It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

UK police arrest man for offensive tweet and other disturbing trends

page: 4
16
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 26 2014 @ 01:49 PM
link   
a reply to: Domo1

If people are afforded the ability of free speech, then it should be used responsibly.

Acting like a tasteless jerk may seem innocuous, until you take into account the fact that a lot of people got killed, at a particularly sensitive time of the year, and what unfolded has some of the worst elements of human tragedy in it - imagine being the parent who saw their partner and kid killed - does that comment seem a little more sour now?

People can say words don't hurt, but try telling that to the parents of the recently deceased who are being made a joke of.

Couching tastelessness, spite and downright nastiness under the excuse of "freedom of speech" is simply making an excuse for morons who, sadly, are afforded a public platform these days. 20 years ago this fool would have not had the ability to be an asshole in public.

Its the same with the fools with knives and weapons in their pictures - the question is why are they doing it? To look tough? To intimidate?

Or are they going out to try and shank people because they either don't know the value of life or simply don't care. Either way they need saving from their own stupidity before they go out and be the assholes who kill someone who will be made fun of on twitter by another asshole.

Legally, the British Police have to investigate if someone makes a complaint.

Whether the Crown Prosecution Service choose to prosecute is down to them.




posted on Dec, 26 2014 @ 02:01 PM
link   
a reply to: Domo1

Creepy it is, but I'd expect two things of this. First, we'll see a lot more of this in the UK going forward because they're sitting on a powder keg of social problems caused by their open borders immigration policies. Second, I've noted over the course of my lifetime that "where so goes the UK, the US is sure to follow".

The reason the US follows the UK is that the elites that run and manage social engineering in the US (among other things) greatly admire the UK as a liberal, progressive regime moving boldly forward toward the end goal of the unified, Progressive Utopia where the almighty/all knowing Government inserts itself into the daily lives of every subject. Notice I said, "subject" because the term "citizen" doesn't mean anything to them. Citizenship has been reduced to a mere work permit of a particular type and a tax I.D. number such that the Government can wreak rapacious taxes upon the hapless masses.

Just be glad you weren't born 20 years later than you were. This can only get worse.



posted on Dec, 26 2014 @ 04:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: neformore
a reply to: Domo1

If people are afforded the ability of free speech, then it should be used responsibly.

Acting like a tasteless jerk may seem innocuous, until you take into account the fact that a lot of people got killed, at a particularly sensitive time of the year, and what unfolded has some of the worst elements of human tragedy in it - imagine being the parent who saw their partner and kid killed - does that comment seem a little more sour now?

People can say words don't hurt, but try telling that to the parents of the recently deceased who are being made a joke of.

Couching tastelessness, spite and downright nastiness under the excuse of "freedom of speech" is simply making an excuse for morons who, sadly, are afforded a public platform these days. 20 years ago this fool would have not had the ability to be an asshole in public.

Its the same with the fools with knives and weapons in their pictures - the question is why are they doing it? To look tough? To intimidate?

Or are they going out to try and shank people because they either don't know the value of life or simply don't care. Either way they need saving from their own stupidity before they go out and be the assholes who kill someone who will be made fun of on twitter by another asshole.

Legally, the British Police have to investigate if someone makes a complaint.

Whether the Crown Prosecution Service choose to prosecute is down to them.


It was a joke, I actually have the ability to see the cleverness of the joke and admire the creativity whilst at the same feeling sympathy for those dead and their families.

To compare a joke to freedom of speech is a bit rich, I suppose you support the pulling of the movie The Interview as it is highly offensive to North Koreans, I suppose you never watched the life of Brian because it is highly offensive to many Christians?

Preaching hatred you believe to incite hate crimes or religious wars is a bit different to telling a joke.

Then to compare a joke to knifing people to death is taking artistic licence to the extreme.



posted on Dec, 26 2014 @ 04:21 PM
link   
a reply to: Domo1

an arrest for this 'offence' is a knee-jerk overreaction to, and symptomatic of, society's current trend of hyper-sensitivity and over-deference to a ' political correctness ' express train which is running out of control.
edit on R2014th2014-12-26T16:22:49-06:0020140pm3594 by RoScoLaz4 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 26 2014 @ 04:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: TheCrowMan

originally posted by: stirling
Don't look now....such snivelling self absorbed doo goodies are the future that the ptb desire for all mankind......


