Page 12 of 16 FirstFirst ...
2
10
11
12
13
14
... LastLast
  1. #221
    Epic! Skavau's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    England, United Kingdom
    Posts
    1,645
    Quote Originally Posted by Wildtree View Post
    you are in the UK...
    Here's the applicable parts of Freedom of Speech for your country:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom...United_Kingdom

    I want to add one more thing... As European, I am also a very passionate Football fan. But I also happen to be a passionate opponent of everything related to Ultras and the kind of consorts who are counterproductive, and are more interested in violence in and around the stadiums (keyword 3rd half). Those people need to be banned from the stadiums and let the true fans enjoy their games and support their teams.
    Rivalry against the other teams fans is perfectly fine. Fighting them used to be done by singing them into the ground. Outperforming them in my own fan curve.
    Chanting down on the other teams players is one thing. No problem boo'ing and what not.. But personal insult outside the stadium is crossing a line.
    And more than often it's also hypocrisy at it's purest form.
    Artificial hate against players, while they wearing their clubs jersey.. The moment they put on the national jersey those who hated them so much, become passionate fans.... Bullshit.. outright bullshit...
    Violence in Football got out of line.. Started decades ago.. The UK could sing a song about it..... How was it when the entire UK was banned from all UEFA events?
    Thanks to Hools and the lack of proper law enforcement... Those days are over, law enforcement works today. I admit, sometimes it's too much enforcement. But it only boils down to a bunch of idiots ruining it for everyone else. If you got a problem with that, and you are somewhat sane, then go after those idiots who act so far beyond everything tolerable that the freedom given from the law gets cut down, and the law as it existed for the longest time gets enforced.
    Do you think all insult should be illegal?

  2. #222
    Quote Originally Posted by Skavau View Post
    If we're taking though, as many do the claim that interaction on the internet is always identical or to be considered identical with real life interaction would racially abusing someone on a UK website be effectively identical to abusing them in a UK city? Would it not be as if they actually were in the UK?
    I don't agree with that claim to begin with. However if we were taking it as that I believe it would be comparable to sending malicious communications (something that is covered in an Act). That's assuming that countries can claim sovereignty of areas of the Internet and apply their laws to everyone that 'visits'.

  3. #223
    Moderator aiko-chan's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Orem, UT
    Posts
    5,558
    There is a difference between being racist and making an emotional comment in a fit of anger.
    Getting arrested for saying something is just...wrong. Being arrested for actually doing something to someone else is where punishment should take place. This is basically punishing someone for getting angry...

  4. #224
    Mechagnome NeonX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    677
    Perhaps a little bit harsh but in general I don't have an issue with people being punished for deliberately being extremely offensive in a none-discrete manner.

    The UK has had this law implemented for many many years now and to my understanding the majority of the EU countries have similar legislation, so nothing new really. I don't think as it stands the law needs to be changed because at best they get a slap on the wrist or a small jail sentence.

  5. #225
    Titan Wildtree's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Iowa - Franconia
    Posts
    14,295
    Quote Originally Posted by Skavau View Post
    Do you think all insult should be illegal?
    Every insult IS illegal, and in my first post I already expressed that this is perfectly fine, and delivered a reason why it is fine.
    Insult has only 2 differences.... In some cases it's a civil matter, in some cases it's a federal matter. Not sure about the UK now, but if I call you an asshole in Germany, that's subject to civil court.. If I call a cop an asshole that's subject to federal matter.
    But let me stick to the example of asshole.. It's an insult.. it likely won't trigger any lawful action. Likely...
    Yet, the law says it's illegal, it's defined an insult. Now why is it illegal in the first place? Because, apparently people - at some point - resorted to insult so much, that legislation was created to protect society from insult. So, now the key question at hand is: Whom to blame?
    Shall we blame the govt, legislation for creating the law and with that. shall we blame the law?
    Shall we blame the executive branch whose job it is to enforce the law?
    Or...... Shall we blame the people, for acting in ways that laws had to be created in the first place?
    I, for my part, I blame the people. Why?
    Because I am an extremely passionate freedom lover. I love my freedom... And I am around long enough, that I have learned, the law as it's written down most always only gets executed when people start to disregard and abuse it.. Only then the law gets enforced rather radical.
    No modern state, no modern country loves to execute laws. That creates bureaucracy, that creates expenses. Naturally every country lets the law slide, and only resorts to it on occasion, when it's really needed. Every modern country counts on it's citizen to know and abide by the laws. Which is the case for the vast majority of the people in their societies. Common sense.... As I said in my first posting.... Common sense dictates, that I do very well know insult is illegal, and every time I resort to it, I have to live with possible consequences.
    Hell, I cannot insult you or anyone here either... I know, if I do, I may get an infraction, and may end in getting a ban.
    Is that so different to the laws? I don't think so. The rules here only reflect and are influenced by the laws, and common sense....
    Last edited by Wildtree; 2013-02-01 at 04:56 PM.

  6. #226
    Scarab Lord GreatOak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Chicago, USA
    Posts
    4,786
    It's understandable to fire someone for something like that, but it's downright unacceptable for the state to arrest you for this. I'm not speaking from a position of "privilege" either having a minority ethnicity and orientation.

    Disgusting.

    ---------- Post added 2013-02-01 at 04:59 PM ----------

    Xyllt, 10000, Social Worker, transracial, posthuman genderghostly mythical creature
    Prounouns: zim/ zip /zhang
    **Proud Non-Euclidean Non-Tertiary Fictionkin**

  7. #227
    If they can arrest you for one type of speech what stops them from arresting you for any type of speech they don't like?

  8. #228
    Epic! Skavau's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    England, United Kingdom
    Posts
    1,645
    Quote Originally Posted by Wildtree View Post
    Every insult IS illegal, and in my first post I already expressed that this is perfectly fine, and delivered a reason why it is fine.
    Really?

    So according to you it'd be entirely appropriate and desirable for people to receive state sanctions for just calling someone else an idiot, no matter what the context.

    Scary.

    Insult has only 2 differences.... In some cases it's a civil matter, in some cases it's a federal matter. Not sure about the UK now, but if I call you an asshole in Germany, that's subject to civil court.. If I call a cop an asshole that's subject to federal matter.
    But let me stick to the example of asshole.. It's an insult.. it likely won't trigger any lawful action. Likely...
    Yet, the law says it's illegal, it's defined an insult. Now why is it illegal in the first place? Because, apparently people - at some point - resorted to insult so much, that legislation was created to protect society from insult. So, now the key question at hand is: Whom to blame?
    Shall we blame the govt, legislation for creating the law and with that. shall we blame the law?
    Shall we blame the executive branch whose job it is to enforce the law?
    Or...... Shall we blame the people, for acting in ways that laws had to be created in the first place?
    I, for my part, I blame the people. Why?
    This is akin to saying that because people aren't perfect and will occasionally amongst themselves cause strife and discord that they deserve draconian legislation against them.

    Because I am an extremely passionate freedom lover. I love my freedom...
    You love your freedom but think insulting others should be against the law.

    What.

    And I am around long enough, that I have learned, the law as it's written down most always only gets executed when people start to disregard and abuse it.. Only then the law gets enforced rather radical.
    No modern state, no modern country loves to execute laws. That creates bureaucracy, that creates expenses. Naturally every country lets the law slide, and only resorts to it on occasion, when it's really needed. Every modern country counts on it's citizen to know and abide by the laws. Which is the case for the vast majority of the people in their societies. Common sense.... As I said in my first posting.... Common sense dictates, that I do very well know insult is illegal, and every time I resort to it, I have to live with possible consequences.
    Hell, I cannot insult you or anyone here either... I know, if I do, I may get an infraction, and may end in getting a ban.
    Is that so different to the laws? I don't think so. The rules here only reflect and are influenced by the laws, and common sense....
    This is a private website. The only sanctions you will receive is that of being banned. They can run their show how they like, however absurd or justified they may be perceived for it. Completely different in both cause and effect of legal sanctions.

    ---------- Post added 2013-02-01 at 05:01 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by GreatOak View Post
    It's understandable to fire someone for something like that, but it's downright unacceptable for the state to arrest you for this. I'm not speaking from a position of "privilege" either having a minority ethnicity and orientation.

    Disgusting.

    ---------- Post added 2013-02-01 at 04:59 PM ----------

    I fucking love that video. Will never get tired of it.

  9. #229
    Legendary! Xanjori's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Sweland
    Posts
    6,033
    Holy fuck people in this thread still can't fucking read. The "state" didn't just decide to arrest him, it was reported to the police who have to investigate it. You may as well rename the thread to "I wonder how many people are incapable of reading."
    [08:44:11] Kurioxan: as long they get big im alright with that

    http://webchat.quakenet.org/?channels=MMOC-GenOT

  10. #230
    Quote Originally Posted by Xanjori View Post
    Holy fuck people in this thread still can't fucking read. The "state" didn't just decide to arrest him, it was reported to the police who have to investigate it. You may as well rename the thread to "I wonder how many people are incapable of reading."
    No, the title is "Man arrested for racial abuse..." The police could refuse to investigate, or after investigation realize that arresting somebody for a FB comment is stupid and leave the man be, but they arrested him. Wasting resources on taking him back to wherever and processing his arrest.

  11. #231
    Epic! Skavau's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    England, United Kingdom
    Posts
    1,645
    Quote Originally Posted by Xanjori View Post
    Holy fuck people in this thread still can't fucking read. The "state" didn't just decide to arrest him, it was reported to the police who have to investigate it. You may as well rename the thread to "I wonder how many people are incapable of reading."
    No, I understood that and have said so several times.

    I don't think it should be the case the police must act on such petty reports. I myself cannot fathom reporting someone on the internet even for being overtly racist. At most I'll reply or post it to RSTDT.

  12. #232
    Quote Originally Posted by Xanjori View Post
    Holy fuck people in this thread still can't fucking read. The "state" didn't just decide to arrest him, it was reported to the police who have to investigate it. You may as well rename the thread to "I wonder how many people are incapable of reading."
    The police and the laws mandating their investigation are part of the state, Aristotle.

  13. #233
    You know, this would all be solved if we just eliminated unneeded words from our vocabulary ala 1984.

  14. #234
    Quote Originally Posted by GreatSageCorban View Post
    You know, this would all be solved if we just eliminated unneeded words from our vocabulary ala 1984.
    Like race since its mostly imaginary.

  15. #235
    Quote Originally Posted by GreatSageCorban View Post
    You know, this would all be solved if we just eliminated unneeded words from our vocabulary ala 1984.
    Or if people could man the fuck up and not look to put people in jail for hurting their feelings.

  16. #236
    Moderator Endus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Waterloo, ON
    Posts
    21,411
    There is far too much misinformation about "free speech" being expressed in this thread.

    Americans (not all of you, just those of you spouting "free speech" in an indignant tone, here); the US has laws that limit speech, too. Lots of them. You cannot defraud someone through speech. You cannot slander someone, through speech. You cannot incite a group to riot, you cannot communicate secrets to other nations, you cannot conspire to commit a crime. You can, in the US, absolutely be found guilty of a crime based on speech alone. Hell, harassment's a crime in the US, too, and that's what this guy was arrested for.

    That's the plain facts.

    The ONLY difference you're seeing here is that some other nations add "hate speech" to that long laundry list of things that aren't covered by free speech laws. It's not the huge egregious difference that you're making it out to be, nor is it the US some bastion of free speech to begin with. Welcome to reality. There are consequences, often legal ones, for acting like an abusive asshat. If you say "you bastard, I'll kill you", congratulations, you've committed assault. If you say "you horsefucker", then unless you have actual reason to believe the person you are insulting has actually had carnal equine relations, you've committed slander and can be pretty heavily sued over it. In the US. Because "free speech" legislation is about being able to speak out against the government without fear of repercussion, not about saying whatever you want without repercussion.

    That's what it's always been, and what it still remains today in the US. If you think your right to free speech allows you to harass someone with racial epithets, then you don't understand what "free speech" is.


    Nor are US laws automagically "right" and everyone else's "wrong". That's just jingoistic BS. You can't point to the US interpretation of the First Amendment as a support for why you think the UK law is "bad". It's irrelevant. The First Amendment isn't a universal truth, it's a US law. That's it.
    Last edited by Endus; 2013-02-01 at 05:18 PM.

  17. #237
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    There is far too much misinformation about "free speech" being expressed in this thread.

    Americans (not all of you, just those of you spouting "free speech" in an indignant tone, here); the US has laws that limit speech, too. Lots of them. You cannot defraud someone through speech. You cannot slander someone, through speech. You cannot incite a group to riot, you cannot communicate secrets to other nations, you cannot conspire to commit a crime. You can, in the US, absolutely be found guilty of a crime based on speech alone. Hell, harassment's a crime in the US, too, and that's what this guy was arrested for.

    That's the plain facts.

    The ONLY difference you're seeing here is that some other nations add "hate speech" to that long laundry list of things that aren't covered by free speech laws. It's not the huge egregious difference that you're making it out to be, nor is it the US some bastion of free speech to begin with. Welcome to reality. There are consequences, often legal ones, for acting like an abusive asshat. If you say "you bastard, I'll kill you", congratulations, you've committed felony assault. If you say "you horsefucker", then unless you have actual reason to believe the person you are insulting has actually had carnal equine relations, you've committed slander and can be pretty heavily sued over it. In the US. Because "free speech" legislation is about being able to speak out against the government without fear of repercussion, not about saying whatever you want without repercussion.

    That's what it's always been, and what it still remains today in the US. If you think your right to free speech allows you to harass someone with racial epithets, then you don't understand what "free speech" is.
    The thing is for slander and libel though is that you have to be able to prove lose to be able to take somebody to court over it tough.

    It would be fine if calling Ba whatever he did if Ba has lost money or was damage in some actual way then fine arrest the guy.

