[rainbow_kisses]

(Original post by Bonged.)
Ginger people are white fyi, so it's not racist.

What? I'm talking about how if I discriminate against someone for a different characteristic it's not a crime but suddenly when I bring up skin colour it is

[original_username]

(Original post by Bonged.)
Ginger people are white fyi, so it's not racist.

Wes Brown.

MIND. BLOWN.

[whyumadtho]

(Original post by Bonged.)
Nope, just people that they see throwing rocks at them, attacking them, attacking members of the public, burning down peoples homes.

So, if an Asian (he's also a recently arrived migrant Muslim ) police officer saw a 5-year old 'white' working-class girl throwing rocks, and this police officer decided to release his deep-seated contempt of 'white' people by killing this girl in a bloody frenzy of violence, that is appropriate? Of course, the police officer personally assessed the situation as warranting such violence, because it is his role to distribute justice. The notion of 'disproportionate' doesn't come into this policy at all, so all police officers can murder anybody they happen to dislike at that particular moment without reprimand. We may as well let all prisoners be police officers since they are able to do whatever they want to whomever they want!

We saw how useful your idea of a police force was in the riots, didn't we.

Anecdotes won't make me change my belief that criminal judgement should be the prerogative of the courts.

[Sovr'gnChancellor£]

(Original post by rainbow_kisses)
Can someone please explain this to me, why is being racist a crime? I would not get in trouble with the police for calling someone a ginger **** but I would get in trouble for calling a someone a black ****, how is that different?

No, no - the office called him a 'n1gger', a derogatory word used for black slaves in the past.

[Psyk]

(Original post by marcusfox)
On Stacey, Senior CPS lawyer, Jim Brisbane says:

"Racist language is inappropriate in any setting and through any media. We hope this case will serve as a warning to anyone who thinks that comments made online are somehow above the law"

But there is a difference here. The police officer didn't publish the racist language. If you say something racist on Twitter you're actually publishing it for the rest of the world to see. If you say something racist privately, it's not illegal surely? Well, I suppose it might be if you're using the language to harrass other people, which you could argue he was doing in this case. But say a white person said something racist about black people to another white person. Surely that's not illegal? If that other white person happens to record it without their knowledge, surely it's still not illegal?

[Sovr'gnChancellor£]

(Original post by Bonged.)
Nope, just people that they see throwing rocks at them, attacking them, attacking members of the public, burning down peoples homes.

We saw how useful your idea of a police force was in the riots, didn't we.

Relating to your post beforehand, you do realise that the man in question was pulled over (he was in a car) and arrested for an offence totally unrelated to the riots (i.e. suspicion of being under the influence of drugs) - twas nothing to do with the riots.

[Bonged.]

(Original post by Sovr'gnChancellor£)
No, no - the office called him a 'n1gger', a derogatory word used for black slaves in the past.

thats wrong.

I was discussing with whyumadtho his position that the police should not "assault" people that are burning down homes, murdering people trying to put out fires etc.

ps. i'd be careful about circumventing the swearblocker with that word. you could literally end up in prison.

[rainbow_kisses]

(Original post by Sovr'gnChancellor£)
No, no - the office called him a 'n1gger', a derogatory word used for black slaves in the past.

In the past? Last time I checked we live in 2012.

[Id and Ego seek]

(Original post by rainbow_kisses)
Can someone please explain this to me, why is being racist a crime? I would not get in trouble with the police for calling someone a ginger **** but I would get in trouble for calling a someone a black ****, how is that different?

When you hold such a high position in society, as a law enforcer, you can't be using such derogatory terms in your work.

Remember what Uncle Ben said? With great power comes great responsibility.

[Bonged.]

(Original post by whyumadtho)
So, if an Asian (he's also a recently arrived migrant Muslim ) police officer saw a 5-year old 'white' working-class girl throwing rocks, and this police officer decided to release his deep-seated contempt of 'white' people by killing this girl in a bloody frenzy of violence, that is appropriate? Of course, the police officer personally assessed the situation as warranting such violence, because it is his role to distribute justice. The notion of 'disproportionate' doesn't come into this policy at all, so all police officers can murder anybody they happen to dislike at that particular moment without reprimand. We may as well let all prisoners be police officers since they are able to do whatever they want to whomever they want!

Anecdotes won't make me change my belief that criminal judgement should be the prerogative of the courts.

Are you literally unhinged? If he saw a 15 year old white working class person assaulting other people and burning homes, I would EXPECT that he "assaults" them to stop them from injuring other people.

A bit of logic and pragmatism, please. Christ.

What anecdote?

[rainbow_kisses]

(Original post by Id and Ego seek)
When you hold such a high position in society, as a law enforcer, you can't be using such derogatory terms.

Remember what Uncle Ben said? With great power comes great responsibility.

Yes, I accept that, still doesn't answer my question about how its different for discriminating against someone for any other characteristic.