But they are never that pure, it's human nature, look what happens when you try and create a so called pure state, Church with a disproportionate amount of sexual deviants, closet homosexuals and paedophiles.



Suppressing your body's natural functions certainly isn't the way to purify it. You're right about the church and the fact that priests were not allowed to engage in natural relationships with women which compelled some of them to consider the altar boys in an inappropriate fashion.



posted on Dec, 26 2014 @ 05:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: Shiloh7
Jokews in bad taste made privately to ones friends are part of british culture and have been made since well before I was born. This is yet another cameron hgelp the elite spy on everyone and get their way by silencing people and making them scared to post what they think.


By all means, bitch and whine about people getting arrested for making stupid tweets, but at least get the culprit right. The Communications Act was brought in during 2003, you know, when Tony Blair was PM? So, nothing to do with "Cameron helping the Elite spy on everyone" in the slightest.

As for the OP, if that is genuinely what was said, this will probably not even get past the CPS in their "public interest" test and if so, any decent Judge or Jury will throw it out as long as he elects for a Crown Court not Magistrates trial. It was a bas taste joke, but nothing more.

That said, the law does protect against people who do genuinely make malicious communications and these types of tweets, texts, e-mails or phone calls can cause genuine distress and harm, so let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater while we're mounting our high horses.....



posted on Dec, 26 2014 @ 07:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: RoScoLaz4
a reply to: Domo1

an arrest for this 'offence' is a knee-jerk overreaction to, and symptomatic of, society's current trend of hyper-sensitivity and over-deference to a ' political correctness ' express train which is running out of control.


If only our society had the same type of knee jerk overreaction to the fact that corporations are poisoning us all, that our governments are systematically repealing basic human rights, spying on us, killing tons of innocent people for no good reason. If only.



posted on Dec, 26 2014 @ 09:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: neformore
The age old mantra....

The USA isn't the world. Its in the world.

Different people in different countries do things in different ways.

One day, you guys over there in the 'States might realise that.

But then again, I've been on here since '06 and you haven't figured it out yet.



Hey im in the UK and even I hate these draconian laws.



posted on Dec, 26 2014 @ 09:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: neformore
a reply to: Domo1

If people are afforded the ability of free speech, then it should be used responsibly.

Acting like a tasteless jerk may seem innocuous, until you take into account the fact that a lot of people got killed, at a particularly sensitive time of the year, and what unfolded has some of the worst elements of human tragedy in it - imagine being the parent who saw their partner and kid killed - does that comment seem a little more sour now?

People can say words don't hurt, but try telling that to the parents of the recently deceased who are being made a joke of.

Couching tastelessness, spite and downright nastiness under the excuse of "freedom of speech" is simply making an excuse for morons who, sadly, are afforded a public platform these days. 20 years ago this fool would have not had the ability to be an asshole in public.

Its the same with the fools with knives and weapons in their pictures - the question is why are they doing it? To look tough? To intimidate?

Or are they going out to try and shank people because they either don't know the value of life or simply don't care. Either way they need saving from their own stupidity before they go out and be the assholes who kill someone who will be made fun of on twitter by another asshole.

Legally, the British Police have to investigate if someone makes a complaint.

Whether the Crown Prosecution Service choose to prosecute is down to them.



Save them from themselfs?

By locking them up and wacking them with criminal records so they cant have any career beyond McDonaldd?

Yeah.......congratulations you just turned a asshat troll into a more serouis career criminal



posted on Dec, 26 2014 @ 10:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: crazyewok

Hey im in the UK and even I hate these draconian laws.



As with many things, it isn't the Law that is Draconian, it is the application of it.

In this particular case, the Police should have taken one look at the tweet and dismissed the complaint, but that's the problem, they cannot ignore any complaint and are compelled to investigate it.

That is what this is, the man has been arrested so that an investigation can take place - being arrested is no indication of any guilt nor any indicator of any charges being brought, but someone made a complaint about a "malicious" communication so the Police were compelled to act.

As I said above, if this is genuinely what the man said, then I strongly suspect the Police will not file charges either under their own direction or that of the CPS.

