus be made as there is no provable intent.

Unfortunately we have Labour MPs who actively 'take offense' on behalf of others, Tory ones who have done nothing to restore basic freedoms.

Its a murky area, one illustrated by the polices numerous attempts at hassling Old Holborn. I dont think they know what they were supposed to be arresting him for, other than anonymous people online claiming to be offended by him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Locking them up is no answer, neither is society having complete tolerance for obnoxious ****s.

Thats why libertarianism is so perfect. Dont like racists/religious loons/politics. You can move to a private community where such talk is banned. Dont like blacks/gays/germans. You can move to a private community where gay black germans are banned. Tired of that, you move out. What is it our politicians find so disagreeable about that?

Just look at how the democrat party changed between 1940-60. They went from full on forced segregation to full on forced integration.

Its clear they dont really care about the issue of race itself other than as a means of control. They dont care if we have forced segregation or forced integration....just so long as it is forced.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   217 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.