Religion and Ethics Forum
General Category => Politics & Current Affairs => Topic started by: jeremyp on March 20, 2018, 09:17:27 PM
-
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-43478925
A man trained his girlfriend's dog to react to the phrase "gas the jews" and to raise its paw when he says "Sieg Heil". Then he put a video of his "accomplishments" on Youtube. I've seen the video and, personally, I found it unfunny, but I can see how Nazis and Jews might find it offensive.
If somebody finds something you say offensive, you can now go to prison in this country. This is a black day.
-
I'm struggling with this, are not Youtube guilty also?
-
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-43478925
A man trained his girlfriend's dog to react to the phrase "gas the jews" and to raise its paw when he says "Sieg Heil". Then he put a video of his "accomplishments" on Youtube. I've seen the video and, personally, I found it unfunny, but I can see how Nazis and Jews might find it offensive.
If somebody finds something you say offensive, you can now go to prison in this country. This is a black day.
freedom of expression is dead in the whole world...
by the use of "hate speech" laws, basically they can stop anyone saying anything...
this is why the gang grooming of white girls by muslims in Britain has gone relatively unchallenged..
-
freedom of expression is dead in the whole world...
Well, at least we can take some comfort from the fact that hyperbole isn't dead.
-
the use of "hate speech" laws, basically they can stop anyone saying anything...
this is why the gang grooming of white girls by muslims in Britain has gone relatively unchallenged
Yes and don't forget the abuse that went on for decades by Catholic Priests. The reason they weren't challenged must be down to hate speech laws as well ::)
-
I am glad certain things are no longer acceptable, like racism and stigmatising gays, for instance.
-
Well, at least we can take some comfort from the fact that hyperbole isn't dead.
wow I like that...
-
I am glad certain things are no longer acceptable, like racism and stigmatising gays, for instance.
yes such important matters...
who is it taking farms off white people again... I forget!!
-
yes such important matters...
who is it taking farms off white people again... I forget!!
Ehhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh?
Yes it is very important. When I was young there were notices up saying 'No Blacks', and homosexuality was illegal. There are some who would happily go back to those intolerant times. >:(
-
Ehhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh?
Yes it is very important. When I was young there were notices up saying 'No Blacks', and homosexuality was illegal. There are some who would happily go back to those intolerant times. >:(
but it seems black lives matter, yet for some reason white lives do not...
I haven't heard anyone ranting about white farmers being killed, raped and now they are legalising taking property of them..
you hear so much about women's rights, yet no one seems to lift a finger to help their fellow females who are covered from head to toe in a black bag and are more or less slaves to their husbands...
funny how some things matter...
-
but it seems black lives matter, yet for some reason white lives do not...
I haven't heard anyone ranting about white farmers being killed, raped and now they are legalising taking property of them..
you hear so much about women's rights, yet no one seems to lift a finger to help their fellow females who are covered from head to toe in a black bag and are more or less slaves to their husbands...
funny how some things matter...
I haven't heard that one, have you a link?
I agree that woman should be treated as equals and it is WRONG for them to enslaved by there husbands.
-
I haven't heard that one, have you a link?
I agree that woman should be treated as equals and it is WRONG for them to enslaved by there husbands.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/africa/south-africa-white-farms-land-seizure-anc-race-relations-a8234461.html
It just seems to me that certain agendas are pushed while some very important agendas are completely ignored and |I would like to know why..
-
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/africa/south-africa-white-farms-land-seizure-anc-race-relations-a8234461.html
It just seems to me that certain agendas are pushed while some very important agendas are completely ignored and |I would like to know why..
Not right, but I suspect their forebears took the land off the original inhabitants, probably by force.
-
Not right, but I suspect their forebears took the land off the original inhabitants, probably by force.
they probably did but as you say two wrongs don't make a right..
-
but it seems black lives matter, yet for some reason white lives do not...
This is a gross misrepresentation of the situation.
The reason for BLM is that on nearly every indicator black people are worse off in this country. They have poorer mental health, they get treated differently (and not in a good way) by the police, they work in lower paid jobs, they have worse outcomes educationally. You get the picture. Some areas of society seek to rectify that situation. They are not saying white lives don't matter - they are saying black lives matter just the same as white lives do.
-
This is a gross misrepresentation of the situation.
The reason for BLM is that on nearly every indicator black people are worse off in this country. They have poorer mental health, they get treated differently (and not in a good way) by the police, they work in lower paid jobs, they have worse outcomes educationally. You get the picture. Some areas of society seek to rectify that situation. They are not saying white lives don't matter - they are saying black lives matter just the same as white lives do.
Exactly.
-
but it seems black lives matter, yet for some reason white lives do not...
I haven't heard anyone ranting about white farmers being killed, raped and now they are legalising taking property of them..
you hear so much about women's rights, yet no one seems to lift a finger to help their fellow females who are covered from head to toe in a black bag and are more or less slaves to their husbands...
funny how some things matter...
What complete and utter bollocks. All lives matter, and no-one but a racist says otherwise. As for white farmers - I take it you're referring to Zimbabwe, which no-one in their right mind defends. I'm sure there have been threads about it on here in the past.
-
What complete and utter bollocks. All lives matter, and no-one but a racist says otherwise. As for white farmers - I take it you're referring to Zimbabwe, which no-one in their right mind defends. I'm sure there have been threads about it on here in the past.
In this case South Africa, GoG posted link later on thread
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/africa/south-africa-white-farms-land-seizure-anc-race-relations-a8234461.html
-
I do happen to know a Zimbabwe family (farmers) who came back here many years ago. They lost some but were sensible and invested over here.; they had originally emigrated to Zimbabwe, goodness knows why, from UK. Nothing bitter or racist about them at all tho' didn't care for Mugabe, how he turned out after a while.
Grace, here in the UK all lives matter. If black people make a lot out of black lives mattering it's because black people in this country have generally had a very bad deal. Less so now of course thank goodness, far better than when I was a youngster (teen from '74), in the 1970s, & early on there was tremendous racism against 'Asians' who came here from Kenya and Uganda, my parents were involved in helping the latter settle here; institutionalised racism still exists amongst the ignorant unfortunately.
-
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/africa/south-africa-white-farms-land-seizure-anc-race-relations-a8234461.html
It just seems to me that certain agendas are pushed while some very important agendas are completely ignored and |I would like to know why..
I don't think any agenda is ignored. I've read and heard plenty about the abuse of white farmers.
-
Robert E ba gum has had a good few mentions on here.
Search results for: Mugabe
Pages: [1]
1
Politics & Current Affairs / Re: Mugabe 'under house arrest'
« by Anchorman on November 21, 2017, 04:41:47 PM »
...... http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-42043370 Mugabe has been sacked. The vice president, whom he ......
2
General Discussion / Re: Forum Best Bits
« by jeremyp on November 15, 2017, 07:42:46 PM »
...... have rarely been any closer to democratic than Mugabe's. Quote from: Nearly Sane on November 15, ......
3
Politics & Current Affairs / Re: Freedom off Expression is Dead in Britain
« by Robbie on Today at 05:01:25 PM »
...... or racist about them at all tho' didn't care for Mugabe, how he turned out after a while. Grace, here in ......
4
Theism and Atheism / Re: Pat Robertson and U S Evangelical Christianity show their ugliest of faces again
« by Brownie on October 03, 2016, 12:52:32 AM »
...... that much longer. I've thought the same about Mugabe. ......
5
Philosophy, in all its guises. / Re: New set of Commandments
« by Littleroses on February 29, 2016, 08:31:20 AM »
...... :26 PM One can respect someone like Hitler - or Mugabe, or Stalin, or Churchill - without agreeing with ......
6
General Discussion / Re: End of an era
« by Hope on November 26, 2016, 08:11:37 PM »
...... similar to our much loved friend Robert Mugabe. ......
