BF2S Forums You Brits need to chill out with the jailing people over speech thing

Nope, it has happened numerous times. I have seen kids tag a Jewish graveyard (along with half the town) and get charged with hate crimes. I have seen a guy hit another guy of another color and be charged with hate crimes. I have seen a drive by shooting hit a gay club (after randomly shooting at three straight clubs) and the shooter get charged with hate crimes. Go read up a bit. This Martin/Zimmerman debacle is a great place to start. What was racist about it before the media got involved? There was a black person in a mostly black neighborhood... RACIST! It is ridiculous. It happens. It sucks, and it is not the spirit of the law, but it happens.

By the way, why is it people on here say my opinion is XYZ, and instead of just stating your opinion back, everything becomes "Murica sucks" attitude, and personal attacks. I have not said a single thing wrong with you of where you are from. I have simply said laws left to the interpretation are worrisome, in my opinion. I have seen them misused, personally, numerous times.


In My OPINION, here are some examples of what I mean:

Good law (most states): The speed limit is 55mph. Anything over that is speeding. If you are doing 56, you are breaking the law (although I wouldn't expect you to get a ticket for it).

Bad law (only a couple states): The speed limit is 55mph. If you are doing 70, you might or might not be breaking the law, as some states do not have an absolute speed limit. It just depends on how well you can justify your speed. If it is a clear, sunny day, and you are on a straight, flat stretch of road, with high visibility, and there was no other traffic, then you were not breaking the law.

So the first law is pretty well defined and clear. The second law is up to a lot of interpretation. By the driver. By the officer writing the speeding ticket. By the judge hearing the case.... And that case could be tried multiple times with multiple results.

I think a number of people on here have said offensive, and racist things. I would certainly hope no one went to jail for them. This is the internet, just like the original case. Public can come here and look, just like the original case... And what happens when someone reads "the best worst joke" thread and gets racially offended? Should the poster go to jail for it? Come on... Be serious.

Jay wrote:

For the record, we do have hate crime laws over here, but they're applied after a crime has been committed and they simply add further punishment on top. If you graffiti swastika's on a synagogue, you'll get charged with a hate crime on top of vandalism. Attack a black man because he's black, and you'll get charged with a hate crime on top of the assault. I think it's absurd (if the initial punishment for the crime isn't considered tough enough, change that aspect).

That said, speech is protected. The KKK can hold their clan meetings and spew hatred all they want. The WBC can picket funerals. But it also means we're completely free to criticize our government, or our police, or whatever else we want. I wouldn't trade it, ugliness and all.

I find it very telling that you think we can't...

How does any of this have any bearing on whether we can criticise the government? The freedom of the press here is very much protected. The right to protest anything is very protected.

All you've done there is list some negative consequences your system has and then go on to list positive points that apply no more to the US than the UK. Doesn't seem like the strongest argument that your laws are better. Maybe you should find some positive points about the system in the US that don't apply equally in the UK?

specops10-4 wrote:

Cheeky_Ninja06 wrote:

specops10-4 wrote:

don't let those in power have control over those not in power.

Lol awesome quote.

I was pretty shit faced when I was posting last night...  I still stand by most of what I said.

Words should never be illegal unless they are specifically inciting violence with a direct threat like "I'm going to shoot you if you don't hand over the money."

Uzique trusts the government is a rational, unbiased system that would never twist the meanings of laws to gain power.  He clearly has a misunderstanding of how the real world works.

How can these laws be twisted by a government to gain power? Present a feasible scenario in which that could happen in the real world.

There's a slippery slope argument but that's a pretty weak argument. I think it's stupid to arrest and jail someone for saying stupid shit on twitter.  Social and cultural attitudes shift too often and government action and law are too often slow to follow. I'd rather have less government-sanctioned infringement on speech and just let society/culture handle that aspect, unless there are serious social impediments/consequences (ie civil rights movement in the US).

specops10-4 wrote:

Cheeky_Ninja06 wrote:

specops10-4 wrote:

don't let those in power have control over those not in power.

Lol awesome quote.

I was pretty shit faced when I was posting last night...  I still stand by most of what I said.

Words should never be illegal unless they are specifically inciting violence with a direct threat like "I'm going to shoot you if you don't hand over the money."

Uzique trusts the government is a rational, unbiased system that would never twist the meanings of laws to gain power.  He clearly has a misunderstanding of how the real world works.

you clearly have a misunderstanding of how the real world of pragmatic legal enforcement works. nobody can afford to take a mickey mouse case to court. nobody is going to wind up in court with an expensive solicitor/barrister being charged english legal bills in order to indict someone for calling them a nasty name. you are hugely suspicious of the big instruments of government (typical american). legal proceedings are ridiculously expensive, not to mention time consuming (months to years). the police and cps (crown prosecution service) have to do reams of paperwork and administrative bullshit to compile and bring a case against anyone. stupid shit is not going to be prosecuted.

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

There's a slippery slope argument but that's a pretty weak argument. I think it's stupid to arrest and jail someone for saying stupid shit on twitter.  Social and cultural attitudes shift too often and government action and law are too often slow to follow. I'd rather have less government-sanctioned infringement on speech and just let society/culture handle that aspect, unless there are serious social impediments/consequences (ie civil rights movement in the US).

Fair enough.

Over here in general people prefer things like this to be handled much as this has. Cultural differences and all that don't cha know old boy...

We don't have free speech over here, and no one is fussed about it, nor are we silenced by big brother - as all the important elements of speech are completely protected. The argument that these laws in any way allow the government to infringe on peoples liberty simply doesn't stand up to scrutiny.

Uzique wrote:

specops10-4 wrote:

Cheeky_Ninja06 wrote:

Lol awesome quote.

I was pretty shit faced when I was posting last night...  I still stand by most of what I said.

Words should never be illegal unless they are specifically inciting violence with a direct threat like "I'm going to shoot you if you don't hand over the money."

Uzique trusts the government is a rational, unbiased system that would never twist the meanings of laws to gain power.  He clearly has a misunderstanding of how the real world works.

you clearly have a misunderstanding of how the real world of pragmatic legal enforcement works. nobody can afford to take a mickey mouse case to court. nobody is going to wind up in court with an expensive solicitor/barrister being charged english legal bills in order to indict someone for calling them a nasty name. you are hugely suspicious of the big instruments of government (typical american). legal proceedings are ridiculously expensive, not to mention time consuming (months to years). the police and cps (crown prosecution service) have to do reams of paperwork and administrative bullshit to compile and bring a case against anyone. stupid shit is not going to be prosecuted.

If someone hates or fears you enough they will go through the painstaking judicial process just to take away your credibility, silence you, get payback etc.  You are not suspicious enough of your government/effectiveness of your judicial system whatever the fuck you want to call it (typical brit).  I am surprised you are so strongly defending the government taking away your rights for the "greater good" or some bullshit like that.

Bertster7 wrote:

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

There's a slippery slope argument but that's a pretty weak argument. I think it's stupid to arrest and jail someone for saying stupid shit on twitter.  Social and cultural attitudes shift too often and government action and law are too often slow to follow. I'd rather have less government-sanctioned infringement on speech and just let society/culture handle that aspect, unless there are serious social impediments/consequences (ie civil rights movement in the US).

Fair enough.

Over here in general people prefer things like this to be handled much as this has. Cultural differences and all that don't cha know old boy...

We don't have free speech over here, and no one is fussed about it, nor are we silenced by big brother - as all the important elements of speech are completely protected. The argument that these laws in any way allow the government to infringe on peoples liberty simply doesn't stand up to scrutiny.

"We don't have free speech and we don't care."

Uzique wrote:

this case is an example of something with high public stress and importance being show-trialled and prosecuted to satisfy a media outcry. on a day to day basis? i think i'd know if people in this country were regularly being locked up for saying nasty things to one another. i live here, you muppet.

My grandfather on my dad's side was a frog. He married a pig. I am racially offended by your remark. Go to jail. Or do I have to get the media to prosecute you first?

Sounds like your proud system has the same flaws as ours... Glad to know the media determines guilt and punishment and legal action in other countries too.

Uzique wrote:

every country has mob justice. cry about something we don't already know about. and then drop the "you brits" shit in the topic title.

thanks.

also the media do not determine "guilt" at all. fucking dumb comment. the media outrage and public demand for punishment will probably effect the judges sentencing guidelines, though. i.e. sentencing at the harsher end of the defined and existing tariff. is a person found guilty because the media are outraged? no. they are given a fair trial still. if they did so happen to commit the crime that the public is so outraged about, though, you can bet they're going to get a harsher sentence than a low-key trial. this happens in EVERY COUNTRY. i am getting tired of discussing this stupid fucking thing over and over. it's OBVIOUS.

You guys can do whatever you want over there, fine by me I didn't write the title.  Just think about what you are doing to yourselves, its not an obvious answer at all.

Was that directed at me or spec or both?

Uzique wrote:

sure. some 21 year old american knows "what we are doing to ourselves" whilst an entire nation of people sleepwalks into an orwellian wetdream. right. listen to yourself for once you arrogant yank. this is the implication of your posting attitude. our legal system is fine; it is just. you guys are running with a case of high public interest and trying to start some huge debate on the free speech principle. we enjoy every benefit of free speech here that you guys do in america, only without the written constitution.

No, in the US someone wouldn't be prosecuted for this.

In regards to the 'Arizona, hurr durr' and 'sleepwalking into an Orwellian wet dream' comments, I think you'll find that the public by and large don't agree with our governments actions.