Tower Block Fire
Comments
-
Its a shame for the grenfell victims, they have my sympathy. Obviously not the ones who are lying to get massive payouts I really dont care two hoots about them.
However they're not special apart from being chavy (the ones on the social). they are therefore the group most likely to take offence and demand action . Police resource would be better spent rounding up those acid throwing kids. I understand there were some fraudulent grenfell people too. Round them up first.0 -
SJH76 wrote:Slowbike wrote:
the men handed themselves in ...Pross wrote:It seems that time can be found when there's enough media pressure.Pross wrote:That said, I'd be quite happy to see them jailed if they have broken a law as anyone who thinks that behaviour is funny should be taken off the streets.
we need bigger/more jails ...
So then, what are you in jail for?
Freedom of speech!
Got to love a country where not long ago, you went to jail for being gay. Now you can go to jail for not liking anyone who is. Cos it's a 'hate crime'
It's called bullying - and society is adapting it's approach to bullies and identifying them. Cyclists often have to suffer bullies - usually those in cars who can't quite understand why we should choose to ride instead of drive. How many of those should be locked up? Do they actually have to hit you before they're "punished" or is a near miss, tooting their horn or revving the engine enough?
Perhaps the local plod visiting the local pub and arresting anyone who mutters "I hate cyclists" would be going a bit too far ... ?
Burning an effigy of the tower - could've been a positive if the comments where along the lines of "How many more must die before we have safe housing?" But they weren't ... perhaps it wasn't intended to be made public - but if you've got a number of people there then you can be assured it will be made public.
Some/The men handed themselves in - was there a massive "Man hunt" or did someone just do a search on twitter/instagram/facebook to find who posted it ... hardly a search of the century. Quite what their punishment will be I've got no idea - but I hope it includes a lesson on tolerance.0 -
I don't know enough about it to form an opinion - don't really want to know enough about it either. I skipped through a BBC report on it - that was enough.Surrey Commuter wrote:Slowbike wrote:
the men handed themselves in ...Pross wrote:It seems that time can be found when there's enough media pressure.Pross wrote:That said, I'd be quite happy to see them jailed if they have broken a law as anyone who thinks that behaviour is funny should be taken off the streets.
we need bigger/more jails ...
I dislike emojis as much as the next grown-up but as this subject is so polarising can we make an exception as I have no idea if the people above really think these (and others) should be jailed.
But if they're going to jail people for this sort of thing - can they also jail close pass drivers too?0 -
Slowbike wrote:SJH76 wrote:Slowbike wrote:
the men handed themselves in ...Pross wrote:It seems that time can be found when there's enough media pressure.Pross wrote:That said, I'd be quite happy to see them jailed if they have broken a law as anyone who thinks that behaviour is funny should be taken off the streets.
we need bigger/more jails ...
So then, what are you in jail for?
Freedom of speech!
Got to love a country where not long ago, you went to jail for being gay. Now you can go to jail for not liking anyone who is. Cos it's a 'hate crime'
It's called bullying - and society is adapting it's approach to bullies and identifying them.
Who was being bullied in the burning of an effigy? On what grounds? Race? Religion, social standing? Apart from the fact you can't really bully someone who's dead you can't say any of the survivors or families of are being bullied either. It is a bad taste joke that's backfired. Have you ever seen Louis Theroux's America's most hated family? People deliberately picketing funerals of dead soldiers. It's extremely abhorrent but it's people exercising their freedom of speech. I'd rather have that than say Saudi Arabia where you get murdered for criticising the government/head of state.0 -
Slowbike wrote:SJH76 wrote:Slowbike wrote:
the men handed themselves in ...Pross wrote:It seems that time can be found when there's enough media pressure.Pross wrote:That said, I'd be quite happy to see them jailed if they have broken a law as anyone who thinks that behaviour is funny should be taken off the streets.
we need bigger/more jails ...
So then, what are you in jail for?
Freedom of speech!
Got to love a country where not long ago, you went to jail for being gay. Now you can go to jail for not liking anyone who is. Cos it's a 'hate crime'
It's called bullying - and society is adapting it's approach to bullies and identifying them. Cyclists often have to suffer bullies - usually those in cars who can't quite understand why we should choose to ride instead of drive. How many of those should be locked up? Do they actually have to hit you before they're "punished" or is a near miss, tooting their horn or revving the engine enough?
Perhaps the local plod visiting the local pub and arresting anyone who mutters "I hate cyclists" would be going a bit too far ... ?
