Bad taste = criminal offence?

[carinaman]

Who does he think he is?

Katie Hopkins?

Before he knows it he'll be in the Celebrity Big Brother house copping a feel.

[carinaman]

Last paragraph:

http://www.express.co.uk/comment/columnists/ann-wi...

I hope the thought police will be knocking on her door soon.

[pilchardthecat]

TTwiggy said:

It's not actually thought crime though is it? Once you write something, say something or type something on the net, it's no longer a 'thought'.

Yes, much better to suppress people so they dont speak out for fear of prosecution, and just seethe inwardly en mass. That's worked out really well for us

[DeanR32]

pilchardthecat said:

Yes, much better to suppress people so they dont speak out for fear of prosecution, and just seethe inwardly en mass. That's worked out really well for us

Yeah, I adore having vile specimens being vile in society.

There just isn't any need for it, and I for one, even though it's probably a bit deep having police involved, am glad something has happened to him for his spontaneous vileness.

I suppose you need to be on the recieving end to shrug your shoulders and laugh when someone like this gets prosecuted.

I remember a girl from essex threw herself off a railway bridge because of being tormented at school. Sometime in the nineties. Freedom of speech can have consequences

[mph1977]

vescaegg said:

What options would he have had? Geniune question.

no comment interview , refuse caution punt it to the CPS ... NFA

[pilchardthecat]

DeanR32 said:

pilchardthecat said:

Yes, much better to suppress people so they dont speak out for fear of prosecution, and just seethe inwardly en mass. That's worked out really well for us

Yeah, I adore having vile specimens being vile in society.

There just isn't any need for it, and I for one, even though it's probably a bit deep having police involved, am glad something has happened to him for his spontaneous vileness.

I suppose you need to be on the recieving end to shrug your shoulders and laugh when someone like this gets prosecuted.

I remember a girl from essex threw herself off a railway bridge because of being tormented at school. Sometime in the nineties. Freedom of speech can have consequences

The problem is, everyone's definition of "vile" is different

[DeanR32]

pilchardthecat said:

DeanR32 said:

pilchardthecat said:

Yes, much better to suppress people so they dont speak out for fear of prosecution, and just seethe inwardly en mass. That's worked out really well for us

Yeah, I adore having vile specimens being vile in society.

There just isn't any need for it, and I for one, even though it's probably a bit deep having police involved, am glad something has happened to him for his spontaneous vileness.

I suppose you need to be on the recieving end to shrug your shoulders and laugh when someone like this gets prosecuted.

I remember a girl from essex threw herself off a railway bridge because of being tormented at school. Sometime in the nineties. Freedom of speech can have consequences

The problem is, everyone's definition of "vile" is different

I'd like to think my definition of vile is pretty much the norm for the average human being.

[TTwiggy]

pilchardthecat said:

TTwiggy said:

It's not actually thought crime though is it? Once you write something, say something or type something on the net, it's no longer a 'thought'.

Yes, much better to suppress people so they dont speak out for fear of prosecution, and just seethe inwardly en mass. That's worked out really well for us

I wasn't suggesting anything of the sort, I was merely pointing out that once you write, say or type something it's no longer a 'thought'.

[vescaegg]

DeanR32 said:

pilchardthecat said:

DeanR32 said:

pilchardthecat said:

Yes, much better to suppress people so they dont speak out for fear of prosecution, and just seethe inwardly en mass. That's worked out really well for us

Yeah, I adore having vile specimens being vile in society.

There just isn't any need for it, and I for one, even though it's probably a bit deep having police involved, am glad something has happened to him for his spontaneous vileness.

I suppose you need to be on the recieving end to shrug your shoulders and laugh when someone like this gets prosecuted.

I remember a girl from essex threw herself off a railway bridge because of being tormented at school. Sometime in the nineties. Freedom of speech can have consequences

The problem is, everyone's definition of "vile" is different

I'd like to think my definition of vile is pretty much the norm for the average human being.