7
Politics & Current Affairs / Re: Litvinenko and Putin
« by Humph Warden Bennett on January 22, 2016, 08:43:47 AM »
...... husband's assassination? If we have allowed Mugabe to enter, then to refuse to allow almost anybody ......
8
Sports, Hobbies & Interests / Re: Fifa officials arrested in Zurich after dawn raid
« by wigginhall on May 29, 2015, 12:09:45 PM »
...... ton of money from FIFA. Again, it reminds me of Mugabe. ......
-
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-43478925
A man trained his girlfriend's dog to react to the phrase "gas the jews" and to raise its paw when he says "Sieg Heil". Then he put a video of his "accomplishments" on Youtube. I've seen the video and, personally, I found it unfunny, but I can see how Nazis and Jews might find it offensive.
If somebody finds something you say offensive, you can now go to prison in this country. This is a black day.
First, I have no sympathy with this terrible idea and reaction the dog was trained to do, none whatsoever.
Having said the above j p, I think you've got a point.
Regards ippy
-
Jonathan Pie's views
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ti2bVS40cz0
-
Freedom of expression no longer exists in the UK. This is a cornerstone of a democracy and when one goes the other will eventually follow.
-
Freedom of expression no longer exists in the UK. This is a cornerstone of a democracy and when one goes the other will eventually follow.
This, of course, is complete and utter gonads. You have every right to free expression, its just that responsibilty also comes with that freedom.
As far as I can see most of the people who object to the "restrictions" placed on speech are mainly objecting because they can't say "fuck off home, Paki" or some such other charming phrase without being challenged and sometimes penalised.
As for democracy, ha - have you taken a close look at our electoral system lately?
-
Total freedom of expression would be terrible if all the sick racist and homophobic bigots were given the right to say exactly what they think. Notices stating, 'No Coloureds', as in the bad old days, might start appearing. >:(
-
We have always had limited freedom of expression, haven't we? It's true that there are limits now on racist stuff, plus homophobic, but I don't see a problem.
-
This, of course, is complete and utter gonads. You have every right to free expression, its just that responsibilty also comes with that freedom.
As far as I can see most of the people who object to the "restrictions" placed on speech are mainly objecting because they can't say "fuck off home, Paki" or some such other charming phrase without being challenged and sometimes penalised.
As for democracy, ha - have you taken a close look at our electoral system lately?
This is my instinctive reaction as well, although I must say that I I am unhappy with the category of hate crime: we have laws aplenty to deal with violence, incitement to violence, etc: Why is bashing someone over the head a more serious crime if it's racially or religiously motivated?
-
Hate speech, who decides.
Mocking a religion = offending people. Below from the Met's website
A Hate Incident is any incident which the victim, or anyone else, thinks is based on someone’s prejudice towards them because of their race, religion, sexual orientation, disability or because they are transgender.
Not all hate incidents will amount to criminal offences, but it is equally important that these are reported and recorded by the police.
Mock a religion - religious person reports incident which they believe is based on prejudice - police question you and now you are on their database.
-
This is my instinctive reaction as well, although I must say that I I am unhappy with the category of hate crime: we have laws aplenty to deal with violence, incitement to violence, etc: Why is bashing someone over the head a more serious crime if it's racially or religiously motivated?
I fully agree with the opinion that crimes should be prosecuted under legislation that we had before "hate crime" came to the fore. Who decides what hate is.
-
Freedom of expression no longer exists in the UK. This is a cornerstone of a democracy and when one goes the other will eventually follow.
when did it ever?
-
The limits placed on it are increasing.
-
The limits placed on it are increasing.
So in what sense does it 'no longer exist', as you stated, if it never did? Further if it was a cornerstone of democracy and yet never existed then your position is that the UK has never been a democracy and there is then nothing to follow.
-
Ok, it doesn't exist as it did, is my belief. It is being eroded.
Is that better?
-
Ok, it doesn't exist as it did, is my belief. It is being eroded.
Is that better?
Better perhaps to say there is less freedom of speech than there has been at some time, but where is the argument that once you reduce freedom of speech in comparison to some specific time, that this then mean there will be no democracy in future which was yout position? Would it not be possible for freedom of speech to be something that as a non absolute might increase and decrease without it being something that means the end of democracy?
-
NS,
The hate crime / incident legislation. Have you any thoughts, however brief, on the piece I put in a few posts back from the Met police website.
-
NS,
The hate crime / incident legislation. Have you any thoughts, however brief, on the piece I put in a few posts back from the Met police website.
Sorry, that's not in any sense an answer to your idea that a reduction at any stage leads inevitably to an end to free speech which was your position.
-
NS,
The hate crime / incident legislation. Have you any thoughts, however brief, on the piece I put in a few posts back from the Met police website.
And I'm fully in agreement with you that religion shouldn't be privileged from ridicule.
-
And I'm fully in agreement with you that religion shouldn't be privileged from ridicule.
But it already is. The freedom to ridicule religion could get you lifted.
-
But it already is. The freedom to ridicule religion could get you lifted.
And? That isn't any evidence of your idea that any restriction on a soecific set of freedom of expression means that democracy will inevitably end. And I am not aware that there was ever a time where various pieces of legislation or common law would gave stopped that happening in any of the countries in the UK, can you outline when you think that was?
-
You seem very unconcerned that people could be arrested for criticising religion, perhaps you are making my case for me.
First they came for the people who criticised religion ....
You know how that one goes, it was a rapid decline. Is it unfeasible that a slow creep to a place where liberty declines and authoritarianism increases, who knows where that could go, eventually.
A hate crime or incident could literally be anything. I remember a lady who went to see Frankie Boyle was upset at him making jokes about Down's syndrome as she had a child with the disorder. I suppose he could have been arrested, or at least interviewed over that.
A Hate Incident is any incident which the victim, or anyone else, thinks is based on someone’s prejudice towards them because of their race, religion, sexual orientation, disability or because they are transgender.
Dare you object to a bloke dressed as a woman using female facilities.
-
You seem very unconcerned that people could be arrested for criticising religion, perhaps you are making my case for me.
First they came for the people who criticised religion ....
You know how that one goes, it was a rapid decline. Is it unfeasible that a slow creep to a place where liberty declines and authoritarianism increases, who knows where that could go, eventually.
A hate crime or incident could literally be anything. I remember a lady who went to see Frankie Boyle was upset at him making jokes about Down's syndrome as she had a child with the disorder. I suppose he could have been arrested, or at least interviewed over that.
A Hate Incident is any incident which the victim, or anyone else, thinks is based on someone’s prejudice towards them because of their race, religion, sexual orientation, disability or because they are transgender.
Dare you object to a bloke dressed as a woman using female facilities.
So a complete avoidance of the questions I asked, with added irrelevance about toilets.
-
Any comments on the hate crime laws and the effect they could have on freedom of thought, opinion and speech.
There is a part of the Racial and Religious Hatred Act 2006 that states "Use of threatening words or behaviour or any written material which is threatening or intends thereby to stir up religious hatred"
Blasphemy law through the back door.
-
So in what sense does it 'no longer exist', as you stated, if it never did? Further if it was a cornerstone of democracy and yet never existed then your position is that the UK has never been a democracy and there is then nothing to follow.
It was me who said that, not JP.
A man has been convicted for making a joke video on the Internet. Please understand it sets a very dangerous precedent. Sure our freedom of expression was more de facto than de jure, but it doesn't help when people make pedantic points about what is a very serious issue.
-
Total freedom of expression would be terrible if all the sick racist and homophobic bigots were given the right to say exactly what they think. Notices stating, 'No Coloureds', as in the bad old days, might start appearing. >:(
Even racists and homophobes should be allowed to spew their bile, provided they don't act on it, or incite others to. Notices saying "No coloureds" go beyond free speech into discriminatory acts, which is why they would no longer be allowed. In fact, we never have had total freedom of expression - the libel and slander laws are restrictions of it, as are laws about inciting to violence, pornography, etc.
