Twitter user jailed for 56 days

[gtdc]

carmonk said:

Exactly. Every so often there's a human interest event that sparks a mass hysteria of saccharine social conformity, where everyone scrabbles to be seen to be grieving and showing their 'respect' in the most public and blatant manner. Anybody who sits there and says, wait a minute, I wish this guy no ill but at the same time I don't give a st, is seen as some sort of pariah. Of course this student brought valid criticism on himself for his idiotic statements but it's a poor state of affairs when an English judge acts as the puppet of a baying mob of professional grievers and self-proclaimed takers-of-offence.

Did it happen before Diana?

[PinkFatBunny]

The guy who racial abused the 6 dead soldiers - I wonder what sentence he gets

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leeds-1734340...

...this shouldn't matter in the slightest, but the accused is Asian and the victims white. Is he going to get 56days x 6 for each offence??
I'd be surprised if he got custodial at all if he plays the religion card!

Should just drop him off in the centre of the barracks wearing a T-Shirt with his remarks printed on it

[Halb]

PinkFatBunny said:

The guy who racial abused the 6 dead soldiers - I wonder what sentence he gets

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leeds-1734340...

We need more prisons.

[Chrisw666]

PinkFatBunny said:

The guy who racial abused the 6 dead soldiers - I wonder what sentence he gets


I'd be surprised if he got custodial at all

As would I.

[superlightr]

Chrisw666 said:

PinkFatBunny said:

The guy who racial abused the 6 dead soldiers - I wonder what sentence he gets


I'd be surprised if he got custodial at all

As would I.

As abhorent as it is - I too would not believe he should get a prison sentence either. Be interesting to see if justice is consistant - sadly we all know it isnt.

[Fantic SuperT]

All Black Footballers are BLACK!

[mattnunn]

Fantic SuperT said:

All Black Footballers are BLACK!

wtf? All racism is racism.

All language that purposefully divides people into sub groups for the reasons of isolation or seggregation is racist.

If you use these terms and believe they are simply descriptive nouns you have a loose grip on history, empathy, human behaviour and your own role in civil society, i.e you're either a child, stupid or a sociopath.

I'm not a racist but.... If you say this, you are a racist.

[roachcoach]

mattnunn said:

Fantic SuperT said:

All Black Footballers are BLACK!

wtf? All racism is racism.

All language that purposefully divides people into sub groups for the reasons of isolation or seggregation is racist.

If you use these terms and believe they are simply descriptive nouns you have a loose grip on history, empathy, human behaviour and your own role in civil society, i.e you're either a child, stupid or a sociopath.

I'm not a racist but.... If you say this, you are a racist.

A touch sweeping, perhaps you can explain these to me:

[mattnunn]

roachcoach said:

A touch sweeping, perhaps you can explain these to me:

signage designating gender based toiletting facilaties, the skirt indicates which facillity is for ladies.

Hth.

P.s if you think seperating people on racial lines is merely a case of practicality, you sir are racist.

[HundredthIdiot]

Racism is negative stereotyping based on race. That's it.

Unfortunately common usage of the term has been widened to include attitudes correlated with racism, such as xenophobia and lazy cultural stereotyping.

"French people irritate me" is therefore deemed racist, even though it's not actually anything to do with race.

[roachcoach]

You didn't specify on race, you said:

you said:

All language that purposefully divides people into sub groups for the reasons of isolation or seggregation is racist.

I contend it is not, it is common and indeed appropriate on occasion. People are split and divided on physical attributes ALL the time, just some are 'acceptable' and some are not. Society decides where this line sits, it is not [no pun], black & white.

[mattnunn]

roachcoach said:

You didn't specify on race, you said:

you said:

All language that purposefully divides people into sub groups for the reasons of isolation or seggregation is racist.

I contend it is not, it is common and indeed appropriate on occasion. People are split and divided on physical attributes ALL the time, just some are 'acceptable' and some are not. Society decides where this line sits, it is not [no pun], black & white.

Some parts of the world have unisex toiletting, some don't, based on cultural preferrance.

What exactly is your point?

[roachcoach]

That your statement was far too sweeping/binary.

Segregation based on attributes exists on a daily basis in a huge variety of places. The society in place at the time dictates what is and what is not acceptable.


Individuals will (obviously) hold their own beliefs but society's viewpoint will form the legal lines defining 'acceptable' or not.

[Fantic SuperT]

mattnunn said:

roachcoach said:

You didn't specify on race, you said:

you said:

All language that purposefully divides people into sub groups for the reasons of isolation or seggregation is racist.

I contend it is not, it is common and indeed appropriate on occasion. People are split and divided on physical attributes ALL the time, just some are 'acceptable' and some are not. Society decides where this line sits, it is not [no pun], black & white.

Some parts of the world have unisex toiletting, some don't, based on cultural preferrance.