Burning an effigy of the tower - could've been a positive if the comments where along the lines of "How many more must die before we have safe housing?" But they weren't ... perhaps it wasn't intended to be made public - but if you've got a number of people there then you can be assured it will be made public.
Some/The men handed themselves in - was there a massive "Man hunt" or did someone just do a search on twitter/instagram/facebook to find who posted it ... hardly a search of the century. Quite what their punishment will be I've got no idea - but I hope it includes a lesson on tolerance.
Pretty big difference between physically threatening someone with a ton of metal and an offensive unfunny joke that was meant to stay between friends.You live and learn. At any rate, you live0 -
DeVlaeminck wrote:Ballysmate wrote:Jesus wept!
Can't believe the country has come to this where something done in bad taste is being considered a crime or the new buzz word/phrase, "hate crime" and people are considering how the law can be stretched to cover it.
Perhaps these villagers should get ready to get their collars felt?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-221830 ... her-effigy
Especially the guy with blackface riding on the wagon !
Yes, cultural appropriation. Lock him up!!
Edit. I was going to say, "Burn him!", but don't want to fall foul of anyone who would accuse me of a hate crime.0 -
Rick Chasey wrote:So four people were murdered in London the other day but yes at least the police launched a manhunt for someone who burns down models of buildings.
State of this f@cking island.
Whereas I doubt the police carried out much of a manhunt, I do share Rick's view that there is something massively wrong with the priorities of a lot of people in this country, whereby causing someone offence, or even causing someone to feel offence on someone else's behalf, is judged more serious than causing physical hurt.0 -
Welcome to the future.
George Orwell may have got the year wrong but it appears to be on the cards...The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
Probably just a case of one begetting the other...SJH76 wrote:PBlakeney wrote:Welcome to the future.
George Orwell may have got the year wrong but it appears to be on the cards...
Right author, wrong book imo. Probably closer to animal farm atm.The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
SJH76 wrote:Slowbike wrote:SJH76 wrote:Slowbike wrote:
the men handed themselves in ...Pross wrote:It seems that time can be found when there's enough media pressure.Pross wrote:That said, I'd be quite happy to see them jailed if they have broken a law as anyone who thinks that behaviour is funny should be taken off the streets.
we need bigger/more jails ...
So then, what are you in jail for?
Freedom of speech!
Got to love a country where not long ago, you went to jail for being gay. Now you can go to jail for not liking anyone who is. Cos it's a 'hate crime'
It's called bullying - and society is adapting it's approach to bullies and identifying them.
Who was being bullied in the burning of an effigy? On what grounds? Race? Religion, social standing? Apart from the fact you can't really bully someone who's dead you can't say any of the survivors or families of are being bullied either. It is a bad taste joke that's backfired. Have you ever seen Louis Theroux's America's most hated family? People deliberately picketing funerals of dead soldiers. It's extremely abhorrent but it's people exercising their freedom of speech. I'd rather have that than say Saudi Arabia where you get murdered for criticising the government/head of state.
Well - apparently (and I did only scan the report) - it's what was said in the video. BBC reported it as "All the little ninjas getting it at the minute" - So I'd say (probably) on grounds of Race ...
Quite frankly I can't see why anyone should want to laugh at the event - whether you believe the residents should be in this country or not - being burned alive isn't deserved on any level.
Freedom of Speech isn't carte blanche - it needs to be used respectfully and in an appropriate manner. This is why we have public order laws that are used to keep some sort of decorum.0 -
Slowbike wrote:SJH76 wrote:Slowbike wrote:SJH76 wrote:Slowbike wrote:
the men handed themselves in ...Pross wrote:It seems that time can be found when there's enough media pressure.Pross wrote:That said, I'd be quite happy to see them jailed if they have broken a law as anyone who thinks that behaviour is funny should be taken off the streets.
we need bigger/more jails ...
So then, what are you in jail for?
Freedom of speech!
Got to love a country where not long ago, you went to jail for being gay. Now you can go to jail for not liking anyone who is. Cos it's a 'hate crime'
It's called bullying - and society is adapting it's approach to bullies and identifying them.
Who was being bullied in the burning of an effigy? On what grounds? Race? Religion, social standing? Apart from the fact you can't really bully someone who's dead you can't say any of the survivors or families of are being bullied either. It is a bad taste joke that's backfired. Have you ever seen Louis Theroux's America's most hated family? People deliberately picketing funerals of dead soldiers. It's extremely abhorrent but it's people exercising their freedom of speech. I'd rather have that than say Saudi Arabia where you get murdered for criticising the government/head of state.