  18. #238
    Epic! Skavau's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    England, United Kingdom
    Posts
    1,645
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    There is far too much misinformation about "free speech" being expressed in this thread.

    Americans (not all of you, just those of you spouting "free speech" in an indignant tone, here); the US has laws that limit speech, too. Lots of them. You cannot defraud someone through speech. You cannot slander someone, through speech. You cannot incite a group to riot, you cannot communicate secrets to other nations, you cannot conspire to commit a crime. You can, in the US, absolutely be found guilty of a crime based on speech alone. Hell, harassment's a crime in the US, too, and that's what this guy was arrested for.

    That's the plain facts.

    The ONLY difference you're seeing here is that some other nations add "hate speech" to that long laundry list of things that aren't covered by free speech laws. It's not the huge egregious difference that you're making it out to be, nor is it the US some bastion of free speech to begin with. Welcome to reality. There are consequences, often legal ones, for acting like an abusive asshat. If you say "you bastard, I'll kill you", congratulations, you've committed assault. If you say "you horsefucker", then unless you have actual reason to believe the person you are insulting has actually had carnal equine relations, you've committed slander and can be pretty heavily sued over it. In the US. Because "free speech" legislation is about being able to speak out against the government without fear of repercussion, not about saying whatever you want without repercussion.

    That's what it's always been, and what it still remains today in the US. If you think your right to free speech allows you to harass someone with racial epithets, then you don't understand what "free speech" is.


    Nor are US laws automagically "right" and everyone else's "wrong". That's just jingoistic BS. You can't point to the US interpretation of the First Amendment as a support for why you think the UK law is "bad". It's irrelevant. The First Amendment isn't a universal truth, it's a US law. That's it.
    No evidence to suggest this guy was harassing, you know. Insulting someone =/= harassment.

  19. #239
    Titan Wildtree's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Iowa - Franconia
    Posts
    14,295
    Quote Originally Posted by Skavau View Post
    Really?

    So according to you it'd be entirely appropriate and desirable for people to receive state sanctions for just calling someone else an idiot, no matter what the context.

    Scary.
    What's scary about that? It's that way ever since..


    This is akin to saying that because people aren't perfect and will occasionally amongst themselves cause strife and discord that they deserve draconian legislation against them.
    correct, and no normal law abiding citizen will ever have the least problem with that..


    You love your freedom but think insulting others should be against the law.

    What.
    Again. my first posting... There it is explained..
    I quote myself:
    Freedom is not unlimited, and common sense commands this. Yet, we learn every day, that there is not a single society on this planet where people can resort to common sense to limit and restrain itself from abuse of freedom at the expense of other individuals, and with that basically outright violate their freedom.
    The moment I insult you, I committed an intrusion of YOUR privacy sphere. That moment I violated your peace, and also your human rights.

    This is a private website. The only sanctions you will receive is that of being banned. They can run their show how they like, however absurd or justified they may be perceived for it. Completely different in both cause and effect of legal sanctions.
    And again you are wrong... The internet is NOT A lawfree space, and with that said, ANYTHING that's written on any private website is subject to laws.

    If someone for example rambles on here with a flaming hate speech, and possibly formulates a threat against the Presidents life, the posting IS subject to the laws of the USA, and therefore the poster could very well find himself in the situation that the CIA is knocking at his door and arrests him. Or if he's from a non US country the local police shows up.. It's at the discretion of the law enforcement, and whether it's made aware of the incident.
    There is no difference whether someone says something online on some platform, or says something at some convention..
    Ask Ted Nugent about it, how his remarks about the President flew with the CIA...
    But again, our case resides in the UK, not the USA. Facebook is an US based company, yet still it's European part is located in Europe, and with that the laws of the UK apply to FB UK... that simple. You can face punishment by law for racist harassment, and that's what's at hand. The guy was arrested for that.
    The problem we have is, that - as it shows on page 1 already - you automatically sided with the arrested guy.. Your first post words that we don't know how tame the FB message was. Well, I rather wonder how severe it was. I'm pretty sure it was not tame. The cops don't get active just that easy over every minor and rather tame remark.

  20. #240
    Moderator Endus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Waterloo, ON
    Posts
    21,411
    Quote Originally Posted by Sorensen View Post
    The thing is for slander and libel though is that you have to be able to prove lose to be able to take somebody to court over it tough.
    You really don't. It's required for some forms of it, but not all. Look up defamation per se laws. There's a host of things that, in some states, are considered damaging in and of themselves, just because of the words that were said.

    ---------- Post added 2013-02-01 at 12:22 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Skavau View Post
    No evidence to suggest this guy was harassing, you know. Insulting someone =/= harassment.
    He was arrested for harassment.

    If there's no evidence, then he'll be found not guilty. If he IS found guilty, well, then there was clearly evidence of harassment.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •