Bad taste joke = prison sentence

[Tom]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-lancashire-19869710

The other week, Frankie Boyle tweeted that Jimmy Savile only did charity work so he'd have first dibs on Madeline Mcann in heaven (although it was a bit more strongly worded than that).

This guy made a joke (from what I've gathered) about the difference between Mark Bridger and Santa Claus (the month that one comes in, I leave it to you to work it out).

Twelve fucking weeks. How utterly pathetic. And yet, groups exist on Facebook to describe in detail what their members would like to do to an as-yet unconvicted and innocent Mark Bridger. Details that most certainly would be offensive to many people. Will the police be arresting any of those members?

Utterly fucking pathetic.

 

[Wij]

Comes in April? Was that the joke?

Sick yes but surely he said more than that to get jail?

 

[Scouse]

I think it's a joke as well. However, he made his posts in a group which was set up by the families as a sort of support group - and there's form for that nowadays.

But yep. Convicted for saying stuff. Not doing stuff.

 

[DaGaffer]

I'm finding this "prison for being a cunt" approach by the UK courts increasingly alarming. I think the man is an utter twat, but just like with all the football stuff, saying things shouldn't invoke the law, its a terrible slippery slope. What's next, the reintroduction of sedition laws?

 

[Scouse]

How about this?

Azhar Ahmed, 20, of Fir Avenue, Ravensthorpe, West Yorkshire, was found guilty in September of sending a grossly offensive communication.
He said he did not think the message, which said "all soldiers should die and go to hell", was offensive.

Who gives a fuck if it is. It's his opinion...

 

[ECA]

Yeah I agree, the stand justices are taking on freedom to reveal yourself as a complete cocktard and suffer the social consequences for it is stifling the reveal of said cocktards.

 

[Raven]

I'm finding this "prison for being a cunt" approach by the UK courts increasingly alarming. I think the man is an utter twat, but just like with all the football stuff, saying things shouldn't invoke the law, its a terrible slippery slope. What's next, the reintroduction of sedition laws?

It was the context more than anything, a joke is fine but to post that joke in an area that is for people genuinely concerned about the girl and to laugh at their grief is just plain cuntish. He did it for the sole reason of upsetting people, not because he thought he might be funny.

As per the law we aren't allowed to give him and other so called trolls the kicking they deserve so prison will have to do. People are too quick to hide behind persevered internet anonymity, doing and saying things that they just wouldn't have the balls to do in person.

 

[Scouse]

It was the context more than anything, a joke is fine but to post that joke in an area that is for people genuinely concerned about the girl and to laugh at their grief is just plain cuntish.

He's a cunt, yes. But getting prison for being a cunt even more cuntish.

 

[Tom]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-19414045

What do we think will happen here then? A stern warning and a fine, or a 12-week prison sentence. I know what my money's going on.

 

[Raven]

How about a swift kicking then? Every cunt needs a good beating now and again but you just can't do it within the law.

 

[DaGaffer]

It was the context more than anything, a joke is fine but to post that joke in an area that is for people genuinely concerned about the girl and to laugh at their grief is just plain cuntish. He did it for the sole reason of upsetting people, not because he thought he might be funny.

As per the law we aren't allowed to give him and other so called trolls the kicking they deserve so prison will have to do. People are too quick to hide behind persevered internet anonymity, doing and saying things that they just wouldn't have the balls to do in person.

He's an awful, awful human being, but all he said was words. Its a very dangerous road that the UK is going down.

 

[Raven]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-19414045

What do we think will happen here then? A stern warning and a fine, or a 12-week prison sentence. I know what my money's going on.

They are police so they will probably just get told off. They are allowed to kill people who are going about their business so I doubt they will get any serious punishment for that.

 

[Raven]

He's an awful, awful human being, but all he said was words. Its a very dangerous road that the UK is going down.

Ok then (not meaning to cause any offence ofc!) what if it was your child that had been taken and someone decided to have a pop at you or the child? It is just words after all. What would you like to see happen to them? (with in the law)

 

[Tom]

As per the law we aren't allowed to give him and other so called trolls the kicking they deserve so prison will have to do. People are too quick to hide behind persevered internet anonymity, doing and saying things that they just wouldn't have the balls to do in person.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-12664346

A £50 fine. This bloke was burning poppies and chanting during an organised silence, and he received a £50 fine.

If you ask me, the authorities simply do not understand the online world. That an offensive joke on Facebook is viewed by some as a crime more serious than the above just helps prove it.

 

[Tom]

Ok then (not meaning to cause any offence ofc!) what if it was your child that had been taken and someone decided to have a pop at you or the child? It is just words after all. What would you like to see happen to them? (with in the law)

I'd like for them to sit in front of me and hear how upsetting I found their comments. I'd like to tell them how it affected me, and how insensitive it was. I think that would be far more effective, in every way imaginable, than depriving them of their liberty for 12 weeks. Because someone coming out of prison still might not understand how upsetting their actions were, and might actually be angry.

