Results are out! Find what you need...fast. Get quick advice or join the chat
Hey there Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Man Arrested Over Offensive Twitter Comments Over Muamba

Announcements Posted on
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tommyjw)
    Because it's all about whether the reasonable person would find it offensive.

    Last bit is pure and utter garbage. Freedom of speech does and always lasted up until a point where it impedes other peoples rights and that is how it should be. Nowhere in freedom of speech does it say that it should be allowed over all and every other right or law.
    And what are these 'rights' you speak of?
    • 48 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    at least poor Muamba can't read these horrible comments. it must be heartbreaking for his relatives and friends though
    • 4 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tommyjw)
    People are free to say it where it wouldnt offend someone and rightly so. I could go outside and say it all day, as long as no1 if offended by what i am doing. If i admitted to the police i was talking to the mirror making very racist comments inside my house then nothing would happen, and so it shouldn't.

    But you have to mix the rights of the person to say what he wants whenever he wants, with the rights of those around him to live without such views being forced on them wherever they may go, which is why the law is good. Should we allow anyone to walk around a town centre and say extremely racist things (that arent directly aimed at people) and make everyone near him suffer for it? No. 'Freedom of speech' has to be cut down and put in line with other peoples rights.
    That's not really true at all. You have no right not to be offended. That right does not exist, either legally or in any sense of the reasoned mind. What IS illegal is inciting racial hatred, which is equally illegal if you say it to a white person who shrugs, a black person who tells you to eff-off, or a white power rally. It's not the case if you say it in a mirror (you're correct there) because there's no one there to incite into action. But the legalities of it have nothing at all to do with being offended or not.
    • 11 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CyclopsRock)
    That's not really true at all. You have no right not to be offended. That right does not exist, either legally or in any sense of the reasoned mind
    Of course it exists legally otherwise assault, harrassment etc wouldnt be real..... .....

    IF you had no right not to be offended than public harassment laws would not exist. Laws with regards to people running around shouting racial abuse would not exist. These and other laws are all ways to limit what a person can say to another in order to protect that person.

    What IS illegal is inciting racial hatred, which is equally illegal if you say it to a white person who shrugs, a black person who tells you to eff-off, or a white power rally. It's not the case if you say it in a mirror (you're correct there) because there's no one there to incite into action. But the legalities of it have nothing at all to do with being offended or not.
    Yes, yes it does.
    If someone is likely to be offended by what you are saying, then it is illegal. If you have reasonable reason to think no1 can hear or no1 will be offended then it is not illegal. You are ignoring the very basics of the public order act.

    "The defendant had no reason to believe that there was any person within hearing or sight who was likely to be alarmed or distressed by his action.". If a person is within sight, but it is not reasonable to suggest he was likely to be distressed by those words, than it is not an offense.
    • Thread Starter
    • 16 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by prog2djent)
    "If we don't believe in free expression for people we despise, we don't believe in it at all." -- Noam Chomsky.

    Thanks beepbeeprichie, hopefully the so called 'left' on here realise a real lefty says such things.
    I think I need to use that more often - thanks for the good quote.


    (Original post by the bear)
    at least poor Muamba can't read these horrible comments. it must be heartbreaking for his relatives and friends though
    I feel sorry for Muamba, not just because he's ill, but because this whole incident is ridiculous. I think what's happening is that the people who didn't like Muamba before, perhaps not for any racial reason but purely because they didn't like him as a player/person etc., are getting demonised because of all the support behind him which isn't very fair - imagine the person you hated most in the world suddenly got a lot of sympathy and suddenly it became 'wrong' to hate them. Not that I'm suggesting Muamba was an unlikeable character or that he wasn't a good player, but it's just something I've noticed.

    (Original post by Genocidal)
    Of course it is, remember this guy? http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf...ther_multiline

    The internet is becoming less and less free for people to say what they like. The only places where you can get away with real freedom of speech now is in the darker corners of the internet. I believe it was Winston Churchill who once said that the facists of the future will be the anti-fascists, quite apt for the way we are going.
    Yeah, very true. Soon we won't be able to think without some alarm going off somewhere.

    (Original post by Tommyjw)
    Good. He was racist, and posted racist things in a public domain, and thus should be punished for it. Dont give a **** if it has anything to do with freedom of speech, it is published material and should be treated so.
    So if someone made an account with no followers, one which wasn't directing tweets to anyone or making any hashtags, but was acting rather like an online journal, and one day someone suddenly stumbled across it and found it was full of racist comments, should the account be closed??? It's not harming anyone, it's just there. Or even in a more private case where the account was private and only one person, the author of such an account, could access it, is it right that because it exists it should be destroyed?

    Try to imagine that type of world before you make comments regarding freedom of speech - you're very lucky you live (I presume) in the UK where we have at least some freedom of speech, why try to limit what we already have? Sounds borderline facist to me.

    (Original post by ROYP)
    I don't see why inciting hatred should be illegal. Let these people expose themselves as ********s.
    Yeah, if people are wanting to be racist/homophobic/sexist/hate people purely because of religion etc. then let them - I think their views, though they can be challenged, should not be censored purely because it's their entitlement to believe in what they want, and if they want to then they have every right to. As long as they're not shooting people to justify their beliefs then let them shout and bawl all they want.

    (Original post by rich2606)
    Did he retweet a joke from sickipedia or something?
    I don't know, but even sickipedia is under threat. I think this is a job for the wambulance!

    (Original post by Belle-x)
    Good. Can't beleive how sick some people are, God know's what they get out of it. There's another one on Twitter that I've seen mentioned a lot, some American guy calling Muamba all sort's of names and saying he deserves to die. Horrible.

    The guy in that article has claimed somebody stole his phone and hacked him. Can face up to seven years in prison but doubt anything will come of it tbh.
    Though I don't agree with what he said, he can say whatever he wants on the internet. You, like a lot of people who get offended easily, don't understand the long term consequences that are at stake if we take away the right to believe in what we want and say what we want. Ironic that someone who would probably believe Nazi Germany to be an abhorrent thing is actually in favour of our Government taking the first steps towards a similar state.


    (Original post by limetang)
    Offence is relative. How on earth can you make laws about something so goddam subjective. By that logic anything you say could in theory be illegal if you find one person who finds it offensive. Preventing people from getting offended should take a back seat to allowing people to speak their mind. Besides. Nothing actually happens if you get offended. They don't burst into flames or anything like that.

    You either have the right to speak freely about any matter irrespective of whether it offends someone or you do not have the right to free speech.
    Agreed.
    • 11 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kiss)
    So if someone made an account with no followers, one which wasn't directing tweets to anyone or making any hashtags, but was acting rather like an online journal, and one day someone suddenly stumbled across it and found it was full of racist comments, should the account be closed???
    Yes it should. It is published material and thats how it should be treated. Whether it would actually be closed or not is down to if it is found and enough people report it so that the website takes notice.

    It's not harming anyone, it's just there.
    Not harming anyone? I guess the whole world just loves racist comments then. Everyones loves seeing them. Oh wait.. they dont? Then it will offend people.

    Try to imagine that type of world before you make comments regarding freedom of speech - you're very lucky you live (I presume) in the UK where we have at least some freedom of speech, why try to limit what we already have? Sounds borderline facist to me.
    Umm.. what are you talking about? I dont need to imagine what type of world i live in because the country i live in already has such laws and views in place. This isnt a radical new view that is coming in in a few years via a new law is it? No. Its an established concept of our legal system and our view of the freedom of speech. If anything YOU are the one not fully understanding it because you do not accept that it is already in place. We are not 'limiting what we already have' because nothing has changed.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    You can see what he wrote if you put in 'Liam Stacey Twitter' into YouTube. He's also pleaded guilty to inciting racial hatred.
    • 3 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    Arrested for writing something incorrect = police state.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    I like the idea of freedom of speech, but you can't use it in absolute terms. You may say what you want, and you are free to do so, but you are responsible for the words that you chose to use, and you will be held accountable for them.

    In other words, say what you want, but if you're going to be a dick you'll get served.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    He's a racist scally who decided to give it the big one on a public forum.

    I have no sympathy for him.
    • 1 follower
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Archamedes)
    I like the idea of freedom of speech, but you can't use it in absolute terms. You may say what you want, and you are free to do so, but you are responsible for the words that you chose to use, and you will be held accountable for them.

    In other words, say what you want, but if you're going to be a dick you'll get served.
    Agreed, especially the bit in bold.
    • 1 follower
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    Horrible comments but shouldn't have been arrested for them in my view.

    FoS is too important.
    • 6 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    Another example of fascism being used to bash freedom of speech. Don't those blue-titted hat wearing idiots have anything better to do?
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Time Tourist)
    Arrested for writing something incorrect = police state.
    which is not what he did, or intended to do or was arrested for doing = not police state.
    • Thread Starter
    • 16 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tommyjw)
    Yes it should. It is published material and thats how it should be treated. Whether it would actually be closed or not is down to if it is found and enough people report it so that the website takes notice.
    But what if no one finds it, what then? For one thing it's existence is not doing anyone any harm as it's not being read. Secondly, you sound like the type of person who wouldn't like the thought of any racism existing in any place at any time even if it's not directly affecting anyone/offending people - let's transfer this example of an account which no one can see or read to someone thinking - someone's thoughts can't be read (currently) but what if someone who thought racist thoughts in their head but didn't ever mention anything racist out loud? I'm sure most people would be satisfied with that but you wouldn't - you, knowing that it exists, would no doubt want that person to think your 'perfect world' thoughts.

    I found Mein Kampf in the library the other day - not that I was searching for it - but I'm sure you would no doubt want to destroy every last copy of it since it 'incites hatred'. That's just an example of book which you might call racist which hasn't actually been banned......


    Not harming anyone? I guess the whole world just loves racist comments then. Everyones loves seeing them. Oh wait.. they dont? Then it will offend people.

    You're quite ignorant to think everyone agrees with you and that no one is racist when there quite a few people in the world, perhaps not the majority but a significant number, hence why racism exists. And you can't simply censor the views of people you disagree with. That's called facism . And frankly you strike me as a facist.


    Umm.. what are you talking about? I dont need to imagine what type of world i live in because the country i live in already has such laws and views in place. This isnt a radical new view that is coming in in a few years via a new law is it? No. Its an established concept of our legal system and our view of the freedom of speech. If anything YOU are the one not fully understanding it because you do not accept that it is already in place. We are not 'limiting what we already have' because nothing has changed.
    No, I was talking about what our country is likely heading for when our government is backed by people like you who kick up a fuss at every single little word which could cause offense/lack a sense of humour on the internet. I know what is in place, but I certainly don't agree with it. We are limiting ourselves if people don't stand up for little incidents like this, they make up the bigger picture to what the UK is going to turn into. From what a liberal, left-wing agenda people originally strived for, people now ignore the real meaning of 'liberal' and 'free' means and only want to focus on censoring everything, to the point where the once ideological liberal, left-wing agenda becomes a facist nation.
    • 2 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tommyjw)
    Because it's all about whether the reasonable person would find it offensive.

    Last bit is pure and utter garbage. Freedom of speech does and always lasted up until a point where it impedes other peoples rights and that is how it should be. Nowhere in freedom of speech does it say that it should be allowed over all and every other right or law.
    Why are we putting the pathetic 'right not to be offended' above the right of all citizens to speak their mind without fear of arrest. And that includes citizens who we'd rather didn't speak their minds.

    Do you want to know what you do if someone uses their right to free speech to express views you find distasteful. You use your right to free speech to make it clear how horrible their views are.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    Good, freedom of speech doesn't mean you have the freedom to be a complete cock while hiding behind your laptop screen.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    I'm sorry, what? How is it fair that a man is arrested for being a little offensive? If he was encouraging people to kill him or to kill all people of his race, then fine, but I think freedom of speech trumps a person's right to not be offended.
    • 10 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    A sad day for freedom of speech.
    • 2 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    basically the guy who posted these comments is a sick troll.

    there seems to be a meme where people post up sick material on face book memorials for people who have died or are ill etc.

    its sick.


    but should a healthy society really be arresting trolls? it seems WAY over the top and this sort of thing is happening more and more. its very sinister.

Reply

Submit reply

Register

Thanks for posting! You just need to create an account in order to submit the post
  1. this can't be left blank
    that username has been taken, please choose another Forgotten your password?
  2. this can't be left blank
    this email is already registered. Forgotten your password?
  3. this can't be left blank

    6 characters or longer with both numbers and letters is safer

  4. this can't be left empty
    your full birthday is required
  1. By joining you agree to our Ts and Cs, privacy policy and site rules

  2. Slide to join now Processing…

Updated: April 21, 2012
New on TSR

Find out what year 11 is like

Going into year 11? Students who did it last year share what to expect.

Article updates
Useful resources
Reputation gems:
You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.