Forum menu
Someone pinch me I just dreamt that I was in the 1950's
To be fair, being publically racist or committing racist harrassment has only been illegal for 26 years. That was practically yesterday!
The language in that link is an absolute disgrace. He deserves everything that he's got coming to him. It should be 'very black' not 'dead black'.Mrs Toast - MemberHe seems like a charmer (caution: Strong language and general unpleasantness)
Someone pinch me I just dreamt that I was in the 1950's
There's a difference between disapproving of something and thinking that people should be convicted of a criminal offense if they do it. You can't, and shouldn't, try to use the criminal justice system to make people think nice things like you do. At most, you should use it to stop them unduly interfering with others - a job that it's having a hard enough time doing as it is. Do you know how many prisons you'd need to build if you wanted to lock up every racist in the country?
Freedom of speech means that douchebags are going to say stupid, unpleasant, offensive things.
So not in favour of racism being illegal then kona?
No, but very much in favour with this:
“I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.”
It may be 'offensive', it was almost certainly meant to be 'offensive', but the listener / reader of those words actually has to choose to be offended. You could hurl every insult under the sun at me, but if I chose to just ignore you, I wouldn't be offended, no matter how hard you tried.
Racism is despicable, but the erosion of free speech is a whole lot more scary than that.
Being racist is not illegal per se discriminating on grounds of race is. many crimes have a racialy agravated verisin as well as the simple offence . The racialy agravated form usually carries and receives a higher penelty.
I'm with konabunny on this you educate racist beliefs and views and punish racist crimes .
Hmmmm, so perfectly acceptable for stadia full of football fans to chant racist abuse and make monkey noises everytime a black player gets the ball then?
1) that's not just an expression of racism, there's a public order and intimidation aspect to it that changes the picture
2) you're treating "acceptable" as meaning the same as "shouldn't be illegal" and vice versa
It's far better to have a stadium full of football fan's chanting Fabrice Muamba.
Was genuinely moving when the whole stadium began at the same time in Sunday's game. 40,000+ people united in wishing him well.
TBH, this sort of cross team support seems to be increasing, and it shows that football supporters aren't all thugs like the easy media steryotyping.
I've not seen anything like what Berm Bandit described above. It may happen, and I feel truly sorry for anyone subjected to it. But more often than not nowadays, this is a hyperthetical situation created to continue the unjust discrimination against working class fans by bigots who don't like football or its followers.
that's not just an expression of racism, there's a public order and intimidation aspect to it that changes the picture
Oh... I thought it was a about freedom of speech!
What I describe was commonplace in the UK until relatively recently, and still is in parts of Europe. Its all well and good for the likes of you and me to pontificate about "sticks and stones Etc etc", but its not us who are facing it on a daily basis. (I'm making that assumption for you, that you aren't exposed to racism on a daily basis, I know I'm certainly not). So sorry can't agree with you. This particualr twunt is getting precisely what he deserves, and there is no way that it is acceptable behaviour and it should be an affront to any reasonable society and it is therefore precisely what the legal system is there for.
Hmm , I'm sympathetic with konabunny and crank boy, but their logic is misguided. Its a toughy, when I made my comment above I had not realised he had made racist comments too, that makes his offence worse than just laughing at somones (assumed) demise.
No isnult to you kona bunny and crankboy, but here is why its wrong to allow racsist languge:-
We believe in freedom of speech even if we find that speech offensive. But there are limits where one persons speech leads to anothers harm, like incitement to murder - you could take the freedom of speech angle - but if you incite others to murder then thats bad right?
Or if you convince a mentally ill person to plant a bomb (like the famous exeter al qaeda bomber) .
Its the same with racism, allowing people to make racist comments can have the effect of inciting racist attacks, or discrimination, so its a special case of freedom of speech that history has shown us needs to be controlled..
The problem is that philosphy and legal limits are not always compatible..
Another example are those revelling in the fact that Thatcher will die soon, I find this disgusting no matter what they feel about her politics, she wasn't a murderer or an evil criminal, she didn't do anything illegal (that we know of), so its pretty awful what people are saying, but they should be allowed to say it as they are not inciting her death..
I had not realised he had made racist comments too
The clues in the thread title 🙄
My observations of STW are that some people write things (including in their thread title) that might not be true or correct. I do it myself, and am happy to acknowledge it.The clues in the thread title
I've also observed that people like to score petty points rather than enter into civilised discussion.