What exactly is your point?

I'd like to butt in here. When a person walks into a room I'll first determine their sex, then their approximate 'race', then their approximate age.
It's not something I was taught, it just happens. I reckon everyone else does the same thing too if they are honest with themselves. It's probably instinctive and no amount of locking people up will stop it happening.

And by the way, I'm black and you called me nasty names that have upset me. I want to complain to the Police in the first instance. I'm reaching for the telephone..........

[King Herald]

Fantic SuperT said:

And by the way, I'm black and you called me nasty names that have upset me. I want to complain to the Police in the first instance. I'm reaching for the telephone..........

But don't repeat the nasty names or YOU will be on charge for inciting racial hatred.

Just saying....

[roachcoach]

King Herald said:

Fantic SuperT said:

And by the way, I'm black and you called me nasty names that have upset me. I want to complain to the Police in the first instance. I'm reaching for the telephone..........

But don't repeat the nasty names or YOU will be on charge for inciting racial hatred.

Just saying....

Unless it's a retweet, in which case you're golden.

[audidoody]

mattnunn said:

wtf? All racism is racism.

All language that purposefully divides people into sub groups for the reasons of isolation or seggregation is racist.

Does that imply the following organisations are racist:

1. National Black Police Association

2. The Music of Black Origin (MOBO) Awards

3. National Association of Black Social Workers (www.nabsw.org/)

4. Association for Black Engineers

5. Parents of Black Children Association

Etc etc

Or would it only be racist if the word "White" was used instead?

[carmonk]

Mojooo said:

carmonk said:

Public pressure and setting an example as a result of that pressure, I'd go along with that. A sad state of affairs. I've heard of serial trolls being convicted on the basis of systematic and targeted abuse (usually on these RIP sites, the less said about them the better) but I've not heard of a penalty so harsh for what was effectively a one-off transgression. You have then to look at why this case is different to any other and the answer is pretty obvious.

I think we all agre 56 days is excessive, but we all know he will serve a tiny amoutn of that, so it may be a moot point.

Back to your poitn on sentencing...

Lets take the poppy burning example as someone mentioned it earlier on this thread.

a) I go out Sunday at 10pm (at night when no one is there) to my high street and burn a poppy and shout death to all British soliders. 1 person sees me and complains.

b) I go out Sunday morning on Remembeance Day at 11am to my High Street and shout the same. 500 people see me and complain.


It seems to me the same act has been commited each time - do you not think the law should allow for different penalties based on the amount of people offended and type of offence caused? (of cours ein poitn b there may be other aggravating factors, like the potentially to cause a riot but lets ignore that bit).

To me it looks like the situation is simialr here, had matey just tweeted soemthing racist no one would have cared, but the fact he did it when he knew he would get a big audience and cause maximum offence is the key factor.

On the face of it it's logical to think that in the second instance the penalty would be harsher, possibly on the grounds of public order or inciting hatred, I don't know precisely. But when you compare dissimilar situations, especially involving the internet, the concept falls down. Say I walked up to a person on the street and abused them verbally. Clearly that should attract a greater punishment than posting the same words on the internet, yet if you make a judgement based on the number of people 'offended' then the latter instance is a million times worse.

The problem is that the internet and associated methods of human interaction are developing at a staggering rate. Great chunks of society don't have the maturity to deal with these social initiatives and similarly legislation to deal with transgression cannot keep up with the pace of change. Which is why we have ridiculous situations like this one. Now all this (edit: all this as in the law and order aspect, not the lack of social maturity) could be solved by scrapping most of our current legislation and applying common sense to our judicial process but that's OT and a whole other story.

mattnunn said:

Fantic SuperT said:

All Black Footballers are BLACK!

wtf? All racism is racism.

All language that purposefully divides people into sub groups for the reasons of isolation or seggregation is racist.

If you use these terms and believe they are simply descriptive nouns you have a loose grip on history, empathy, human behaviour and your own role in civil society, i.e you're either a child, stupid or a sociopath.

I'm not a racist but.... If you say this, you are a racist.

How could you divide something into sub-groups without isolating or segregating? Your statement not only makes no sense, it's plain wrong. I know the liberal interpretation of racism is now "anything that anybody wants" but those of us not in the grip of lefty hysteria prefer to use the accepted definition of the word.

[Chrisw666]

audidoody said:

Does that imply the following organisations are racist:

1. National Black Police Association

2. The Music of Black Origin (MOBO) Awards

3. National Association of Black Social Workers (www.nabsw.org/)

4. Association for Black Engineers

5. Parents of Black Children Association

Etc etc

Or would it only be racist if the word "White" was used instead?

Start a white footballers association and watch the subsequent media outrage explosion.

[hornetrider]

Not sure it's been mentioned in ong the arguing, but he is appealing and his case will be heard tomorrow.