 

[Scouse]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-12664346

A £50 fine. This bloke was burning poppies and chanting during an organised silence, and he received a £50 fine.

Again, I'm fine with him doing that.

We do NOT have a right to not be offended by other people - and we shouldn't have that right.

 

[DaGaffer]

Ok then (not meaning to cause any offence ofc!) what if it was your child that had been taken and someone decided to have a pop at you or the child? It is just words after all. What would you like to see happen to them? (with in the law)

Nothing. I'd expect him to be banned from Facebook for breaking their Ts&Cs, and that's it. And I think that poor family has far worse things to think about that some trolling pinhead.

 

[old.Tohtori]

I'd like for them to sit in front of me and hear how upsetting I found their comments. I'd like to tell them how it affected me, and how insensitive it was. I think that would be far more effective, in every way imaginable, than depriving them of their liberty for 12 weeks. Because someone coming out of prison still might not understand how upsetting their actions were, and might actually be angry.

Or like 99% of the population, if someone calls a parents child a donkey looking wastebasket, most would probably hit them.

A stern talking to, even if the preferred method after ignoring it, is not in the general dictionary of people.

 

[Nate]

Didn't I read somewhere that he was arrested for his own protection?

 

[Gwadien]

What stops me reporting all the pages on this forum to the police then?

 

[old.Tohtori]

What stops me reporting all the pages on this forum to the police then?

You could, but international forum so might have a problem there.

Also if Deebs heard they're investigating, he could just add a "This is a forum for humor oriented RPG of internet stereotypes, feel free to choose your role from a troll, to know-it-all, to boobypicture poster and jump right in. These are not real people, just avatars, so feel no shame." in to the CoC

 

[Scouse]

What stops me reporting all the pages on this forum to the police then?

Nothing.

 

[rynnor]

There are a number of disturbing issues here:

1. making a kid a criminal for saying something stupid on the internet

2. the 50 people who turned up outside his house - what the fuck - are we living in the middle east or something that offended people feel they can go form a lynch mob?

3. vicariously punishing the real criminal by taking it out on other people - the kid has nothing to do with the child going missing yet hes basicly being toasted by the public outrage.

 

[Raven]

What stops me reporting all the pages on this forum to the police then?

Nothing.

But that's not the reason he is getting prosecuted. He actively searched for a page (on facebook I believe) dedicated to the girl and posted it there with the sole purpose of upsetting people either related to the girl or effected in one way or another by the whole situation.

It's the internet version of being a cunt at a wake, except people are unable to do anything about it to stop it. If someone was to do that at a wake they would likely receive a good shake down.

This is fairly new ground legally but something has to be done. Trolling on here is one thing, trolling on something like that is another, people didn't ask for it and certainly didn't expect it and there isn't a great deal they can do to stop it.

Snivelling losers trying to upset people over the internet is a problem, "it's only words" doesn't really cut it either. Would your mum shrug her shoulders and say, ah well, it's only words?

 

[rynnor]

Additionally I dont see how people could suffer fear from a bad joke.

 

[rynnor]

I'm finding this "prison for being a cunt" approach by the UK courts increasingly alarming. I think the man is an utter twat, but just like with all the football stuff, saying things shouldn't invoke the law, its a terrible slippery slope. What's next, the reintroduction of sedition laws?

It wouldn't be so bad if the laws were consistently applied but they arent - its trial by public opinion - ie lynch mobs.

 

[Embattle]

It wouldn't be so bad if the laws were consistently applied but they arent - its trial by public opinion - ie lynch mobs.

Mainly because they are not consistently the same, but most people would only know that if they did more than read it on a news site.

I could also see how some people find it really offensive, to me he is a dickhead and the subject appears offensive but I come from a different generation of net users. It always seems as if people think that being offense in such a manor is excused because it was on the internet, in reality you can be arrested for offensive language on the street.

 

[rynnor]

Mainly because they are not consistently the same, but most people would only know that if they did more than read it on a news site.

What are you on about - clearly 99.9999% of the offensive material on the net doesnt get a police investigation - how is that consistent?

 

[Embattle]

What are you on about - clearly 99.9999% of the offensive material on the net doesnt get a police investigation - how is that consistent?

Yeah mine was about the punishment aspect and what is done on a case by case basis not before a case even exists. On the point you make most of it isn't applicable to the Uk and secondly most of it isn't in the spot light at the time.

 

[Raven]

What are you on about - clearly 99.9999% of the offensive material on the net doesnt get a police investigation - how is that consistent?

Because it is in a private place (or as private as it can be)

The only analogy I can think of is of you telling your mate a joke about it and you telling the girls parents the joke. Just because it is online makes no difference. You would have to go searching for the bad taste (or downright offensive) joke to see it.