Everton fan avoids jail after tweeting an offensive image

Politicians create laws, Police apply them.

You can't fault the Police for applying the laws of the land.
 
Its utterly bonkers that this is a police priority when there are so many unsolved, unattended crimes.

It’s an absolute joke imo. Yes, it’s a distasteful picture, but who cares.
 
Let's not also forget the CPS dropped a case where a both racist and misandrist incitement to murder was made by a univesity 'diversity officer' on twitter with a lot more than 13 followers.

https://www.theguardian.com/comment...ahar-mustafa-killallwhitemen-tweet-goldsmiths

adidan said:
Politicians create laws, Police apply them.

You can't fault the Police for applying the laws of the land.
Click to expand...

Do you think these laws are being applied by the whole criminal justice system without bias given cases like the above one?
 
Last edited:
adidan said:
Politicians create laws, Police apply them.

You can't fault the Police for applying the laws of the land.
Click to expand...

Some police forces are encouraging people to report "non crime hate incidents", they're getting involved in areas that they aren't even legally obligated to.

The problem I have with this incident is if it were against a Christian nobody would care, if you're going to waste resources policing medievil blasphemy laws (created under the guise of progressivism) then at least treat all offenders equally.

All the Everton fan is really guilty of is expressing a stereotype, if it's not accurate then why would anyone get their knickers in a twist over it? people need to stop acting like babies when it comes to speech they don't like. There's too many control freaks who want to stop everything they don't like nowadays and most governments will be all too happy to oblige. It's why the US has free speech in their constitution (1st amendment no less) once a government starts censoring speech it's a slippery slope.
 
Last edited:
The mental gymnastics - actually that's the wrong term. Gymnasts are skilled and disciplined. The mental retardation by a certain person in this thread when repeatedly asked a question is brilliant! Proper politicians' responses. Until Dowie posts the definition at which point the guy disappears...
 
jsmoke said:
. . . why are we able to mock Tom Cruise without repercussions and not minorities such as Muslims?
Click to expand...
I guess that criticism of Tom Cruise isn't likely to be perceived as criticism of millions of people?

Or it could be that people tend not to watch Tom Cruise in public week in, week out?

Whatever, I suspect that approval of this offensive portrayal of a footballer is heartily applauded by some people - who may or may not be racists.
 
mmj_uk said:
Some police forces are encouraging people to report "non crime hate incidents", they're getting involved in areas that they aren't even legally obligated to.
Click to expand...
That sounds more like political ideology from Police hierarchy that are looking to move into loftier positions.

Not uncommon, not a fan. Not a crime? Not the Police's business.
 
I've been on the internet for 20 years now. There was a lot more profanity, religious hate, trolling (old fashioned trolling), board wars, shock images and website defacing going on in 1999. It was up to the moderators and sysadmins to keep their sites in check, like how the Dons keep the OcUK boards in check now. People had thicker skin back then.

The profanity / blasphemy etc posted on today's internet shouldn't be police business imo. It should still be the work of moderators and sysadmins to ban them from the network, detect sockpuppet accounts (returnees) and keep their site clientèle-friendly by deleting 'offensive' material (a term that I use loosely).

The police should be using their limited resources on tangible crimes.
 
This thread would be about half the length if people just accepted the racism and bigotry are pretty much interchangable in modern English.

Just as literally no longer means that, racist/racism has become a synonym for bigotry.

Even the law Dowie quoted seemed to imply that the punishments for racial bigotry are just the same as being racist.
 
dowie said:
why ignore my questions and simultaneously expect me to answer yours? Anyway - to answer your second question...
Click to expand...
:D that's why haha



Racism in football is a big thing. This fool was treated appropriately.


What's the issue here really? Pedantry?
 
mmj_uk said:
Some police forces are encouraging people to report "non crime hate incidents", they're getting involved in areas that they aren't even legally obligated to.

The problem I have with this incident is if it were against a Christian nobody would care, if you're going to waste resources policing medievil blasphemy laws (created under the guise of progressivism) then at least treat all offenders equally.

All the Everton fan is really guilty of is expressing a stereotype, if it's not accurate then why would anyone get their knickers in a twist over it? people need to stop acting like babies when it comes to speech they don't like. There's too many control freaks who want to stop everything they don't like nowadays and most governments will be all too happy to oblige. It's why the US has free speech in their constitution (1st amendment no less) once a government starts censoring speech it's a slippery slope.
Click to expand...

That's because the people who write the laws and set the agenda generally aren't Christian, some may claim they are but they're arguably not. Christians are the ultimate group that have been and will be persecuted. Everything else is just fighting against a reflection of themselves that they don't want to see.
 
stockhausen said:
I guess that criticism of Tom Cruise isn't likely to be perceived as criticism of millions of people?
Click to expand...

The criticism of Tom Cruise in this case would be mocking Scientology rather than just mocking Tom Cruise.

You seem to be suggesting that the seriousness the state should attach to mockery or abuse of a group should be proportional to its size which if true is a rather bizarre as smaller groups are often less able to ignore or defend themsleves from abuse by larger/ majority group.
 
Caracus2k said:
The criticism of Tom Cruise in this case would be mocking Scientology rather than just mocking Tom Cruise.

You seem to be suggesting that the seriousness the state should attach to mockery or abuse of a group should be proportional to its size which if true is a rather bizarre as smaller groups are often less able to ignore or defend themsleves from abuse by larger/ majority group.
Click to expand...

No, it's not the same thing.

BJ is demonstrably a liar or ignorant.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-politics-49470831

Therefore to deride him for his personal failings is one thing.

To suggest a professional footballer, who has probably contributed more, financially and culturally, to this country than most, is a suicide bomber simply because of his religion is offensive to him and to millions of Muslims and has nothing to do with how they live their lives of who they are.
 
stockhausen said:
His season ticket has been cancelled?
Click to expand...
What's this? 13 minutes quote to post? Are you a Freeman? I hope so :)



Regarding the 'appropriate treatment':

"The only thing stopping you going to custody immediately is your contrite admission and that you were aware when arrested by police officers how wrong your behaviour was.

"The tweets were offensive and disgraceful and the court has to send out a message to society that it will not be tolerated.

"I hope that has sunk in."

She imposed a six week suspended sentence for 12 months, ordered him to carry out 200 hours of unpaid work and spend 14 days attending a promoting human dignity course.
Click to expand...

Dowies doing his part to connect a wider audience :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom