Huge Fire In Block Of Flats
Discussion
The model of the tower block had victims at the windows, none of whom were white. There was a cross of St George flying in garden, and the audio had them cracking jokes at the victims' expense.. I don't know about the legalities, but I doubt it's illegal to be a "free Tommy Robinson" mindless racist t
t in your own garden. There's probably no law about publishing their names and addresses either and then let's see how mouthy they are.
Scum.
t in your own garden. There's probably no law about publishing their names and addresses either and then let's see how mouthy they are.Scum.
Cold said:
Under a week since Chief Constable Sara Thornton stated the police should focus on burglary and violent crime we have calls for police involvement in a tasteless joke. That new directive lasted well.
Sara Thornton is not a Chief Constable.Come on, if you're going to criticise then fair enough - but at least get your facts straight.
I'll add that I have no idea what rank Thornton currently holds or if she is still a Police 0fficer.
She is chair of the NPCC though (the replacement for ACPO) so I kind of get your point.
PH - pedantry matters.
Red 4 said:
Cold said:
Under a week since Chief Constable Sara Thornton stated the police should focus on burglary and violent crime we have calls for police involvement in a tasteless joke. That new directive lasted well.
Sara Thornton is not a Chief Constable.Come on, if you're going to criticise then fair enough - but at least get your facts straight.
I'll add that I have no idea what rank Thornton currently holds or if she is still a Police 0fficer.
She is chair of the NPCC though (the replacement for ACPO) so I kind of get your point.
PH - pedantry matters.
Cold said:
She was being labelled as such by the report on the 1st of this month by the Beeb: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-46053069
Yeah, I saw that.I've no idea what Thornton is Chief Constable of though ... She stepped down as Chief of Thames Valley a few years ago to take up her role as Chair of the NPCC.
I even googled her. For at least 30 seconds. And then came to the conclusion that I really don't care.
I take your point though about her comments last week and now this. Fair comment.
gizlaroc said:
Noodle1982 said:
petop said:
Ok is it me but was i the only one that discretely (inside of course!) sniggered at this?
Ok maybe its the dark humour drawn out from 24 years military service but lighten up (no pun intended there!!).
I'm with you on this one.Ok maybe its the dark humour drawn out from 24 years military service but lighten up (no pun intended there!!).
I therefore can't for one second see how mocking those who went through this is any way humorous?
If you find the thought of this funny I worry for those around you.
The thought of anyone being burnt alive is not funny but then neither is being blown up by a IED and losing a leg and 2 arms, but the person that happened to, myself and many others on a certain military forum have ripped the pish out of him constantly with "one way of getting out of a Afghanistan tour" or "i take it Strictly Come Dancing is not on the cards this year?" comments.
In the fact that someone decided to make the effort to do that on Bonfire night instead of burning a effigy of a catholic human being (now that sounds a little different doesnt it when Guy Fawkes is being referred to like that?) then its this that was funny, albeit in a dark sense.
I bet you cursed Prince Harry when he dressed as a Nazi then?
Dont worry, i am not that cold. Today i rescued a abandoned 2 day old lamb, gave it some condensed milk and managed to get it back to its Mother....the heartless tw*t i am!
It’s about as funny as mocking any of the tragic events that have happened. Silly naive - likely drunk/stoned individuals.
Police involvement is farcical the individuals who did it will already be paying a high price and rightly having the guilt for such a retarded thing to do hanging shame on them.
Police involvement is farcical the individuals who did it will already be paying a high price and rightly having the guilt for such a retarded thing to do hanging shame on them.
gizlaroc said:
I have a pretty dark sense of humour, but the thought of watching the fear on my 10 year old son and my wife's faces as the flames come into our house knowing they are about to be burnt alive fills me with dread.
I therefore can't for one second see how mocking those who went through this is any way humorous?
If you find the thought of this funny I worry for those around you.
What else can't people joke about? Just so we're clear. I wouldn't want you to worry about my friends and family if I find a joke about a plane crash amusing. I therefore can't for one second see how mocking those who went through this is any way humorous?
If you find the thought of this funny I worry for those around you.
TwigtheWonderkid said:
The model of the tower block had victims at the windows, none of whom were white. There was a cross of St George flying in garden, and the audio had them cracking jokes at the victims' expense.. I don't know about the legalities, but I doubt it's illegal to be a "free Tommy Robinson" mindless racist tt in your own garden. There's probably no law about publishing their names and addresses either and then let's see how mouthy they are.
Scum.
Pretty sure I saw a pink character with orange hair?t in your own garden. There's probably no law about publishing their names and addresses either and then let's see how mouthy they are.Scum.
dmulally said:
What else can't people joke about? Just so we're clear. I wouldn't want you to worry about my friends and family if I find a joke about a plane crash amusing.
Don't worry, I wouldn't care less about you or you family. 
There was just something really distasteful about that video, the way they had their kids laughing.
I just think it sums up some pretty serious issues we have many parents these days.
I think it will be very interesting to see who there are, I think a lot of people will be surprised.
I doubt it could be a hate crime, I think angle would be Communications Act, sending a grossly offensive message - the same as the nazi pug guy.
The difference is that Mark Meechan "broadcast" his on YouTube, and the court believed it was intended to cause offence to some of the viewers.
In this case, the video appears to have been made casually and spread outside of the friends.
I can't see that it's illegal to burn an effigy of anything in the (relative) privacy of your garden, and taking a video and sending it to people you know won't be offended wouldn't fall under the communications act offence.... quite where that leaves us is a good question...
The difference is that Mark Meechan "broadcast" his on YouTube, and the court believed it was intended to cause offence to some of the viewers.
In this case, the video appears to have been made casually and spread outside of the friends.
I can't see that it's illegal to burn an effigy of anything in the (relative) privacy of your garden, and taking a video and sending it to people you know won't be offended wouldn't fall under the communications act offence.... quite where that leaves us is a good question...
Edited by Gareth79 on Tuesday 6th November 02:41
Gareth79 said:
I doubt it could be a hate crime, I think angle would be Communications Act, sending a grossly offensive message - the same as the nazi pug guy.
The difference is that Mark Meechan "broadcast" his on YouTube, and the court believed it was intended to cause offence to some of the viewers.
In this case, the video appears to have been made casually and spread outside of the friends.
I can't see that it's illegal to burn an effigy of anything in the (relative) privacy of your garden, and taking a video and sending it to people you know won't be offended wouldn't fall under the communications act offence.... quite where that leaves us is a good question...
Most normal people would find what they did as abhorrent so spare us all the legalities bThe difference is that Mark Meechan "broadcast" his on YouTube, and the court believed it was intended to cause offence to some of the viewers.
In this case, the video appears to have been made casually and spread outside of the friends.
I can't see that it's illegal to burn an effigy of anything in the (relative) privacy of your garden, and taking a video and sending it to people you know won't be offended wouldn't fall under the communications act offence.... quite where that leaves us is a good question...
Edited by anonymous-user on Tuesday 6th November 02:41
ks. They might not get done for anything but they'll be named and shamed so hopefully have a moron tag around them for the rest of their lives.Salmonofdoubt said:
I’m outraged that someone did something in a private party.
Seriously when bad taste is a hate crime what do we have left?
People need thicker skins and to stop faux outrage on behalf the others.
This. fSeriously when bad taste is a hate crime what do we have left?
People need thicker skins and to stop faux outrage on behalf the others.
king ridiculous. Awfully bad taste thing to do let alone film and put on the internet, but that is absolutely all it is. It becoming a police matter is absolutely insane.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff