[Closed] its official freedom of speech is dead, 1984 came a bit late....

[url= http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/racist-muamba-tweets ]ongoing for a while now[/url]

I've now read the tweets and personally think that prison was inappropriate, and a waste of time and money for all involved.

Community service would be much better. Not sure what options the judges have in terms of sentencing though.

This isn't an attack on freedom of speach.

When protesters are kettled, restrained and goaded it's an attack on the freedom of speech.
When media moguls and newspaper editors enjoy cosy relations and hold secret meetings with senior politicians and law enforcement officials it's an attack on the freedom of speech.
The Hutton enquiry and report was it's an attack on the freedom of speech.

This is just a racist idiot who got a stiff sentence.

Freedom of speech is not the issue. What he said was racist, and that is illegal. Light sentence if you ask me...

Freedom of speech is not the issue. What he said was racist, and that is illegal

BANGS HEAD ON WALL...

so now saying things the government does not like can get you put in prison

How do you work that out ? ......what's it got to do with the government ?

I'm pretty sure that every day a fair few people say all sorts of things which the government doesn't like, and yet they never seem to be prosecuted.

.

bash some granny's face in, get off Scott free

Are you sure about that ?.........it's a fact is it ?

Or are you maybe getting a tad hysterical ?

The case also had a little bit of media backing!! Down with the troll......

BTW jumpupanddown, why don't you exercise your [i]"freedom of speech"[/i] on here ? Make racist and offensive remarks and see what happens.

Just for research purposes of course.

Pretty deplorable but not prison worthy though IMHO.

If he'd have left the racial adjectives out he would just be another idiot who likes attention but because he included them in his tweets it shows he's obviously a racist with issues untold.

They should have given him community service to work with black people - this would be much more beneficial.

surely the best punishment for 'keyboard warrior crime' is a good shoeing and anonymity permanently withdrawn..?

Well maybe the head-banging might improve your ability to think properly mate, one can only hope.

If he'd have been drunk and spoken to people down the pub like that he would have ended up in hospital or worse. I think he got off very lightly!

anonymity permanently withdrawn..?

I think his using his real name makes it look like anonymity meant little to him anyway...

its official freedom of speech is dead

Might want to have a bit of a think about what you're saying there, being a racist **** in the public domain is not something I'd put under freedom of speech personally...

I do think prison is too severe though, someone recently pointed out that you often get less for death by dangerous driving…

Might want to have a bit of a think about what you're saying there, being a racist **** in the public domain is not something I'd put under freedom of speech personally...

id say it is, freedom of speak is saying things others don't like. IE the ability to say any thing with out fear of persecution by government.

Why would we send someone to prison for racism and not sexism? Or Homophobic comments, or ageism?

Was he convicted sharing a racist view, or inciting racial hatred? Are two things are perhaps different?

From the video from twitter it just looks like offensive and abusive racist comments, can't see any incitement to anything.

I bet I can find loads of offensive abusive sexist or homophobic stuff on twitter, and no one is going to jail for it.

Why not?

http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/YoungPeople/CrimeAndJustice/TypesOfCrime/DG_10027721

Being a racist **** has nothing to do with freedom of speech.

Cheers DezB, I'll definately refrain from abusing gay people on twitter now (Sexual Orientation is on the list of hate crimes) but looks like I can still say abusive things about women to women, because they are women, without any fear of punishment.

Being a racist **** has nothing to do with freedom of speech.

of course it does, it's just that we have placed limits on that freedom

Spot on Nick, its all a big response to the tragic story, if the same comments had been made about a Black child rappist the the outcome would not be the same, the same laws would have been broken however.

Seems to me like the Judge got carried away.

I only heard of this hate crime stuff because MrsDezB is a lecturer and they had to have training in how to spot/stop hate crimes in the college.
Bonkers.

Could Jim Davison have started a career in the 2000s? (yeah I know, he shouldn't have been able to start one in the 70s!)

of course it does, it's just that we have placed limits on that freedom

In the same way that we have put limits on equality

Freedom of speech doesn't mean you can go around saying what the hell you like without consequences.

Interesting discussion here.

the incitement element aside, how far can someone express racist views before it becomes illegal and how does this compare against other hate crimes? The BNP and EDL exist within the law, despite the fact they are clearly racist.

What this guy said is clearly vile to most people (including me), but even without the racist elements, it remains vile yet I suspect he would not have been punished under law.

[i]how far can someone express racist views before it becomes illegal[/i]

Until it is reported. (That's according to the wife's training)
Same with homophobic etc. views.