-
It was me who said that, not JP.
A man has been convicted for making a joke video on the Internet. Please understand it sets a very dangerous precedent. Sure our freedom of expression was more de facto than de jure, but it doesn't help when people make pedantic points about what is a very serious issue.
He said it in reply #23. It was never de facto or de jure. Have a look at his statement in #23 and you will see what I was taking issue with.
-
Even racists and homophobes should be allowed to spew their bile, provided they don't act on it, or incite others to. Notices saying "No coloureds" go beyond free speech into discriminatory acts, which is why they would no longer be allowed. In fact, we never have had total freedom of expression - the libel and slander laws are restrictions of it, as are laws about inciting to violence, pornography, etc.
OH heck - this is a thorny issue. Your first sentence poses difficulties straight away. How do we know that people are or are not acting as a result of homophobic comments made by others?
For example, in my own mind I am fairly sure the upswing in violence against transgendered people in the USA is due in part to Trump's own approach to the subject, but how do you prove that? And if you can't is it then better to have a robust set of laws in place to try to prevent that kind of speech.
I don't know the answer to all this, I do know as a member of a group that gets targeted more often than is statistical usual with verbal abuse and violence that I sometimes change my behaviour, where I walk, even how loudly I speak sometimes depending on the area/pub/company I am in. Now firstly, that is demeaning because it reinforces what vestiges of self hatred I still have within me, and it also makes me feel like I am a coward. More importantly than that though I would ask you what price would you pay for my safety? Isn't a little curtailment of "free speech" which is nothing of the sort; it is hate speech; worth citizens of this country feeling a little bit safer and more comfortable in their own country.
As I say I don't know the answers and I feel uneasy curbing speech. At the same time I feel much more uneasy about acts of violence that are perpetrated based on racist, mysognistic and homophobic attitudes that some people express and that others may then use as a green light to act out their petty prejudices against ordinary people of this country.
-
He said it in reply #23. It was never de facto or de jure. Have a look at his statement in #23 and you will see what I was taking issue with.
But as JeremyP had said, the same thing was in his opening post, yet, you did not take him up on exactly the same point. Hmmm, something fishy going on.
Anyway, I will say freedom of expression is being curtailed and as such eroded, I believe it will continue as a creeping death. The hate laws are unnecessary in the UK as we have other legislation to prosecute under.
Here is an example from your own very fine city NS, https://tinyurl.com/ybwoflrl
Racially abusing police officers, not prosecuted under hate legislation which he could have been, but he wasn't and in addition he avoided jail, yet Mark Meechan was done as a hate crime and faces jail.
I am losing confidence in the police. FGM is rampant, knife crime in London is out of control, shoplifting is almost not a crime and 999 calls can take days to get a response yet say some hurty words and they are all over it like a rash.
-
This is a gross misrepresentation of the situation.
The reason for BLM is that on nearly every indicator black people are worse off in this country. They have poorer mental health, they get treated differently (and not in a good way) by the police, they work in lower paid jobs, they have worse outcomes educationally. You get the picture. Some areas of society seek to rectify that situation. They are not saying white lives don't matter - they are saying black lives matter just the same as white lives do.
I don't think it is misrepresenting anything...
it should either be equality or nothing, both black and white lives matter equally...
-
The CPS has this on their website about hate crime
Any criminal offence which is perceived by the victim or any other person, to be motivated by hostility or prejudice, based on a person's disability or perceived disability; race or perceived race; or religion or perceived religion; or sexual orientation or perceived sexual orientation or transgender identity or perceived transgender identity."
However they go on to say that as there is no legal definition of hostility they will go with the dictionary one which includes Ill-will, spite, contempt, prejudice, unfriendliness, antagonism, resentment and dislike.
No, it isn't a joke.
People take this very seriously indeed. The London Mayor has set up 900 strong team to tackle hate crime which includes hurty words on Twitter etc. Just think about that. Nine hundred staff employed in the London crime fighting area to tackle "hate" crime. The law used to prosecute Count Dankula.
