ReadingRambo
Member
Who says he was drunk?
It's called precedent. You want to be mindful when setting them.
Who says he was drunk?
I'm fine with this because it's obviously racist. Just because it's the internet doesn't mean you should escape the consequences of what you say.
I don't understand the American views on this. Do I take it you don't like racism but think people shouldn't be punished for it? That seems a bit contradictory, surely?
How far does the US take the defence of free speech, if someone was just shouting racist abuse in the street, can anything be done about it for instance? What about calling for violence against specific groups of people (or even individuals)? (This is an honest question, I don't know much about American laws)
That was blatant incitement. I don't see the incitement in this case.
I don't understand the American views on this. Do I take it you don't like racism but think people shouldn't be punished for it? That seems a bit contradictory, surely?
How far does the US take the defence of free speech, if someone was just shouting racist abuse in the street, can anything be done about it for instance? What about calling for violence against specific groups of people (or even individuals)? (This is an honest question, I don't know much about American laws)
Incredibly extreme sentencing but undoubtedly necessary if the 'I can say what I want, its the internet' fallacy is going to be driven out of society.
Incredibly extreme sentencing but undoubtedly necessary if the 'I can say what I want, its the internet' fallacy is going to be driven out of society.
Yeah, America doesn't do that all. I mean you can't get held indefinitely without any rights or get your head beaten in because you're doing a peaceful protest and you definitely don't have presidential candidates pushing to remove the rights of everyone they don't like. Oh wait, yeah you do.
Doesn't matter if he was drunk, being arrested for this is fucking stupid.
Because people can be fixed if we just punish them enough!
wrong place at the wrong time on the internet?What you have to understand is that this guy has been sacrificed to send a message from the courts: you alone are responsible for your actions regardless of medium of expression, level of intoxication, or inebriated state. Not everyone who sends a racist tweet will be arrested obviously, I doubt this law is written in any significant way, but it's there as a deterrent and publicised as a warning. Our courts can be very sadistic in this way.
This guy was stupid enough to be in the wrong place at the wrong time, and he obviously did himself no favours throughout the court process.
Depends what you mean by changed man. If you meant now permanently a member of an underclass incapable of obtaining reasonable employment and education, then yeah, he'll be changed.
It should not be a crime to be offensive. I've gone through a personal hell in my own life being abused, taunted, slurs leveled at me... I can defend myself against that, thanks. I don't need or WANT the courts to act on my behalf like some omnipresent nanny.
sourceMr Atkinson, famous for his roles in Blackadder and Mr Bean, told Peers in the House of Lords: Do I think that I would risk prosecution because of jokes or drama about sexual orientation with which I might be involved if we dont have the free speech clause?
Not really but I dread something almost as bad a culture of censoriousness, a questioning, negative and leaden attitude that is encouraged by legislation of this nature but is considerably and meaningfully alleviated by the free speech clause.
He added: It would provide succour and reassurance to those of us in the creative world and I would plead for its retention.
Mr Atkinson also criticised hate speech legislation in general.
wrong place at the wrong time on the internet?
But those are pretty clearly defined laws. This one is just asking for all sorts of abuse.
What you have to understand is that this guy has been sacrificed to send a message from the courts: you alone are responsible for your actions regardless of medium of expression or level of intoxication. Not everyone who sends a racist tweet will be arrested obviously, I doubt this law is written in any significant way, but it's there as a deterrent and publicised as a warning. Our courts can be very sadistic in this way.
This guy was stupid enough to be in the wrong place at the wrong time, and he obviously did himself no favours throughout the court process.
Can't believe people are okay with someone being tossed in jail over a tweet
I don't understand the American views on this. Do I take it you don't like racism but think people shouldn't be punished for it? That seems a bit contradictory, surely?
How far does the US take the defence of free speech, if someone was just shouting racist abuse in the street, can anything be done about it for instance? What about calling for violence against specific groups of people (or even individuals)? (This is an honest question, I don't know much about American laws)
That was blatant incitement. I don't see the incitement in this case.
Wrong place = Twitter, not the best for anonymity
Wrong time = right after the incident
No need to get all Godwin's law on this and throw your toys out the pram.
So what's stopping cops from chilling outside a bar?
What you have to understand is that this guy has been sacrificed to send a message from the courts: you alone are responsible for your actions regardless of medium of expression or level of intoxication. Not everyone who sends a racist tweet will be arrested obviously, I doubt this law is written in any significant way, but it's there as a deterrent and publicised as a warning. Our courts can be very sadistic in this way.
This guy was stupid enough to be in the wrong place at the wrong time, and he obviously did himself no favours throughout the court process.
You can legislate against behaviour, not attitudes.Incredibly extreme sentencing but undoubtedly necessary if the 'I can say what I want, its the internet' fallacy is going to be driven out of society.
You see nothing wrong with all this?What you have to understand is that this guy has been sacrificed to send a message from the courts: you alone are responsible for your actions regardless of medium of expression or level of intoxication. Not everyone who sends a racist tweet will be arrested obviously, I doubt this law is written in any significant way
Being known as a racist asshole should be punishment enough and deter future people from doing so on a not-so-anonymous website. I find it pretty disturbing that words, or text in this case, can be so offensive that the person who they belong to needs to be removed from society, even if it's a short sentence. Jail should be for people who are a danger to the public.
How can you stop racism (and surely most rational US citizens want that to happen) if you don't punish it?
Thanks to everyone for the replies, believe me the US system seems just as bad to me (from the UK) as ours seems to appear to you. How can you stop racism (and surely most rational US citizens want that to happen) if you don't punish it?
How can you stop racism (and surely most rational US citizens want that to happen) if you don't punish it?
Thanks to everyone for the replies, believe me the US system seems just as bad to me (from the UK) as ours seems to appear to you. How can you stop racism (and surely most rational US citizens want that to happen) if you don't punish it?
You see nothing wrong with all this?
You cant just jail one person and not another for the same offense. There needs to be equality, or at least a desire to acheive equality.
And the worst part is that last comment, about the law not being written in any specific way! Yay abuse!
Thanks to everyone for the replies, believe me the US system seems just as bad to me (from the UK) as ours seems to appear to you. How can you stop racism (and surely most rational US citizens want that to happen) if you don't punish it?
They have it in South Korea, everything you say is accountable. Thought I think there were debates against it being removed. People went to jail for hating on celebrities and I believe, and posting pro North Korea comments. It's an incredibly slippery slope.I approve of accountability on the Internet. Even though this is not an example of that, this is an example of using a scapegoat to scare everybody else into behaving better.
I don't know the answer to this question but I definitely know what it isn't: Putting them in jail.
It's disgusting behavior, but you all are fucking nuts if you agree with jail time.
By that logic no one would commit murder, rape, theft, etc...
Cause punishing it won't correct the behavior. You think this guy will have an awakening in jail? Nah, he will just keep it quieter and more subtle.
Maybe "stop" was the wrong word, but surely the fact that there is a punishment will deter some people from committing the crimes? There'd be a lot more thefts if you just got a telling off instead of a prison sentence, don't you agree?
It's disgusting behavior, but you all are fucking nuts if you agree with jail time.
Lets look at the logical extension of this. I and friends are eating at a cafe. I say something racist "Illegal immigrants are horrible and stealing jobs and should be shot." I think I am having a private conversation (presumably legal??) but if a passerby hears me, I can now be jailed for that statement. Insanity.
my understanding of the western jurisdication system (especialy in Europe) always was that rehabilitation and resocialication is at its core