I do think prison is too severe though, someone recently pointed out that you often get less for death by dangerous driving…

It would on the face of it seem fairly severe, although 56 days is considerably less than the 4 years those two herberts got for attempting to use Facebook to "organise and orchestrate disorder" at the time of the rioting. However he didn't plead guilty to offensive behaviour, he pleaded guilty to inciting racial hatred.

Inciting racial hatred has been illegal in Britain since the 1960s, it is a law which is greatly ignored with disastrous consequences. Because the consequences of inciting racial hatred, in common with other hate crimes, can be, and often is, extreme violence - right up to murder.

In keeping with the majority of the population I believe that hate crime should be stamped out, or at least their occurrence minimised. Society can only benefit hugely from a reduction in hate crimes. So 56 days doesn't really seem like that much when attempting to emphasise the severity of the crime and how it won't be tolerated, in fact it seems rather lenient.

However the OP hasn't raised the severity of the sentence, jumpupanddown clearly believes that the lo-life in question has a legitimate right to incite racial hatred, claiming that his "freedom of speech" has been denied......which is a completely different ballgame altogether.

Out of interest apparently the maximum sentence for ths offence as taken from the CPS website is as follows

Offence
s.19 - publishing/distributing written material which is threatening/abusive/insulting with intent/likely to stir up racial hatred

Maximum Penalty
Crown Court - 7 years imprisonment
Magistrates' court - 6 months

So in light of that 56 days doesn't seem that bad to me.

I wonder if the sentence would have been the same with a reverse situation.
Say,for example,if a Muslim cleric had used racist language towards christian white people.

Wow this thread is really outing the terminally stupid.

I wonder if the sentence would have been the same with a reverse situation.
Say,for example,if a Muslim cleric had used racist language towards christian white people.

Probably more severe - 56 days is rather lenient.

And btw why would it be a "reverse situation" ? Is Fabrice Muamba a Muslim cleric ?

What do we think my chap who's up in court tomorrow for a similar thing should get, if convicted?

The complainer, who is Filipino, asked the accused not to park in front of his driveway, then after a brief argument, was told to 'fu k off back to India you black ___ (either bastard or c t, it's still disputed), before his son headbutted him.

As an aside, the defence to this was 'apparently he's not even from India, so it wasn't even racist'
What does that deserve, if anything?

i'd give him 10 out of 10 for the headbutt alone 🙂

and get it into yer heads ... there is No real Freedom in this country Or any other for that matter.

What do we think my chap who's up in court tomorrow for a similar thing should get, if convicted?

The complainer, who is Filipino, asked the accused not to park in front of his driveway, then after a brief argument, was told to 'fu k off back to India you black ___ (either bastard or c t, it's still disputed), before his son headbutted him.

As an aside, the defence to this was 'apparently he's not even from India, so it wasn't even racist'
What does that deserve, if anything?

I think that if its the magistrates, it will be passed to a higher court. Racial abuse that actually lead to violence should get a minimum of 2 years IMO.

What do you think he should get?

What does that deserve, if anything?

Well I guess it depends on your point of view. Either the defendant was merely exercising his hard won legitimate rights, which were defended at the Battle of Britain and on the beaches of Normandy, to be a vile racist lo-life. Or, he should understand in no uncertain terms that a civilised democratic society, in which everyone has the right to live free of fear, hate, and discrimination, will not tolerate that sort of behaviour.

Don't know to be honest.

id say it is, freedom of speak is saying things others don't like. IE the ability to say any thing with out fear of persecution by government.

Is this thread a cunning ploy to cast potential entrants in the new series of Life on Mars the Reality TV Show?

denying people the freedom to think or feel things which differ from how the majority think and feel, or from how those in power want people to think or feel is a bad thing imo. Check your history books or google freedom in north korea for the alternatives to freedom of speech .A huge number of people around the world throughout history have sacrificed their life so that others can enjoy the freedom to think and say what they like ! Ask yourself why , having lived without such freedom, they felt the need to do that ? I dont agree with what this guy said or how he thinks , but honestly believe he has a rite to both!

but honestly believe he has a rite to both

but can we assume that he doesn't present his thoughts in the interest of stimulating constructive debate, but with the intention of causing distress..?

So by your logic surely it's then society's right to administer a good hard slap..?

The only legal vehicle available for that slap being a few weeks in nick..
Perhaps liberal policies can only be administered effectively if society is also granted the freedom to police itself responsibly..?

Yunki :Politicians shout "Boo" "Rubbish" etc in the house of commons , the home of stimulating constructive debate , they do it to cause offence ! Do they need a good slap from . . . .Oh hang on i see your point !!!!!