[Id and Ego seek]

(Original post by rainbow_kisses)
In the past? Last time I checked we live in 2012.

lol the hurtful connotations still and will always apply

[whyumadtho]

(Original post by rainbow_kisses)
Can someone please explain this to me, why is being racist a crime? I would not get in trouble with the police for calling someone a ginger **** but I would get in trouble for calling a someone a black ****, how is that different?

No. Under Section 4A.1.a of the Public Order Act 1986, Chapter 64, "A person is guilty of an offence if, with intent to cause a person harassment, alarm or distress, he [...] uses threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour, or disorderly behaviour, [...] thereby causing that or another person harassment, alarm or distress."

If harassment, alarm or distress can be demonstrated in a court of law, you can indeed be prosecuted for calling somebody a "ginger ****".

[rainbow_kisses]

(Original post by whyumadtho)
No. Under Section 4A.1.a of the Public Order Act 1986, Chapter 64, "A person is guilty of an offence if, with intent to cause a person harassment, alarm or distress, he [...] uses threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour, or disorderly behaviour, [...] thereby causing that or another person harassment, alarm or distress."

If harassment, alarm or distress can be demonstrated in a court of law, you can indeed be prosecuted for calling somebody a "ginger ****".

Okay, thanks!

[internet tough guy]

(Original post by najinaji)
I was arguing against this point:


You don't honestly think that I think it's alright to go around calling people *******...?

Well I assumed we all thought he implied respect in context with the incident of this thread, in effect putting: respect = not being racist. Regardless, I think its quite reasonable to expect the police to be professional when they deal with suspects, obviously I'm not expecting them to strike up a friendly conversation with them as they may with grannies and children in the park on a sunday morning, but I can't see whats wrong with adopting common formal courtesy standards towards suspects.

[Id and Ego seek]

(Original post by rainbow_kisses)
Yes, I accept that, still doesn't answer my question about how its different for discriminating against someone for any other characteristic.

What? I don't quite follow.

If you said to a Jewish man he was a 'greedy, money loving, big nosed shmut.' That would be discriminating against someone for another characteristic. It's not different; playing on pre-conformed stereotypes to insult and provoke is always wrong. Is that what you mean?

[whyumadtho]

(Original post by Bonged.)
Are you literally unhinged? If he saw a 15 year old white working class person assaulting other people and burning homes, I would EXPECT that he "assaults" them to stop them from injuring other people.

A bit of logic and pragmatism, please. Christ.

Can he kill them? You realise permitting assault with the intention of '[stopping] them' means anything, don't you? If a police officer saw a toddler hitting someone in the park and decided 'stopping them' would require kicking them repeatedly in the head, is that okay? This is why the law only grants officers the ability to restrain and detain people, not deliver unwarranted summary 'justice'.

What anecdote?

Riots.

[marcusfox]

(Original post by Psyk)
But there is a difference here. The police officer didn't publish the racist language. If you say something racist on Twitter you're actually publishing it for the rest of the world to see. If you say something racist privately, it's not illegal surely? Well, I suppose it might be if you're using the language to harrass other people, which you could argue he was doing in this case. But say a white person said something racist about black people to another white person. Surely that's not illegal? If that other white person happens to record it without their knowledge, surely it's still not illegal?

A racist incident is one that is perceived to be racist by the victim or any other person.

[doggyfizzel]

(Original post by Psyk)
But there is a difference here. The police officer didn't publish the racist language. If you say something racist on Twitter you're actually publishing it for the rest of the world to see. If you say something racist privately, it's not illegal surely? Well, I suppose it might be if you're using the language to harrass other people, which you could argue he was doing in this case. But say a white person said something racist about black people to another white person. Surely that's not illegal? If that other white person happens to record it without their knowledge, surely it's still not illegal?

This is in no way private though, he's a public servant carrying out his duty and being paid for it. Its not a comment made to another white person in private either, its a comment made by a police officer to a suspect he has detained.

[Bonged.]

(Original post by whyumadtho)
Can he kill them? You realise permitting assault with the intention of '[stopping] them' means anything, don't you? If a police officer saw a toddler hitting someone in the park and decided 'stopping them' would require kicking them repeatedly in the head, is that okay? This is why the law only grants officers the ability to restrain and detain people, not deliver unwarranted summary 'justice'.

Riots.

No , behave yourself. Obviously I mean with the intention of stopping them from injuring innocent people. Not just for cops to go out and put everyone who says "blud" into a blender.

A person will have to have a certain level of mental stability to become a police officer, only an insane person would do that.

As far as I'm aware they have been well documented and reported. By papers that you will trust too. The guardian reported on them.

The riots showed that the police are unable to deal with large groups of people assaulting innocent people because of people like you who would shout racist or some other cliche if they actually did get their truncheons out and batter some scumbags.