Well - apparently (and I did only scan the report) - it's what was said in the video. BBC reported it as "All the little ninjas getting it at the minute" - So I'd say (probably) on grounds of Race ...
Quite frankly I can't see why anyone should want to laugh at the event - whether you believe the residents should be in this country or not - being burned alive isn't deserved on any level.
Freedom of Speech isn't carte blanche - it needs to be used respectfully and in an appropriate manner. This is why we have public order laws that are used to keep some sort of decorum.
I'm not sure if you read my first comment on this thread. Family Guy (amongst others) have been doing 9/11 jokes for ages. Essentially laughing at an extreme act of terrorism that killed many more directly and dragged us into 2 conflicts and it's after effects killing thousands more but hey, that was ages ago so who cares right?
At no point had any of the alleged shown direct racial discrimination. They weren't all of a particular race anyway. Some were black, some were Asian, pick a random minority group of your choice I'm sure many of the poor victims fall into at least one category or another.0 -
For the last time (if only!!!):Slowbike wrote:Freedom of Speech isn't carte blanche - it needs to be used respectfully and in an appropriate manner. This is why we have public order laws that are used to keep some sort of decorum.
IT WASN'T IN PUBLIC
But even if it was - laws for decorum? Really? Where do you want to set the bar?
I'd go for just a warning for burping, a small fine for farting, and a short prison sentence for exposing a tattoo in public.
That should sort 'em.
I find it staggering, and actually quite scary, that Pakistan appears to be getting more liberal with its blasphemy laws, but we're heading the other way.
The further down the road we get, the more I realise that free speech fundamentalism is the only thing that makes any sense.0 -
bompington wrote:
For the last time (if only!!!):Slowbike wrote:Freedom of Speech isn't carte blanche - it needs to be used respectfully and in an appropriate manner. This is why we have public order laws that are used to keep some sort of decorum.
IT WASN'T IN PUBLIC
But even if it was - laws for decorum? Really? Where do you want to set the bar?
I'd go for just a warning for burping, a small fine for farting, and a short prison sentence for exposing a tattoo in public.
That should sort 'em.
I find it staggering, and actually quite scary, that Pakistan appears to be getting more liberal with its blasphemy laws, but we're heading the other way.
The further down the road we get, the more I realise that free speech fundamentalism is the only thing that makes any sense.
Doesn't have to be apparently:
Public Order Act 1986
(2)An offence under this section may be committed in a public or a private place,0 -
Maybe it does, but that's precisely the point I'm making - you now have no right to say what you want in private. Orwellian hardly begins to describe it.0
-
Surrey Commuter wrote:DeVlaeminck wrote:Ballysmate wrote:Jesus wept!
Can't believe the country has come to this where something done in bad taste is being considered a crime or the new buzz word/phrase, "hate crime" and people are considering how the law can be stretched to cover it.
Perhaps these villagers should get ready to get their collars felt?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-221830 ... her-effigy
Especially the guy with blackface riding on the wagon !
am I missing something?
Thatcher seemed to be riding up front
Yes there is a miner, or a guy dressed as a miner as I don't think there are any coal mines left, complete with coal dust covered face riding in the back.[Castle Donington Ladies FC - going up in '22]0 -
But someone has to be there to be aggrieved. If there is no one there how can anyone be aggrieved?
If people are so desperate to convict someone, the only recourse would be to prosecute the person who published to the net under some other legislation.0 -
Never watched family guy - so can't comment.SJH76 wrote:I'm not sure if you read my first comment on this thread. Family Guy (amongst others) have been doing 9/11 jokes for ages. Essentially laughing at an extreme act of terrorism that killed many more directly and dragged us into 2 conflicts and it's after effects killing thousands more but hey, that was ages ago so who cares right?
I think the comments were probably directed at anyone who wasn't "white" - why pick on one race when they'll all do? But - like I said - I've not looked at it in detail and have no intention of doing so - it wouldn't do any good if I did anyway.SJH76 wrote:At no point had any of the alleged shown direct racial discrimination. They weren't all of a particular race anyway. Some were black, some were Asian, pick a random minority group of your choice I'm sure many of the poor victims fall into at least one category or another.0 -
DeVlaeminck wrote:Surrey Commuter wrote:DeVlaeminck wrote:Ballysmate wrote:Jesus wept!
Can't believe the country has come to this where something done in bad taste is being considered a crime or the new buzz word/phrase, "hate crime" and people are considering how the law can be stretched to cover it.