I'd like to thank you for obviously taking the time to read my post and entering into a discussion about the philisophical and logical points made
Racism is despicable, but the erosion of free speech is a whole lot more scary than that.
it depends I doubnt abyone would actually fight and die for the freedom to troll offensive racist shit whilst pissed on the internet.. it is more the freedom to be an absolute male hen than about free speech.
It is unwise to trot out this noble and fine principle[free speech] to uphold the rights of this individual as all rights have responsibilities
free speech will be curtailed over say child porn for example. I am not trying to get emmotive or suggest you would defend this it was just the strongest/ clearest example I could think of where we would all curtail free speech.
Free speeech needs protecting but the person also needs to say something worthwhile as well as be offensive. They failed that standard. For example dawkins may offend christians but he is making a point I fail to see what point the person was making tbh.
I refer you to slander and a variety of other areas where free speech is limited.
I would find the Thatcher thing disgusting if it was anyone else other than Thatcher. this is offensive to wish death apon her but the point would be to show how much hatred there still is for her and what she did.
I struggle to see a point to this persons comments tbh.
Nice post toys, both of them
bermbandit racist chanting at football is illegal see football offences act 1991 .
toys19 junkyard i'm sure you get that neither i nor konabuny are endorsing racisam but you cannot make holding an opinion nor simply expressing it illegal (except holocaust denial) . The law very neatly draws the line between holding and expressing views and acting to the detriment of others based on those views. In this case the twitter post linked above is clearly criminal .
crankboy, I assure you I didnt think you or konabunny were expressing racism or being rascist. I'm happy that we are having simply having a discussion about racism and freedom of speech without any finger pointing or any of that childish nonsense. 🙂
bermbandit racist chanting at football is illegal see football offences act 1991
Yep I know. So if what this twunt did shouldn't be illegal then surely that shouldn't be illegal either by the same token, being the overall point.
I'd like to thank you for obviously taking the time to read my post and entering into a discussion about the philisophical and logical points made
Bad day? 😕
I see your point but still think this guy falls foul by being so abusive. He can hold opinions obviously no problem and he can broadcast his opinions in a none abusive way, distasteful as they maybe but again ok*, spouting dodgy views [i]in an overtly abusive way[/i] is going to end in a knuckle rapping scenario shirley?but you cannot make holding an opinion nor simply expressing it illegal
*with 1 or 2 exceptions already mentioned
Edit and I'm another who doesn't get the "nation in grief" thing but as someone up there ^ said it seems to be about collective emotion, everyone feeling the same at the same time, which I guess is absolutely intrinsic in going to football matches anyway.
I refer you to slander and a variety of other areas where free speech is limited.
You're addressing a suggestion that hasn't been made - that speech is not, and should not, be limited in any way.
Toys - meh. Racist speech -could- lead to an incitement to violence? That's a low bar for prosecution. You not even talking about -actual- incitement to violence.
I can't believe that you'd be happy for the cops to go around arresting people for talking racist nonsense. If you remember, the Met is having a hard time with the whole "must not arbitrarily detain and beat protesters" concept. You should also look into the ethnicities of the people who get charged with racial offenses and who reports racial offenses in the UK - clue: it often ain't the people you would think need much protection.
How many months should someone who says "they all look the same to me" get? How about "it's a scientific fact that they are lazier"?
Why shouldn't sexism be a criminal offense? There is far more gendered violence in the UK (and world) than racial violence.
there is no way that it is acceptable behaviour and it should be an affront to any reasonable society and it is therefore precisely what the legal system is there for.
The law isn't there to educate people on "acceptable" behavior in polite society. Prison is not a finishing school.
BB racist chanting is the public intimidation of an individual so at the very least they can't do their job and at the higher end could well incite serious public order offences , a good reason fot it to be illegal.
In twiter world making bad taste jokes and expressing distasteful opinions should be legal but disaproved of . Inciting violence or fear of violence or setting out to cause gratuitous harrasment alarm or distress should be illegal .
The question is how and where do you draw the line , "Crap! Robin Hood airport is closed. You've got a week and a bit to get your shit together otherwise I'm blowing the airport sky high!!"
apparently is on the wrong side of that line , which i disagree with as is the Muamba tweet , as were the facebook riot posts which i think clearly were out of order.