Thats probably what the shooters in Paris thought.

[DeanR32]

vescaegg said:

DeanR32 said:

pilchardthecat said:

DeanR32 said:

pilchardthecat said:

Yes, much better to suppress people so they dont speak out for fear of prosecution, and just seethe inwardly en mass. That's worked out really well for us

Yeah, I adore having vile specimens being vile in society.

There just isn't any need for it, and I for one, even though it's probably a bit deep having police involved, am glad something has happened to him for his spontaneous vileness.

I suppose you need to be on the recieving end to shrug your shoulders and laugh when someone like this gets prosecuted.

I remember a girl from essex threw herself off a railway bridge because of being tormented at school. Sometime in the nineties. Freedom of speech can have consequences

The problem is, everyone's definition of "vile" is different

I'd like to think my definition of vile is pretty much the norm for the average human being.

Thats probably what the shooters in Paris thought.

Would you class them as average human beings?

[wiggy001]

DeanR32 said:

vescaegg said:

DeanR32 said:

pilchardthecat said:

DeanR32 said:

pilchardthecat said:

Yes, much better to suppress people so they dont speak out for fear of prosecution, and just seethe inwardly en mass. That's worked out really well for us

Yeah, I adore having vile specimens being vile in society.

There just isn't any need for it, and I for one, even though it's probably a bit deep having police involved, am glad something has happened to him for his spontaneous vileness.

I suppose you need to be on the recieving end to shrug your shoulders and laugh when someone like this gets prosecuted.

I remember a girl from essex threw herself off a railway bridge because of being tormented at school. Sometime in the nineties. Freedom of speech can have consequences

The problem is, everyone's definition of "vile" is different

I'd like to think my definition of vile is pretty much the norm for the average human being.

Thats probably what the shooters in Paris thought.

Would you class them as average human beings?

The point is, they probably would. To me you sound a little sensitive and are probably more likely to be offended by something someone says/writes than I would. Does that make me right and you wrong, or vice versa? Of course not. But I personally don't think it's right that freedom of speech only extends as far as you say it should as your "level" of acceptable is likely to be lower than mine.

For the record, I think freedom of speech should be absolute except where you are actively encouraging something that is a crime. In any case, no-one was forced to read this guy's tweet and no actual harm came from it imho.

[pilchardthecat]

DeanR32 said:

I'd like to think my definition of vile is pretty much the norm for the average human being.

If you took 100 people and asked them all to define the appropriate boundaries, you would get 100 different answers.

[vescaegg]

wiggy001 said:

DeanR32 said:

vescaegg said:

DeanR32 said:

pilchardthecat said:

DeanR32 said:

pilchardthecat said:

Yes, much better to suppress people so they dont speak out for fear of prosecution, and just seethe inwardly en mass. That's worked out really well for us

Yeah, I adore having vile specimens being vile in society.

There just isn't any need for it, and I for one, even though it's probably a bit deep having police involved, am glad something has happened to him for his spontaneous vileness.

I suppose you need to be on the recieving end to shrug your shoulders and laugh when someone like this gets prosecuted.

I remember a girl from essex threw herself off a railway bridge because of being tormented at school. Sometime in the nineties. Freedom of speech can have consequences

The problem is, everyone's definition of "vile" is different

I'd like to think my definition of vile is pretty much the norm for the average human being.

Thats probably what the shooters in Paris thought.

Would you class them as average human beings?

The point is, they probably would. To me you sound a little sensitive and are probably more likely to be offended by something someone says/writes than I would. Does that make me right and you wrong, or vice versa? Of course not. But I personally don't think it's right that freedom of speech only extends as far as you say it should as your "level" of acceptable is likely to be lower than mine.

For the record, I think freedom of speech should be absolute except where you are actively encouraging something that is a crime. In any case, no-one was forced to read this guy's tweet and no actual harm came from it imho.

This. And I agree entirely.

No one should be able to 'decide' what is offensive and what isnt.

The joke was in poor taste but I have heard and seen far worse. It didnt offend me in the slightest.

[DeanR32]

I work in the utilities industry. That was tame compared to some st I've heard on site.

All this ask 100 people business. Ask 100 people if it was a really st thing to say. That'll get you 100 answers the same, and that's what it was. A st thing said by a st person, in disgusting taste.

I'll repeat. I don't think it was an issue the police should be getting involved in as such, but if that's what the consequences of being a are, then so be it. How about a Rogue Traders type programme, where a couple blokes on a bike go round and expose the stty people who do stty things?

There's nothing sensitive about me really. Things said which are not anything to do with me don't offend me. I'll of course have an opinion on it, and the person who said it. Someone like this boy, who had a dig at 10 dead people, their families and 3 days before Christmas, don't deserve to share the same air as decent folk.

Sorry, but I don't like s, and have no desire to defend their actions

[DeanR32]

Looks terrible with all the swearing. I'll have to knock that on the head.

[pilchardthecat]

DeanR32 said:

I work in the utilities industry. That was tame compared to some st I've heard on site.

All this ask 100 people business. Ask 100 people if it was a really st thing to say. That'll get you 100 answers the same, and that's what it was. A st thing said by a st person, in disgusting taste.

I'll repeat. I don't think it was an issue the police should be getting involved in as such, but if that's what the consequences of being a are, then so be it. How about a Rogue Traders type programme, where a couple blokes on a bike go round and expose the stty people who do stty things?

There's nothing sensitive about me really. Things said which are not anything to do with me don't offend me. I'll of course have an opinion on it, and the person who said it. Someone like this boy, who had a dig at 10 dead people, their families and 3 days before Christmas, don't deserve to share the same air as decent folk.

Sorry, but I don't like s, and have no desire to defend their actions

There's a big difference between thinking something is a "st thing to say" and having people criminally prosecuted for saying something "st"

I don't believe the apparatus of the state should be used to control what it's citizens are permitted to say.

[DeanR32]

Yeah, I'd probably go along with that. It doesn't need any police interference.

And I can hear what you're saying about we should have total freedom of speech. I personally couldn't care less if it stayed as it is now. It's somewhat limited for a reason I reckon. I'd rather someone bottle up the urge to call me or my kids names to do with colour, so if that's where limits are there for, then so be it

[Tyre Tread]

DeanR32 said:

Yeah, I'd probably go along with that. It doesn't need any police interference.

And I can hear what you're saying about we should have total freedom of speech. I personally couldn't care less if it stayed as it is now. It's somewhat limited for a reason I reckon. I'd rather someone bottle up the urge to call me or my kids names to do with colour, so if that's where limits are there for, then so be it

If you think this incident didn't need Police interference then surely you must accept that the enforcement based upon what people say has gone too far. However you go on to say "I personally couldn't care less if it stayed as it is now." This is in itself a contradiction.

Personally I find your (albeit swear filter censored) use of bad language equally as objectionable as the comments by the person who made the wholly inappropriate joke.

[DeanR32]

Tyre Tread said:

If you think this incident didn't need Police interference then surely you must accept that the enforcement based upon what people say has gone too far. However you go on to say "I personally couldn't care less if it stayed as it is now." This is in itself a contradiction.

Personally I find your (albeit swear filter censored) use of bad language equally as objectionable as the comments by the person who made the wholly inappropriate joke.

I'm sure I'll be repeating myself when I say I think police action is too far, but something should be done in some sort of naming and shaming form.

Are you sure I'm contradicting myself when I couldn't care less if there's some sort of police prosecution process regarding things like this? It's too far in my eyes, but I don't care either way.

And you find a few censored swear words equally as "objectionable" as what this boy said? They swear in movies above a PG rating. Do you not watch them?

Honestly mate

[DeanR32]

Poxy phone!