Nagel Posted March 19, 2012 Share Posted March 19, 2012 So you will also believe that being racist is a freedom of speech too... when does someone cross the line (if you even think there is one!) Yes, I do. If someone wants to say racist things it shouldn't be a police matter in my opinion. However, I don't see how this Facebook kid was being racist in any way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted March 19, 2012 Share Posted March 19, 2012 One question that may arise from this ,and Im sure I will be derided in a spectacular manner,should Facebook be held more accountable for things like this posted on their website ,I know they have millions of users but they also have a multi billion bank account to surely employ monitors,the site doesnt even have swearing filters,now you cant tell me with the size of their bank balance and access to up to date technology they cant at least attempt some kind of monitoring. Why should they? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted March 19, 2012 Share Posted March 19, 2012 He was charged and bailed over the weekend, he's in court tommorow. The charge was racially agrevated public order offenses, the report didn't state which exactly but i'd guess section 4a or section 5. I can't see how they expect it to go anywhere, he doesn't mention race in the statement he made. I hope the prosecutors aren't going to pretend that the British army is made up purely of caucasians. I'm sure the defence will point out that it includes many different ethnic backgrounds, including people of the same ethnicity as the defendant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrsDavies2Be Posted March 19, 2012 Share Posted March 19, 2012 Well alright then I agree with you both about the death sentence bit but if we were to say something racist it would be outrageous though. I know that was a mis carriage of justice the case of Stephen Lawrence I agree with you there I did not get a very good nights sleep thamks I am a night owl twit twooo that is when I come alive. :thumbsup: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harleyman Posted March 19, 2012 Share Posted March 19, 2012 That's really quite different isn't it. You see, he never mentioned race, religion or colour. I know that's hard to grasp, but he didn't... Are you being racist? Hmmm, given that the troops are fighting the taliban who live in rural afghanistan I suspect that they don't need some bloke in the UK to tell them to kill the people they are fighting. I'd also be very surprised if they all carry laptops and communication equipment around with them, followed by a generator. In every army there are the Lieutenant Calleys and the Sergeant Bales, maybe more so in the US Forces given that they are ten times the size of any other allied forces. The tragedy here is that these very few bad apples bring disgrace on their comrades who have to bear the collective burden of guilt because of these miscreants. I have no sympathy for this man who posted his tirade of hate. He's an ignorant stupid moron and it's even sadder that he should share the same nationality that I once did. He should have directed his rant at the politicians whose decisons resulted in sending these soldiers to such a place as Afganistan in the first place. No army was ever trained to fight wars that go on for years and years and rotating the same soldiers over and over again imposes an unreasonable amount of stress on them and their families. I'm sure that this war has left a whole trail of broken families if the truth is known. You may be essentially right in defending this man's freedom of speech but bear in mind also that there are more victims than just those innocents among the Afghan populace. These soldiers in their own right are also vicitms Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted March 19, 2012 Share Posted March 19, 2012 I can't disagree with what you've written there, but none of that takes away the guys right to free speech or makes what he said a crime. I haven't defended what he said, I just don't think he's committed a crime, the police and the CPS are going to make themselves look silly and they've abandoned any moral high ground they might have been able to claim. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andygardener Posted March 19, 2012 Share Posted March 19, 2012 I can't see how they expect it to go anywhere, he doesn't mention race in the statement he made. I hope the prosecutors aren't going to pretend that the British army is made up purely of caucasians. I'm sure the defence will point out that it includes many different ethnic backgrounds, including people of the same ethnicity as the defendant. You're confusing two issues. He's very likely been charged with either a section 4a or section 5. Thats for the thing he wrote. Whether it's racially aggrevated or not depends on the reasons behind why he did the thing he's accused of, not that that thing was in itself racist. So what explanation at arrest, under interview or both he's given for doing the thing he's accused of has in this case led the police to believe it was motivated by racism, and the CPS to concur. So, in a hypothetical example white woman A hit's white woman B in an unprovoked assault. Thats the only publically available information. Under interview she gives the reason for the assault that woman B has an Asian boyfriend which she vehemently disaproves of for racist reasons. She would probably be charged with racially aggrevated common assault, however until the trial it would seem like an odd charge as the only information available in public was one white woman hit another white woman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glamrocker Posted March 19, 2012 Share Posted March 19, 2012 Why should they? Why shouldnt they..Oh Cyclone say no more usual trolling Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zamo Posted March 19, 2012 Share Posted March 19, 2012 I can't see how they expect it to go anywhere, he doesn't mention race in the statement he made. I hope the prosecutors aren't going to pretend that the British army is made up purely of caucasians. I'm sure the defence will point out that it includes many different ethnic backgrounds, including people of the same ethnicity as the defendant. I think you are wrong on this one Cyclone. Below is a link to the Equalities & Human Rights Commission where you can see their definition. EHRC website According to their definition this is clearly an offence under the RRA. I think this thread does raise an interesting question. Why are people seeking to excuse his offensive behaviour using technicalities? If it was someone being prosecuted for posting about wanting killing pakis dead, then there would rightly be no quarter given. You certainly wouldn't have the liberal elite saying "arghh but Pakistan isn't a race it's a country with many different races so it isn't racist". I do however agree with posters who point out that we are in danger of suppressing free speech by making the causing of offence a crime. I think we are still trying to work out where the line is but what is clear is we need the same line for all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halibut Posted March 19, 2012 Share Posted March 19, 2012 I think you are wrong on this one Cyclone. Below is a link to the Equalities & Human Rights Commission where you can see their definition. EHRC website According to their definition this is clearly an offence under the RRA. I'm afraid I just don't see it; can you clarify which parts of what was said you think fall foul of the law please? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.