In the meantime London has overtaken New York for number of murders.
-
But as JeremyP had said, the same thing was in his opening post, yet, you did not take him up on exactly the same point. Hmmm, something fishy going on.
Anyway, I will say freedom of expression is being curtailed and as such eroded, I believe it will continue as a creeping death. The hate laws are unnecessary in the UK as we have other legislation to prosecute under.
Here is an example from your own very fine city NS, https://tinyurl.com/ybwoflrl
Racially abusing police officers, not prosecuted under hate legislation which he could have been, but he wasn't and in addition he avoided jail, yet Mark Meechan was done as a hate crime and faces jail.
I am losing confidence in the police. FGM is rampant, knife crime in London is out of control, shoplifting is almost not a crime and 999 calls can take days to get a response yet say some hurty words and they are all over it like a rash.
Nothing fishy, just hadn't been posting when Jeremyp posted, and then picked up on your post as a recent post. Tbh I am not even sure what you think would be fishy.
And yes, I know you are making a slippery slope argument, repeating it doesn't give it anymore validity. And I am frankly baffled why you cite a case where someone wasn't done for hate speech as an argument for it being a slippery slope.
Given you have raised Scotland, in the guise of its best city, it might be worth considering that the Offensive Behaviour at Football Act, OBFA, has just been repealed which would seem to be evidence against your slippery slope argument.
http://www.bbc.com/news/live/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-42774512
Not really sure what point your last para is trying to make as it introduces a number of other issues which appear to have no real connection to your point.
-
The CPS has this on their website about hate crime
However they go on to say that as there is no legal definition of hostility they will go with the dictionary one which includes Ill-will, spite, contempt, prejudice, unfriendliness, antagonism, resentment and dislike.
No, it isn't a joke.
People take this very seriously indeed. The London Mayor has set up 900 strong team to tackle hate crime which includes hurty words on Twitter etc. Just think about that. Nine hundred staff employed in the London crime fighting area to tackle "hate" crime. The law used to prosecute Count Dankula.
In the meantime London has overtaken New York for number of murders.
Not really sure what point you are making with the last line but it's worth being a bit dubious about short term stats
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-43628494
-
A hate crime trial in Wales
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-43645636
-
A hate crime trial in Wales
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-43645636
And this shows your premise that we are witnessing an unavoidable slippery slope in what way?
-
SO Meechan has been fined £800! Have t admit that I don't see the point in it. If it was an actual hate crime then that's not an appropriate sentence, and if it isn't then there shouldn't be a guilty verdict
-
Is it a hate crime to lost Robertson’s golly pins on eBay? Because there’s quite a lot on there. I’m guessing that both they and the dolls turn up at car boot sales and collectors fairs.
FWIW I had a golly as a child, it had been my cousin’s and she passed him onto me as she outgrew him. I never even knew what it represented until I was an adult.
-
Is it a hate crime to lost Robertson’s golly pins on eBay? Because there’s quite a lot on there. I’m guessing that both they and the dolls turn up at car boot sales and collectors fairs.
FWIW I had a golly as a child, it had been my cousin’s and she passed him onto me as she outgrew him. I never even knew what it represented until I was an adult.
I've been doing a books I love with no explanation thing elsewhere , and I've been trying to post the covers from when I read them at first. SO I put up the 70s cover that I read Ten Little Niggers in, complete with golliwog on cover. Do I think doing that was a hate crime - nope, And I don't think Dunkula was either though there may have been more intent to test boundaries. My issue is though if you think it's a hate crime a fine is pointless - he'll get that for an interview and there will be many interviews. That cases like this happen are not indicative of huge changes to British law, just that it's a law that will always have grey areas. Multiple repetitions of Gas the Jews is going to at least trigger some questioning of the intent.
