You're right in that people should expect to be called out, I feel like there should always be social consequences for everything we do and say, but that is not what's happening here at all.
I cannot help but feel very disturbed by the state feeling like it's there place to intervening in someone's right to say words when those words aren't inciting violence. The police absolutely should not be restricting a persons liberty just for boisterously proclaiming their "wrong" opinions, or even if they are purposefully offending someone. Sticks and stones.
I really hope it goes completely without saying that these points are not related to whether or not the guy is a douche, or made bad decisions. I await the delivery of that point regardless. Come at me.
I'd be hesitant to say that the state has intervened in this case. To me it looks like police overreach in this example and the police are accountable to the IPCC, whereas the state is accountable to the electorate (hahahaha).
For that reason, I don't think it's too chilling to accept that in certain cases the police should have the power to step in and shut people up in certain cases. That isn't to say it should be for 'wrongthink' or saying something deliberately offensive, but we do have individuals with large followings such as Tommy Robinson and Katie Hopkins who are smart enough to know where the line is and whose followers are largely ignorant vessels who will go far beyond that line in harrassing other people. In situations where the private entities who provide their platforms do not deplatform them, it makes sense to me that the police should have the power to investigate if a reasonable amount of complaints are made about them; it's the basis of a breach of the peace, which is a civil dispute rather than a criminal one. That isn't the same as having the police arrest you for subversive political opinions or engaging with 'wrongthink.'
Back to the case in question, I am a little bit surprised that a former police officer was visited by the police. The details seem to be scant, but it would suggest that at least some complaints were made about his conduct on Twitter, wouldn't it? I don't imagine Humberside Police spend their days looking for Twitterati to investigate. Moreover, whilst the judge ruled that the Police's action was disproportionate, he ruled that the Police's guidance on the subject of what defines a transgender hatecrime was not disproportionate.
More generally (and maybe slightly tongue in cheek), Twitter is bad and people shouldn't use it for anything serious and people should talk about politics an awful lot less than they do now. I remember not knowing who my neighbours and colleagues voted for and I liked it, now I can barely go anywhere without some stranger on the internet yelling into the void about how woke they are, how the Jews control the world or how the UK will no longer have to follow Germany's laws. Politics has widely become a polarised hellscape of groups of people screaming incoherently at each other whilst plugging their ears with their fingers.
Thanks for attending my TED Talk.