CB: Yep, but you see my point. Its about a line in the sand somewhere. Regarding the law, its always going to be about reflecting societies values, so personally I'm pretty comfortable with no overt racism being one of those. Obviously it isn't possible to stop every last little thing, but it does make a statement about whats acceptable and what isn't.
In a country where law is made in the interests of those who make it and a society where many people are casually racist, you're saying the criminal law ought to be about what society's values ought to be.
Edit: sorry, I don't want to personalize this or turn it not some sort of weird thread stalk but I can't help noticing you're on the other thread suggesting that all Catholics are paedo sympathisers. If the law were passed to make any expression of racism a criminal offense, as you seem to be suggesting would be desirable, how would statements like yours be handled?
Yep to be honest to stand quietly by and continue to support an organisation which is so clearly morally bankrupt does in my view push you across into the realms of at the very least being culpable in the commission of paedophilia. Not sure about you, but if I were a Catholic, I'd be screaming from the roof tops for action to be taken, anything less really isn't commensurate with the belief system I'd be subscribing to.
[url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tyne-17462619 ]....hurrah![/url]
Well, Catholics aren't a 'race' so I reckon he'd be just dandy.konabunny - Member
...you're on the other thread suggesting that all Catholics are paedo sympathisers. If the law were passed to make any expression of racism a criminal offense, as you seem to be suggesting would be desirable, how would statements like yours be handled?
I was assuming that any law would be Written in similar terms to the current racially aggravated public order laws n the uk which treat religiously motivated behaviour more or less in the same way as racially motivated behavior. Sorry if that wasn't clear...
I'm also surprised to hear someone who is so keen to use courts and prison to suppress what they think is socially unacceptable and offensive behavior would espouse such abrasive and offensive views.
espouse such abrasive and offensive views
LOL: So pretending that [url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-17453849 ]this[/url] is acceptable and isolated isn't abrasive or offensive?
Of course it's wrong to be an apologist for that kind of conduct (let alone to do it). But do you think it should be illegal to be a Catholic because you think they are all paedo sympathisers and that's unacceptable and offensive to you - is that what you're saying?
Nope, what I'm saying is being a member of that organisation and standing by idley and accepting that that sort of behaviour goes on makes you culpable in the commission of a crime IMHO. Whether that should or shouldn't be illegal is an entirely seperate conversation. I am however quite prepared to stand by that considered view and defend it wherever I might have to, unlike the little scumbag who this thread is about. Who, once he realised what he had done, wasn't prepared to defend his viewpoint and instead tried to weasel out of accepting responsibility.
Actually not sure what its got to do with this thread, but as you wanted to bring it up I'm happy to accomodate you.
56 days!! Result IMHO
Jail for that, and 100hrs community service for killing a cyclist. Some justice 😥 🙄
what woody said
Drunk nob is a drunk nob SHOCKA
did anyone else laugh when they heard that the little weirdo cried when the sentence was handed down..?
I'd imagine there will be a lot more crying once he arrives at prison. Aren't the countries ethnic minorities somewhat over-represented in the prison population? I'm sure they're all busy preparing the welcoming party
Jail for that, and 100hrs community service for killing a cyclist. Some justice
Quite. Sending this racist idiot to prison is an expensive and pointless failure of imagination.
Sending this racist idiot to prison is an expensive and pointless failure of imagination
I reckon there would have been about 6 million jews, 2 million Poles, & 250,000 gypsies who would have warmly welcomed a similar lack of imagination in the Weimar republic, and that is the point. If we've learnt nothing else from the 20th Century surely to God zero tolerance of racism has to be on the list??
I spot a Goodwins Law slipping under the radar there.
To be honest, just because the person has a nasty viewpoint, I don't see why essentially, namecalling someone who won't see or care about it, is worth 56 days in prison, when lowlife who steal my cars/bikes don't even get a trivial investigation, even when theres plenty of evidence.
When did a "thought crime" become more important than a physical crime? Someone steals my car, I can't get to work. Someone calls me names, I can walk away.
Given that to an extent, rascism is hardwired into us, and it's only civilisation and education that leads us to overcome basic beliefs, why has "race/religion hate crime" become so topically important just now, when we still can't get basic rights and wrongs addressed on an everyday level?
Rascism is nasty, but is it really "imprisonable?! Should non violent people who simply believe something different to what we would like, really be sent to jail, at the expense of investigating genuine "criminals who harm?"
We already have a thread about a car incident, implying ethnic origin is significant, and it is true that certain cultures are grossly over represented in this sort of crime. So at what point does saying this become "rascist" and at what point are we all reporting that poster to the police?
Rascism is such a grey area (it's not black and white, honestly), I am very uneasy in seeing courts intrude into "social" areas of life, when they should be mroe concerned over rather more significant criminal issues.
Well said.
I was only half aware of this till I saw the trial results today.
Sure, we should have a zero tolerance policy towards racially motivated hate crimes. But I can't help but think that the sentencing is a little disparate to the crime in this case.
As, uh, unspellable68 above says, people who premeditatedly commit crimes with long-reaching consequences routinely get a slap on the wrist and called a naughty boy, now we've suddenly got someone sent down for essentially "calling someone names and being rather unpleasant." If we jailed everyone who called people names, there'd be a measurable attendance drop in the terraces.
And yeah, I know it's about racism, and I agree that it's unacceptable behaviour. But when this idiot spouts off about someone being dead and being black, and it's the 'black' bit that gets him locked up, I can't help but wonder whether we've got our priorities straight.
To be honest, just because the person has a nasty viewpoint, I don't see why essentially, namecalling someone who won't see or care about it, is worth 56 days in prison,
he did more than name call and how on earth do you know whether he will or will not see it or care about it? You may as well defend trolling dead folk remeberance sites as that is ok as they wont see it or care.
when lowlife who steal my cars/bikes don't even get a trivial investigation, even when theres plenty of evidence.
Important issue but it is not one or the other is it.
When did a "thought crime" become more important than a physical crime?
I can think what i want but i am typing this on the internet where people can read it so it is no longer a thought but an action. if i was to call for you to murder someone then I would be in trouble but if I just think it I am fine.
Someone steals my car, I can't get to work. Someone calls me names, I can walk away.
So it is worse to have you car stolen than being daily abused for being gay or black ? Have you got some analysis of victim reactions to back this up or are you just saying what you think?
Given that to an extent, rascism is hardwired into us,
no it is not
and it's only civilisation and education that leads us to overcome basic beliefs
not sure what you mean
, why has "race/religion hate crime" become so topically important just now, when we still can't get basic rights and wrongs addressed on an everyday level?
is race /religion hatred not an example of our failure to get basic rights and wrong addressed? why should we turn a blind eye to this
Rascism is nasty, but is it really "imprisonable?!
It is and he has just been imprisoned for it apparently.
Should non violent people who simply believe something different to what we would like, really be sent to jail, at the expense of investigating genuine "criminals who harm?"
again it is not an either or is it. This is just emotive tosh IMHO [ though i support your right to write it 😉 ] We could do both couldn't we
Rascism is such a grey area (it's not black and white, honestly), I am very uneasy in seeing courts intrude into "social" areas of life, when they should be mroe concerned over rather more significant criminal issues.
I am not sure in what sense being abusive to people is a social issue tbh. Why not get drunk wander the streets and hurl abuse at people and let me know what happens when the police turn up
Just because he did his on the internet i dont see why we should ignore it.
Why not get drunk wander the streets and hurl abuse at people and let me know what happens when the police turn up
Normally you'd get told to go home and sleep it off, if the police 'reality TV' shows are anything to go by.
aye but they dont film in east lancs do they 😉
Heh.
TBH, a lot of them do. It's a prime source of scrotes.
Guy sounds like he's childish moron to me, prison is massively OTT.
I'm guessing the seriousness of the punishment is due to
- 1. Its related to football, which is trying hard to rid itself or racism
- 2. Its on twitter, which for some reason means everythings taken a lot more seriously than on Youtube, sickipedia or any of the hundreds of other sites where similar stuff is said (please note, i'm not trying to justify it as being "okay because everyone does it" by saying this, just wondering why twitter is being taken so seriously
just wondering why twitter is being taken so seriously
Probably because of a much ignored aspect of criminal law. Someone has to make a complaint and follow it through. By all accounts Police forces UK wide received complaints and therefore were able to do something about it.
Regarding not locking anyone else up. Am I the only person who is aware that the UK's prisons are full to bursting? Not really supporting the suggestion that no one else ever gets locked up is it?
Am I the only person who is aware that the UK's prisons are full to bursting?
No, but apparently you're the only one who thinks the implication is that more people should be imprisoned for opinion crime.