Perhaps these villagers should get ready to get their collars felt?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-221830 ... her-effigy
Especially the guy with blackface riding on the wagon !
am I missing something?
Thatcher seemed to be riding up front
Yes there is a miner, or a guy dressed as a miner as I don't think there are any coal mines left, complete with coal dust covered face riding in the back.
Let's hope that's all it is and they ain't 'blacking up' someone might get offended0 -
Slowbike wrote:
Never watched family guy - so can't comment.SJH76 wrote:I'm not sure if you read my first comment on this thread. Family Guy (amongst others) have been doing 9/11 jokes for ages. Essentially laughing at an extreme act of terrorism that killed many more directly and dragged us into 2 conflicts and it's after effects killing thousands more but hey, that was ages ago so who cares right?
I think the comments were probably directed at anyone who wasn't "white" - why pick on one race when they'll all do? But - like I said - I've not looked at it in detail and have no intention of doing so - it wouldn't do any good if I did anyway.SJH76 wrote:At no point had any of the alleged shown direct racial discrimination. They weren't all of a particular race anyway. Some were black, some were Asian, pick a random minority group of your choice I'm sure many of the poor victims fall into at least one category or another.
1st - I recommend you do watch sone family guy. You might see what I'm pointing out and may also inject some humour into your life as well.
2nd - You can't base a hate crime on ' he ain't the same as me' it's not a direct attack on a particular person or social group race etc. It's a very very broad thing which is clutching at straws at best.0 -
bompington wrote:Maybe it does, but that's precisely the point I'm making - you now have no right to say what you want in private. Orwellian hardly begins to describe it.
Yep, I take your point.
Unrelated, but an interesting thought all the same: the Stasi went to great lengths to gather private information on the subjects of East Germany, much of it, I suspect, the same mundane information that most of the world's population now freely give away on their Facebook accounts.0 -
SJH76 wrote:DeVlaeminck wrote:Surrey Commuter wrote:DeVlaeminck wrote:Ballysmate wrote:Jesus wept!
Can't believe the country has come to this where something done in bad taste is being considered a crime or the new buzz word/phrase, "hate crime" and people are considering how the law can be stretched to cover it.
Perhaps these villagers should get ready to get their collars felt?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-221830 ... her-effigy
Especially the guy with blackface riding on the wagon !
am I missing something?
Thatcher seemed to be riding up front
Yes there is a miner, or a guy dressed as a miner as I don't think there are any coal mines left, complete with coal dust covered face riding in the back.
Let's hope that's all it is and they ain't 'blacking up' someone might get offended
God forbid he gave a rendition of Camptown Races.0 -
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1986/64bompington wrote:
For the last time (if only!!!):Slowbike wrote:Freedom of Speech isn't carte blanche - it needs to be used respectfully and in an appropriate manner. This is why we have public order laws that are used to keep some sort of decorum.
IT WASN'T IN PUBLIC
But even if it was - laws for decorum? Really? Where do you want to set the bar?
An Act to abolish the common law offences of riot, rout, unlawful assembly and affray and certain statutory offences relating to public order; to create new offences relating to public order; to control public processions and assemblies; to control the stirring up of racial hatred; to provide for the exclusion of certain offenders from sporting events; to create a new offence relating to the contamination of or interference with goods; to confer power to direct certain trespassers to leave land; to amend section 7 of the Conspiracy and Protection of Property Act 1875, section 1 of the Prevention of Crime Act 1953, Part V of the Criminal Justice (Scotland) Act 1980 and the Sporting Events (Control of Alcohol etc.) Act 1985; to repeal certain obsolete or unnecessary enactments; and for connected purposes
He who smelt it dealt itbompington wrote:I'd go for just a small fine for farting
It's finding a sensible middle ground that allows individuals to comment on the running of the country without being offensive. Of course, what is offensive is subjective - so you'll never cover everything. I wasn't aware of any recent law changes on public order offenses - although people's outcry on every little thing has skyrocketed given the prevelence of social media and the ease in which views can be shared.bompington wrote:I find it staggering, and actually quite scary, that Pakistan appears to be getting more liberal with its blasphemy laws, but we're heading the other way.
The question is - do the police really knee-jerk to everything that does the rounds - or do they play the media too with a "We are investigating" response ?