-
Link to the judgement in the case - note neither Crown nor defence submitted anything formally about freedom of expression.
http://www.scotland-judiciary.org.uk/8/1962/PF-v-Mark-Meechan
-
I've been doing a books I love with no explanation thing elsewhere , and I've been trying to post the covers from when I read them at first. SO I put up the 70s cover that I read Ten Little Niggers in, complete with golliwog on cover. Do I think doing that was a hate crime - nope, And I don't think Dunkula was either though there may have been more intent to test boundaries. My issue is though if you think it's a hate crime a fine is pointless - he'll get that for an interview and there will be many interviews. That cases like this happen are not indicative of huge changes to British law, just that it's a law that will always have grey areas. Multiple repetitions of Gas the Jews is going to at least trigger some questioning of the intent.
Yes, I did get what your point was. I’m imagining fines for ebayers by the dozen.
But there’s a huge punishment in being found guilty of a hate crime. Publicity aside, this person will never pass a CRB check, for example, and will need to declare it to employers, when applying for a mortgage etc. This may or may not matter to this individual, but it does have wider implications. If I had any kind of golly related collectibles I’d be burning them or putting them into landfill. I don’t think it’s be safe even to try to sell them on. But anything repeating ‘gas the Jews’ can’t be anything other than a hate crime, surely?
-
Link to the judgement in the case - note neither Crown nor defence submitted anything formally about freedom of expression.
http://www.scotland-judiciary.org.uk/8/1962/PF-v-Mark-Meechan
If you said ‘gas the Jews’ at a football game you’d be arrested. I don’t see how this is any different.
-
If you said ‘gas the Jews’ at a football game you’d be arrested. I don’t see how this is any different.
I don't know about that. Given we've just had the Offensive Behaviour at Football Act , OBFA, removed from the statute book in Scotland in part because people felt it went to far, and yet you could still regularly hear the songs about being up to your knees in Fenian blood on Sky, I'm not sure simply saying 'Gas the Jews' at a football match would lead to arrest. I think the judgement is quite a clear one, and is certainly arguable but I think the issue is that it's really not clear that the bloke is trying to get people to gas Jews, or saying that it should happen.
-
Yes, I did get what your point was. I’m imagining fines for ebayers by the dozen.
But there’s a huge punishment in being found guilty of a hate crime. Publicity aside, this person will never pass a CRB check, for example, and will need to declare it to employers, when applying for a mortgage etc. This may or may not matter to this individual, but it does have wider implications. If I had any kind of golly related collectibles I’d be burning them or putting them into landfill. I don’t think it’s be safe even to try to sell them on. But anything repeating ‘gas the Jews’ can’t be anything other than a hate crime, surely?
'Woman burns symbols of slaves in bizarre threat to black immigrants'
-
Section 127 is a hugely controversial area of the law
https://wiki.openrightsgroup.org/wiki/Communications_Act_2003/Section_127
It should be noted though that it isn't a new idea in British law.
-
I don't know about that. Given we've just had the Offensive Behaviour at Football Act , OBFA, removed from the statute book in Scotland in part because people felt it went to far, and yet you could still regularly hear the songs about being up to your knees in Fenian blood on Sky, I'm not sure simply saying 'Gas the Jews' at a football match would lead to arrest. I think the judgement is quite a clear one, and is certainly arguable but I think the issue is that it's really not clear that the bloke is trying to get people to gas Jews, or saying that it should happen.
Anti Semitic chanting certainly gets reported to the FA and fans have been arrested for Nazi salutes and the like. I don’t think arrests are unheard of, although probably not as often as they should. Obviously Spurs matches often feature.
-
Anti Semitic chanting certainly gets reported to the FA and fans have been arrested for Nazi salutes and the like. I don’t think arrests are unheard of, although probably not as often as they should. Obviously Spurs matches often feature.
Again the legislation is very different, but I think the idea that there is much chance of getting arrested at a football match for saying as one person to no one in particular, gas the jews, is fanciful.
-
Douglas Murray's take
https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/count-dankula-mark-meechan-prosecution-free-speech-battle/