[News] 30 people a day on average arrested in UK for offensive online posts....

[Thunder Bolt]

I didn't know that. So it's more about enforcement then. Which I think is an issue. But I think it's certainly better that these issues are being addressed, although some of the arrests in recent times have been absurd.

Which arrests have been absurd?

 

[boik]

So do we get the context of what they're being arrested for or is this designed to make us think people are being arrested for saying things which are pretty innocuous?

I mean, if someone tweets that they're planning on blowing the Amex up on Saturday with the purpose of killing everyone there then I'd hope they would be arrested.

Ooh, that would make a good plot for something!!

 

[portlock seagull]

Ooh, that would make a good plot for something!!

There but for the GRACE of god go we!

 

[CheeseRolls]

Police make 30 arrests a day for offensive online messages

Civil liberties groups say that the authorities are over-policing the internet and threatening free speech using vague laws

www.thetimes.com

Saw this posted by Joe Rogan and thought it was some US right wing crap.... But it's actually correct and JD Vance was right after all

Crazy shiz. When you know most of the drug dealers , phone snatchers , thieves aren't been touched anymore.

'I met her for 30 seconds, she stalked me online for four years'

Victims tell BBC Panorama how a prolific stalker posted thousands of abusive messages about them on social media.

www.bbc.co.uk

I don't know many drug dealers, phone snatchers or thieves (or at least people who admit to these activities in public), maybe because these are the sorts of things people just don't generally boast about.

I am pretty happy the police decided to pursue this one though.

 

[Eeyore]

Which arrests have been absurd?

There's been a few concerning opinions on Gaza. These are all flash memories, I don't have time to trawl. But, despite broadly supporting enforcement of legislation, I know I've looked at some and felt a little uncomfortable about it.

 

[A1X]

Ooh, that would make a good plot for something!!

Feels more like something that would happen in Wimbledon TBH

 

[Nobby Cybergoat]

There's been a few concerning opinions on Gaza. These are all flash memories, I don't have time to trawl. But, despite broadly supporting enforcement of legislation, I know I've looked at some and felt a little uncomfortable about it.

Is it possible under the legislation to be arrested for expressing an "opinion"?

I guess only if that opinion is to advocate for the extermination of one side or the other. In which case their arrest surely isn't concerning?

 

[Eeyore]

So do we get the context of what they're being arrested for or is this designed to make us think people are being arrested for saying things which are pretty innocuous?

I mean, if someone tweets that they're planning on blowing the Amex up on Saturday with the purpose of killing everyone there then I'd hope they would be arrested.

This is often the problem. We never know the full context and certain newspapers will choose to eliminate key facts. The first question I find myself asking these days is 'What is the background to this story ?'

 

[Happy Exile]

There is some evidence that those who commit hate crime online are more likely to be involved in some other criminal activity, either related to the context of their message or not. Not as strong a correlation as the one between harming animals and more serious offences but a small link nonetheless. Also a lot of it could be perceived as incitement which in itself could have tragic consequences, and the rise in depression, self-harm and suicidality among young people is often directly linked to receiving offensive messages online. All in all there's nothing wrong with nicking people for offensive messages online in the same way they would be nicked for shouting the same things at people in the street.

 

[Eeyore]

Is it possible under the legislation to be arrested for expressing an "opinion"?

I guess only if that opinion is to advocate for the extermination of one side or the other. In which case their arrest surely isn't concerning?

It does seem that way. And this is my concern. I'm pleased that issues of bullying and harassment seem to be addressed much better now than ever before. But if someone said to me 'f*** of you twat' on NSC, i wouldn't go screaming for a policeman. Sadly some do. However, if someone in outside life kept harassing me and making my life uncomfortable with such things, the law should be there to deal with it.

But no-one should be prosecuted for having an opinion. But even in that context, there are degrees of offence. A person who says, for example, 'I think homosexuality is wrong' is expressing an opinion. And as outdated and ignorant as it is, society should tolerate such views. If it wasn't for those who were campaigning for such views to be marginalised in law, and being allowed to, we wouldn't have finally got to the better place we are now. It works both ways. But if someone was on social media making all kinds of slurs, false accusations, and calling for violent action against homosexuals, that is another matter. As a society this should not be tolerated.

The issue is that everyone has a red line which is rarely parallel to someone else's. I think my red line is somewhere in the middle. But it's mainly the extreme arguments we hear. Such is need for conflict these days.

I had a neighbour recently call the police on someone who called him a c*** in a private message on Facebook. This person who called him that wasn't by nature aggressive, but was clearly upset about something. It was the same neighbour who just called the police about anything and everything. It really got on my wick. There was a time when not enough was being done to curb the nasty excesses of society. I'm very glad that changed. But now it seems to be headed to a bizarre extreme of Puritanical Liberalism. And the problem is that you don't change folk by silencing them. You only have to look at some of the elements in our political stream, and perhaps in America, to see what it leads to.

 

[kevo]

It depends what you call an "offensive" post. There was a woman recently targetted online by some psycho saying he was going to break into her house, rape and torture her and murder her children.

Assume you think that's OK?

 

[portlock seagull]

If NSC was launched today, if it could be, I wonder how many of us would now be serving time in Siberia for something now deemed offensive*





*I stand by everything I’ve said about Palace and Snake Mountain

 

[Eeyore]

It depends what you call an "offensive" post. There was a woman recently targetted online by some psycho saying he was going to break into her house, rape and torture her and murder her children.

Assume you think that's OK?

Well that would be a criminal offence on many levels. I think even the most hardened of 'free speech' advocates would say that was wrong. It's a threat.

Mind you, I could be wrong when I suggest that all would object.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

It does seem that way. And this is my concern. I'm pleased that issues of bullying and harassment seem to be addressed much better now than ever before. But if someone said to me 'f*** of you twat' on NSC, i wouldn't go screaming for a policeman. Sadly some do. However, if someone in outside life kept harassing me and making my life uncomfortable with such things, the law should be there to deal with it.

But no-one should be prosecuted for having an opinion. But even in that context, there are degrees of offence. A person who says, for example, 'I think homosexuality is wrong' is expressing an opinion. And as outdated and ignorant as it is, society should tolerate such views. If it wasn't for those who were campaigning for such views to be marginalised in law, and being allowed to, we wouldn't have finally got to the better place we are now. It works both ways. But if someone was on social media making all kinds of slurs, false accusations, and calling for violent action against homosexuals, that is another matter. As a society this should not be tolerated.

The issue is that everyone has a red line which is rarely parallel to someone else's. I think my red line is somewhere in the middle. But it's mainly the extreme arguments we hear. Such is need for conflict these days.

I had a neighbour recently call the police on someone who called him a c*** in a private message on Facebook. This person who called him that wasn't by nature aggressive, but was clearly upset about something. It was the same neighbour who just called the police about anything and everything. It really got on my wick. There was a time when not enough was being done to curb the nasty excesses of society. I'm very glad that changed. But now it seems to be headed to a bizarre extreme of Puritanical Liberalism. And the problem is that you don't change folk by silencing them. You only have to look at some of the elements in our political stream, and perhaps in America, to see what it leads to.

There is a difference between someone posting they think homosexuality is wrong (an opinion) to abusing gay people, which is not just swearing at them, but threatening them in some way, like wishing all gay people died of a horrible disease etc

There is a line, and the police/CPS have guidelines.

Threats to kill which are frequently sent to football players, for example. Remember the young chap in Singapore went to jail for threatening Knocky. I doubt very much if he would have ever got on a plane to the UK, but threatening someone on line, has crossed the criminality threshold.

 

[AZ Gull]

There is a difference between someone posting they think homosexuality is wrong (an opinion) to abusing gay people, which is not just swearing at them, but threatening them in some way, like wishing all gay people died of a horrible disease etc

There is a line, and the police/CPS have guidelines.

Threats to kill which are frequently sent to football players, for example. Remember the young chap in Singapore went to jail for threatening Knocky. I doubt very much if he would have ever got on a plane to the UK, but threatening someone on line, has crossed the criminality threshold.

Neal Maupay, I think.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Neal Maupay, I think.

You're right. Old age I'm afraid and I didn't look it up.