On the flipside, the Law is there to protect people who may actually be the subject of malicious communications which are genuinely offensive, or even scary. My own fiancee was subject to such text messages etc from her ex for quite some time and it did cause her great fear and anxiety - the guy even threatened me with an axe but being made of sterner stuff, I laughed it off - she ended taking an injunction out and having him arrested - the Police used this Law and others to take that action.

So, as I said above, don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.



posted on Dec, 26 2014 @ 10:05 PM
link   
a reply to: Domo1

Just wondering how many people need to be "offended" before the Offended Police get to work. 133? 23? 1?

Isn't being offended the choice of the person who claims to be offended? If so, then why is the person who spoke the words held responsible for the other person's choice of taking offense?



posted on Dec, 26 2014 @ 11:38 PM
link   
a reply to: Jamie1

It's not about "being offended" - the wording of the law states that a person has committed an offence if there was "malicious intent" to cause "distress, offence or incite hatred". It is then down to the Police and CPS to determine if there was such an intent and whether such a case is "in the public interest". Personally, I feel that this particular tweet was a joke in bad taste rather than a malicious intent, so therefore doesn't apply.

Also, since when is it a choice to be offended? I'm sure if dug up the corpse of your dead Grandma, for example and danced with her bones, wearing her skull as a macabre hat, you'd be pretty "offended" with no choice being considered, or perhaps on the slightly less extreme side of things, I could make disparaging remarks about your avatar or perhaps make a quip about her attire and yourself?

Being offended isn't a choice, it is an emotional response - I think you're confusing having a choice about viewing "offensive" material and actually being offended.



posted on Dec, 27 2014 @ 06:23 AM
link   
I have to agree that in this instance its not exactly the law applicable that's overtly totalitarian. The law is there to protect vulnerable members of society from stalkers, sex pests, and other nefarious individuals. The culprits responsible for implementing said law however aka the Police are more often than not in this day of age rather susceptible to the politically correct bullcrap doing the rounds hence the reason for arrest i imagine.


Simply a waste of the tax payers monies and for what some idiot attention seeker that makes poor jokes, in poor taste, at the most inopportune of moments. If we were to jail everyone that displayed such tendencies rather a significant percentage of our population would be inside.

edit on 27-12-2014 by andy06shake because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 27 2014 @ 09:42 AM
link   
a reply to: stumason

I agree there needs to be law stopping REAL threats of violence and specific targeted bullying/stalking. No arguments there.

But the law needs to be changed to be more specific and less open to abuse and stupid mistakes.


Im fed up of hearing people getting arrested and even getting convicted for off colour jokes or unpopular opinions.
edit on 27-12-2014 by crazyewok because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 27 2014 @ 11:23 AM
link   
Watching the TV the other night i heard comedian Jack dee say when someone mentioned JFK.."Well there's a no brainer" to much hilarity from the panel and the audience.

If we are going to arrest people for bad taste jokes we should start with most Comedians. I'm sure we would hear the general public cry foul then.



posted on Dec, 27 2014 @ 12:57 PM
link   
a reply to: Soloprotocol
This draconian punishment for comments on facebook twitter ect has nothing to do with bad taste an juvenile bad taste jokes.
And every thing to do with T P T B TERROR Of the peoples power to communicate via the internet.
They watched in dismay as the Arab Spring sprung into action as protesters used it to mobilise like never before an toppled dictatorship after dictatorship via the domino affect,

Now when a young man was followed an shot by armed police .
The UK KICKED OF an not by chants up of hands up don't shoot an small sporadic civil unrest.

NO
City after City went up in flames weeks of full scale rioting ensued billions of pounds of damage an lost revenue caused the Government to make fudge in there pants.
LIKE the arab spring /soon to be arab nuclear arab winter the UK Rioters / looters / opertunistic criminals used Face BOOK .TXT AN OTHER FORMS OF SOCIAL MEDIA TO RUN RINGS ROUND THE POLICE,

sO AFTER THE DUST HAD SETTLED THEY CRACKED DOWN HARD WITH NEW LEGISTKLATIONS RUSHED THROUGH .
eNABLEING THEM TO INFLICT .
lONG Jail sentances upon people whom had encouraged people tp riot.
Two young men from Norich never been in trouble with the law received three years each for doing so.
Young girls boys all with clean records were sent to prison in droves .

As the government realised that the medium of social interwebbing could just as easily bring about a Britsh Spring of revelution if the youth of the UK lost there apathy
An put there energises to destroying infrastructure rather than looting for flat screens an consumer goods.

So its a given now thease laws are in place to send people to prison for a long time for alleged abuse of the inerwewb .
They have given the judicial system cart blanche to inflict long terms of incarseration. on offenders.

It helps that every now an then if morons whom make sick comments also get sent down.
They get mixed in with the aggitaters an political activists so the genral public sees them all as the same.
And theres no out cry as more an more people not only get imprisoned.
But also receive lengthty bans from even owning a pc or accsses to the net,
So even when theve served there time.
They have a further five year ban from the net.
An if they breach that then life time bans,

It called social conditioning and the public will get sucked in an see no harm in it.
As only bad people use the internet to try an change the world.

Watch all the child porn or snuff flicks you want.

But don't dare talk political change,



posted on Dec, 27 2014 @ 01:12 PM
link   
a reply to: Soloprotocol

That's the thing, Solo - Jokes are usually not covered by this, mainly because it is conveyed to a live audience rather than communicated but also because people know it is a joke. However, the moment it goes into a form of communication (be it in print or online) is when it becomes covered by the law, although again usually jokes are not treated like this unless there was clear malicious intent.

That's why I think this guy won't even be charged as the CPS won't see any "public interest". I do suspect, however, that the Police will offer the man a caution and he will accept it, which he doesn't have to but few people know that.



posted on Dec, 27 2014 @ 01:15 PM
link   
a reply to: crazyewok

The law is quite specific already:



(1)A person is guilty of an offence if he—
(a)sends by means of a public electronic communications network a message or other matter that is grossly offensive or of an indecent, obscene or menacing character; or
(b)causes any such message or matter to be so sent.
(2)A person is guilty of an offence if, for the purpose of causing annoyance, inconvenience or needless anxiety to another, he—
(a)sends by means of a public electronic communications network, a message that he knows to be false,
(b)causes such a message to be sent; or
(c)persistently makes use of a public electronic communications network.

The Commincations Act 2003


I am pretty sure that this particular tweet is neither grossly offensive, indecent, obscene or menacing. In bad taste? Certainly, but that is it.



posted on Dec, 27 2014 @ 01:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: ecossiepossie
sO AFTER THE DUST HAD SETTLED THEY CRACKED DOWN HARD WITH NEW LEGISTKLATIONS RUSHED THROUGH .
eNABLEING THEM TO INFLICT .
lONG Jail sentances upon people whom had encouraged people tp riot.
Two young men from Norich never been in trouble with the law received three years each for doing so.
Young girls boys all with clean records were sent to prison in droves .


This paragraph alone makes your entire (badly spelled and punctuated) rant complete pointless.

Regardless of previous convictions or not, rioting, setting fires and endangering lives or property is a serious offence. People were killed over the course of the riots, for crying out loud and your whining because some of the idiots who led the violence were punished?

Give me a break. It wasn't about any kind of "revolution" or social change, as you banged on about - it was opportunist thugs of a generation that expects life to be handed to them on a plate taking advantage of a situation whereby a gang-land drug dealer got shot by Police. If it had any political motive, it would have been sustained and more widespread, but it wasn't. It was isolated to a few bad area's of the country and no where near as dramatic as you seem to make out.



posted on Dec, 27 2014 @ 01:25 PM
link   
a reply to: crazyewok

For that airport chap - strictly speaking, he did make a "threat" of a "menacing" nature. However, he got off very lightly (a small fine which was paid for by Stephen Fry and his conviction was later quashed) and I think the only reason they punished him was because they took the "threat" seriously (how were they supposed to know?) and expended Police time (money) investigating it - they usually don't like that.

It seems, from further reading, it was the Director of Public Prosecutions, Keir Starmer (the same man who decided to not prosecute Police over Ian Tomlinson's death) who pushed the case and the CPS were quite keen to not press charges at all.
edit on 27/12/14 by stumason because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
16
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join