Riot!

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
D

Deleted member 159

Guest
I guess, if it goes to the wire, it'll be a jury that decides.

A jury!

For general public openly discussing subjects, that is regulation by process.

To drag someone to court over a disagreement is ludicrous. We are not talking of personal accusations, libel/slander etc but, just one person saying something and another person/organisation being offended/ disagreeing.
 
  • Wow
Reactions: C R

matticus

Guru
Who decides what is truth, misinformation, what is hateful?

No matter which side you are on, the end of open free speech is here

1984 has arrived in the UK

For a looooong long time before 1984, it was not entirely legal to say exactly what you want, to anyone you want.
It's quite hard to break the relevant laws, but they've been with us a while, and they help protect UK residents/citizens from harm, and help keep the peace.

TL: DR - grow up.
 
Last edited:

BoldonLad

Old man on a bike. Not a member of a clique.
Location
South Tyneside
A jury!

For general public openly discussing subjects, that is regulation by process.

To drag someone to court over a disagreement is ludicrous. We are not talking of personal accusations, libel/slander etc but, just one person saying something and another person/organisation being offended/ disagreeing.

But, surely, we ARE talking about personal accusations? Assuming the person she named exists, she falsely accused them of being the suspect in a multiple murder case,
 

winjim

Welcome yourself into the new modern crisis
Come on lads...

Screenshot_20240809-122042_X.jpg
 
D

Deleted member 159

Guest
But, surely, we ARE talking about personal accusations? Assuming the person she named exists, she falsely accused them of being the suspect in a multiple murder case,

What they are legislating is unless what you say is 100% accurate beyond doubt, then someone or authority can drag you in front of a court.


Who can say with 100% certainty what the truth is


The example is the labour councillor, who said cut their throats.

Very stupid indeed, but does it need a charge/conviction of 'encouraging murder'.

Whose murder of the future will help be attached to?

It's a massive hammer to crack the nut of online debate/argument. It will be the process of being dragged to court that is the punishment

I know a couple who were dragged to court over a civil matter, it literally destroyed them not financially but emotionally.

What happens over the next couple of years might be so surreal, we will be gob smacked
 
D

Deleted member 159

Guest
Billy Thompson from Cumbria has been given a 12 week jail sentence for online comments

The disparity in sentencing is astonishing

It's begun
 

AndyRM

Elder Goth
Billy Thompson from Cumbria has been given a 12 week jail sentence for online comments

The disparity in sentencing is astonishing

It's begun

What are you comparing his sentence to?
 
  • Like
Reactions: C R
D

Deleted member 159

Guest
What are you comparing his sentence to?
Something a darn sight more serious, sexual assault, knife crime. There are examples out there.

This gentleman was made an example of.
 
Has the Councillor who made the 'throat cutting' comment actually been charged with an offence?

Or is it an investigation that will probably go no further than words of advice being given?
 

BoldonLad

Old man on a bike. Not a member of a clique.
Location
South Tyneside
What they are legislating is unless what you say is 100% accurate beyond doubt, then someone or authority can drag you in front of a court.


Who can say with 100% certainty what the truth is


The example is the labour councillor, who said cut their throats.

Very stupid indeed, but does it need a charge/conviction of 'encouraging murder'.

Whose murder of the future will help be attached to?

It's a massive hammer to crack the nut of online debate/argument. It will be the process of being dragged to court that is the punishment

I know a couple who were dragged to court over a civil matter, it literally destroyed them not financially but emotionally.

What happens over the next couple of years might be so surreal, we will be gob smacked

Given the events of the past week, it would appear that you, and I, have very different ideas of what debate/argument is.
 

C R

Über Member
A jury!

For general public openly discussing subjects, that is regulation by process.

To drag someone to court over a disagreement is ludicrous. We are not talking of personal accusations, libel/slander etc but, just one person saying something and another person/organisation being offended/ disagreeing.

So you will be OK with me going round telling everyone that you bother dogs in your spare time. Who's to say that I am wrong, after all you just disagree with me about that, there's nothing that makes your opinion on the subject truer than mine.
 
Top Bottom