If you want to discuss OTT policing - perhaps we should discuss the Madeleine McCann case - which has been going on for 11 years at a cost of ~£11 million (UK cost) - is that OTT? What about other missing persons? Has this case been singled out? If so, why?0 -
@Slowbike
Read my post on the previous page re there having to be someone present to be aggrieved.0 -
SJH76 wrote:1st - I recommend you do watch sone family guy. You might see what I'm pointing out and may also inject some humour into your life as well.
2nd - You can't base a hate crime on ' he ain't the same as me' it's not a direct attack on a particular person or social group race etc. It's a very very broad thing which is clutching at straws at best.
1 - no thanks - I've seen trailers for it - don't think it's my thing - I have plenty of humour in my life (perhaps you don't read my other posts?)
2 - probably - I started on this thread as there was incredulation at the effort the police were putting into finding the people behind the video - the news openly reported it as "they handed themselves in" - quite frankly, for me, that's the end of it - the police will have seen the video and will decide if there's a case worth putting to the CPS - given the publicity it's received I'd be surprised if they "got off" with just a warning - but having not seen the video (and not really wanting to either) perhaps it's all a bit of nothing. Quite frankly I don't care eitherway.0 -
Someone has already pointed out that they don't have to be.Ballysmate wrote:@Slowbike
Read my post on the previous page re there having to be someone present to be aggrieved.
Otherwise you could sit in your home, videoing a lot of racial hatred and post it all over social media with impunity.
Can I just clear it - My personal views on this are it seems to be a load of fuss over nothing - HOWEVER, I can see why people could be fussed over it.0 -
St George flag in the back garden – check
Shaved heads and thick necks – check
Referring to some of the cut out people with crude representations of burqas as ‘little ninjas’, with a few 'brown' folk stuck on to balance things out – check
Yeah, definitely just a bit of harmless fun.0 -
@ SJH76 - You might watch Family Guy but you’re clearly not getting Seth McFarlane’s humour.0
-
Slowbike wrote:SJH76 wrote:Slowbike wrote:SJH76 wrote:Slowbike wrote:
the men handed themselves in ...Pross wrote:It seems that time can be found when there's enough media pressure.Pross wrote:That said, I'd be quite happy to see them jailed if they have broken a law as anyone who thinks that behaviour is funny should be taken off the streets.
we need bigger/more jails ...
So then, what are you in jail for?
Freedom of speech!
Got to love a country where not long ago, you went to jail for being gay. Now you can go to jail for not liking anyone who is. Cos it's a 'hate crime'
It's called bullying - and society is adapting it's approach to bullies and identifying them.
Who was being bullied in the burning of an effigy? On what grounds? Race? Religion, social standing? Apart from the fact you can't really bully someone who's dead you can't say any of the survivors or families of are being bullied either. It is a bad taste joke that's backfired. Have you ever seen Louis Theroux's America's most hated family? People deliberately picketing funerals of dead soldiers. It's extremely abhorrent but it's people exercising their freedom of speech. I'd rather have that than say Saudi Arabia where you get murdered for criticising the government/head of state.
Well - apparently (and I did only scan the report) - it's what was said in the video. BBC reported it as "All the little ninjas getting it at the minute" - So I'd say (probably) on grounds of Race ...
Quite frankly I can't see why anyone should want to laugh at the event - whether you believe the residents should be in this country or not - being burned alive isn't deserved on any level.
Freedom of Speech isn't carte blanche - it needs to be used respectfully and in an appropriate manner. This is why we have public order laws that are used to keep some sort of decorum.
why not watch the video? I did and see no racial element to it. Seemed more like a group of people trying to outdo one another for bad taste on what to burn.
Should we prosecute the likes of Lewes for burning effigies of recognisable people?
I once took a foreigner to an organised bonfire party and they were staggered that we took children to an event that involved burning an effigy.0 -
Slowbike wrote:
Someone has already pointed out that they don't have to be.Ballysmate wrote:@Slowbike
Read my post on the previous page re there having to be someone present to be aggrieved.
Otherwise you could sit in your home, videoing a lot of racial hatred and post it all over social media with impunity.
Can I just clear it - My personal views on this are it seems to be a load of fuss over nothing - HOWEVER, I can see why people could be fussed over it.
There has to be someone there at the time for it to be a public order offence. Someone has to suffer fear' alarm or distress'.
The fear, alarm or distress was not caused until the video was published so any "guilty party" would be the one publishing it.
I could spend all day churning out Nazi posters and pamphlets but if there is no one here to be caused offence, what crime is there?
Any offence would only be committed once I distributed said literature.
The Public Order Act is dated 1986 wasn't it and was never designed to cover social media.0
