Arrested for posting pictures

Mickie said:
because he asked for it no less, he claimed it wouldnt harm him and it didnt on his reply.. it would be different if i picked a random stranger off the street and started insulting him, knowing for a fact it would upset him..
Click to expand...

No it wouldn't.

Either you can say things that are offensive, or you can't.

This is what I'm grasping at here - just being offensive can't be punished.

Of course if your words are intended to incite violence, or make someone fear for their life, or are designed to harass or bully someone, then things can and should be done, but merely being offensive?

Who cares? You're offended? Good for you, carry on.
 
dowie said:
I think that saying/doing something that offends/insults beliefs held by a group of people shouldn't be illegal. I've not said its fine to go up to a Muslim and insult them.

The film 'the life of Brian' caused controversy in its time amongst Christian groups who called for it to be banned.

If they'd reacted violently to it would you consider the Monty Python group to have incited violence?
Click to expand...

Thats a different story, but if enough people called for it to be banned, say more than half the audience, then yes i think it should be banned..

same goes for an idiot burning a poppy, if enough people are upset, angered from it then i think it should be illegal. its getting too deep for me to understand what law that would be under, or should be under, though i guess their is no law against it, or maybe their is, how else could they arrest him..

he is obviously inciting something by burning it and my opinion is something should be done about it..
 
Last edited:
(1) Any person who sends to another person
(a) a letter, electronic communication or article of any description which conveys
(i) a message which is indecent or grossly offensive
(b) any article or electronic communication which is, in whole or part, of an indecent or grossly offensive nature,
is guilty of an offence
Click to expand...
 
Mickie said:
Thats a different story, but if enough people called for it to be banned, say more than half the audience, then yes i think it should be banned..

same goes for an idiot burning a poppy, if enough people are upset, angered from it then i think it should be illegal. its getting too deep for me to understand what law that would be under, or should be under, though i guess their is no law against it, or maybe their is, how else could they arrest him..

he is obviously inciting something by burning it and my opinion is something should be done about it..
Click to expand...

So anything could be banned if 51% of the UK found it offensive?

Can't you see that being upset doesn't mean anything?

That if someone is upset, nothing happens?
 
PardonTheWait said:
No it wouldn't.

Either you can say things that are offensive, or you can't.

This is what I'm grasping at here - just being offensive can't be punished.

Of course if your words are intended to incite violence, or make someone fear for their life, or are designed to harass or bully someone, then things can and should be done, but merely being offensive?

Who cares? You're offended? Good for you, carry on.
Click to expand...

i'd say burning a poppy as being an harassment..

he disturbed and upset people burning it, so you agree something should be done about it.. good for you, carry on.
 
Steve Hughes:

"How do you make a law about offending people? How do you make it an offense to offend people? Being offended is subjective. It has everything to do with you as an individual or a collective, or a group or a society or a community. Your moral conditioning, your religious beliefs. What offends me may not offend you. And you want to make laws about this? "
 
PardonTheWait said:
A harassment of who?
Click to expand...

harassment is offensive behavior intended to disturb and upset, obviously aimed at people who are going to get upset about it.. and he sure picked a good day to burn it, intending on upsetting a lot of people..

and if a lot of people are being harassed they should then have a right to call for some justice..
 
Mickie said:
harassment is offensive behavior intended to disturb and upset, obviously aimed at people who are going to get upset about it.. and he sure picked a good day to burn it, intending on upsetting a lot of people..

and if a lot of people are being harassed they should then have a right to call for some justice..
Click to expand...

Harassment is repeated and continuous. The first definition I found:

ha·rass (h-rs, hrs)
tr.v. ha·rassed, ha·rass·ing, ha·rass·es
1. To irritate or torment persistently.
2. To wear out; exhaust.
3. To impede and exhaust (an enemy) by repeated attacks or raids.

Doing one obnoxious thing is not harassment. It's just obnoxious.

What you're saying is that if one person does one thing that you find obnoxious or offensive, then they should be arrested. What happens if you do something that I find offensive? Can I have you arrested? Who decides what's offensive? Again, it's subjective.

What was unthinkable 100 years ago is perfectly fine now, and vice versa. You can't make laws about being offended!
 
PardonTheWait said:
Harassment is repeated and continuous. The first definition I found:

ha·rass (h-rs, hrs)
tr.v. ha·rassed, ha·rass·ing, ha·rass·es
1. To irritate or torment persistently.
2. To wear out; exhaust.
3. To impede and exhaust (an enemy) by repeated attacks or raids.

Doing one obnoxious thing is not harassment. It's just obnoxious.

What you're saying is that if one person does one thing that you find obnoxious or offensive, then they should be arrested. What happens if you do something that I find offensive? Can I have you arrested? Who decides what's offensive? Again, it's subjective.

What was unthinkable 100 years ago is perfectly fine now, and vice versa. You can't make laws about being offended!
Click to expand...

i agree you cant but to quote a comedian ? wasnt he making a joke.

im sure he'd agree that if 1 person was offended out of a thousand that 1 person is a moron but if a thousand to 1 was offended something should be done about it.. if the police had a million complaints against him burning a poppy their should be something done about it, atleast give him a fine..and put his money towards poppy appeal
 
PardonTheWait said:
I agree that the problem of being offended is easily solved among those involved without need of involving the emergency services.

It seems we've reached an accord, with the added bonus of you showing yourself up as a neanderthal semi-moron.

I'm off to bed then.
Click to expand...

night night, dont burn too many poppys will you..
 
Mickie said:
Wow, i dont know what to say in reply but that makes me pretty angry..

that you think its fine, should be legal to go upto a Muslim and insult them..
Click to expand...

So, if I saw your face and thought you were incredibly ugly, so ugly that I found it offensive, so ugly that it made me angry, would it be cool for me to go and beat you up because you were inciting violence due to your incredibly ugliness?
 
I am completely convinced that people only get angry at "offensive" things because they believe it's what you're supposed to do. It seems that people are losing the ability to actually think for themselves, to make use of the brain in their heads.

I seriously couldn't care less if some one burns a poppy, it means nothing unless you CHOOSE to ascribe meaning to it.

Something I've noticed a lot more lately (of people in general) is that people are so sensitive. If you say something they don't like, they think it's perfectly justified to get very upset and kick up a big stink about it.

I'm starting to think that a lot of people think it's a human right to be spared of being offended, or reading/hearing things you don't want to see or hear.

Arresting this kid for burning a poppy is worse than the whole poppy burning thing because burning a poppy means nothing unless you let it have meaning. Arresting this kid for doing something some people don't like completely undermines the whole point of people buying and wearing the poppy in the first place.
 
Last edited:
im saying its not fine to insight violence and you're saying it should be ok ?

im agreeing with the Malicious Communications Act and everyone else doesnt agree..
and im made to feel like im in the wrong.. if this were china it would be off with his head.. yet all im calling for is a fine and its off with my head..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom