Wriggly
Banned
It needs to be stopped ? Well so that it doesnt offend the PC phalanx, what about twitter gets themselves a fudging swear filter ?
-
Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara
Fabrice Muamba
- Thread starter 7percent
- Start date
It needs to be stopped ? Well so that it doesnt offend the PC phalanx, what about twitter gets themselves a fudging swear filter ?
Oh the irony.
But we have always had freedom of speech....you still cant call someone a n#gger, or print racial hatred in a book without getting arrested....so why should you be able to type it? Its a criminal offence...nothing to do with free speech.
I do agree, you shouldnt. But what about for example someone posts on here about Wenger and kids - should they be arrested? Thats equally as vile as any racist comment. There are so many things especially in football you'd sing at a match or say on a forum but would never say to someone on the street.
Totally agree
1882
Milenko Acimovic
You can't stop anyone THINKING it, but until people come out with it in print, or verbally, it's almost impossible to know... I actually think Twitter has become a VERY useful device for whittling these pricks out of the hate-filled cave they've been hiding in all these years... the beauty of it is that these people STILL THINK they have anonymity to say what they want, or at least can't physically be seen... yet they can, we ALL can... it's only '1984' if what you say or write isn't something you'd be prepared to say to that person's face and are subsequently caught... and if you are, then accept the consequences.
1882
Milenko Acimovic
(not if it has a ring of truth about it..) 8-[
...which I don't ACTUALLY think it does... :-#
Someone bricking in our Lasagne on the other hand is summit that be speculated on (by me anyway) until the cows come home.... it's not gonna change anything, least of all my feelings on the subject!
Mulletperm
Mauricio Taricco
yiddo2786
Steed Malbranque
This made my day when I saw it this morning. Just brilliant =D>
parklane1
Vic Buckingham
But there is a difference between freedom of speech and some tinkled up racist bigot on teletext doing what he did.
awesome dawson
Mitchell Thomas
Full text from guardian
A student who mocked the football player Fabrice Muamba on Twitter after the Bolton player collapsed with a cardiac arrest, has lost his appeal against a 56-day jail term.
Liam Stacey, 21, of Pontypridd, south Wales, sobbed as he was taken away after the failed appeal hearing at Swansea crown court.
Mr Justice Wyn Williams rejected an argument that Stacey had already been punished enough. He said the Swansea University biology student had admitted an offence, racially aggravated public disorder, of intent.
"He was intending to say what he said and was intending to produce the effect that he did."
He heard the appeal with two magistrates from the court where the original sentence was imposed on Tuesday.
After listening to arguments from both sides, Williams adjourned for 30 minutes to reach a conclusion. He returned more than 90 minutes later and apologised for the delay.
"You will all understand that this is a very emotive and very difficult case and we wanted to be sure in our minds that what we were doing was right."
He highlighted a penalty notice Stacey received in March last year for violent disorder. The incident had previously been overlooked and was not mentioned at Stacey's earlier sentencing.
The notice was the result of Stacey becoming violent as he was ejected, drunk, from a pub. He threatened and swore at police officers when they arrived on the scene and was eventually arrested for a public order offence.
Earlier Stacey's lawyer, Paul Hobson, who had been unaware of the offence, spoke of the effect the case had had on his family and friends and argued that a suspended sentence or a community order would be appropriate.
"What he did on that particular night was vile. But I would submit that the court can conclude that, vile though his actions were, he is not a vile person," Hobson said.
"What he did does not define his whole personality, but it will be a blot on his character forever."
He added: "Very rarely will a court deal with an individual who has attracted so much stigma." That stigma had affected his family and friends, who were guilty of nothing.
Hobson said Stacey had been a normal student with a very bright future a fortnight ago. Now he had a criminal conviction and his academic future was uncertain, with a university disciplinary hearing next month.
"He is now three days into a prison sentence and, probably worse than all of that, he has managed to achieve a notoriety and perhaps pariah status."
Stacey triggered revulsion when he tweeted: "LOL [laugh out loud]. fudge Muamba. He's dead!!!" as doctors fought to save the footballer's life.
The Bolton Wanderers midfielder collapsed during an early evening FA Cup tie against Tottenham Hotspur on 17 March. Millions watched the match live on TV and feared the cardiac arrest was fatal.
While prayers were being said for Muamba worldwide, a drunken Stacey turned to his BlackBerry to post his now infamous tweet. When it attracted a barrage of criticism he replied with a series of racist and personally abusive posts.
Support for the jail term was widespread on the day it was handed down, and was subsequently debated on Twitter. But a significant minority criticised his punishment and claimed it was politically motivated to make him into an example.
A student who mocked the football player Fabrice Muamba on Twitter after the Bolton player collapsed with a cardiac arrest, has lost his appeal against a 56-day jail term.
Liam Stacey, 21, of Pontypridd, south Wales, sobbed as he was taken away after the failed appeal hearing at Swansea crown court.
Mr Justice Wyn Williams rejected an argument that Stacey had already been punished enough. He said the Swansea University biology student had admitted an offence, racially aggravated public disorder, of intent.
"He was intending to say what he said and was intending to produce the effect that he did."
He heard the appeal with two magistrates from the court where the original sentence was imposed on Tuesday.
After listening to arguments from both sides, Williams adjourned for 30 minutes to reach a conclusion. He returned more than 90 minutes later and apologised for the delay.
"You will all understand that this is a very emotive and very difficult case and we wanted to be sure in our minds that what we were doing was right."
He highlighted a penalty notice Stacey received in March last year for violent disorder. The incident had previously been overlooked and was not mentioned at Stacey's earlier sentencing.
The notice was the result of Stacey becoming violent as he was ejected, drunk, from a pub. He threatened and swore at police officers when they arrived on the scene and was eventually arrested for a public order offence.
Earlier Stacey's lawyer, Paul Hobson, who had been unaware of the offence, spoke of the effect the case had had on his family and friends and argued that a suspended sentence or a community order would be appropriate.
"What he did on that particular night was vile. But I would submit that the court can conclude that, vile though his actions were, he is not a vile person," Hobson said.
"What he did does not define his whole personality, but it will be a blot on his character forever."
He added: "Very rarely will a court deal with an individual who has attracted so much stigma." That stigma had affected his family and friends, who were guilty of nothing.
Hobson said Stacey had been a normal student with a very bright future a fortnight ago. Now he had a criminal conviction and his academic future was uncertain, with a university disciplinary hearing next month.
"He is now three days into a prison sentence and, probably worse than all of that, he has managed to achieve a notoriety and perhaps pariah status."
Stacey triggered revulsion when he tweeted: "LOL [laugh out loud]. fudge Muamba. He's dead!!!" as doctors fought to save the footballer's life.
The Bolton Wanderers midfielder collapsed during an early evening FA Cup tie against Tottenham Hotspur on 17 March. Millions watched the match live on TV and feared the cardiac arrest was fatal.
While prayers were being said for Muamba worldwide, a drunken Stacey turned to his BlackBerry to post his now infamous tweet. When it attracted a barrage of criticism he replied with a series of racist and personally abusive posts.
Support for the jail term was widespread on the day it was handed down, and was subsequently debated on Twitter. But a significant minority criticised his punishment and claimed it was politically motivated to make him into an example.
Last edited:
braineclipse
Willie Hall
We all know by now that in Britain there is. Question is, should there be?
Freedom of speech is much too important to let the government decide what should be allowed and what shouldn't in my opinion. Several western countries are now talking about or actually reintroducing blasphemy laws. Is that ok as well? And what level of racism is alright, and what isn't? There was that female politician who was discussed in random at some point last year, a lot of people accused her of making a comment that at the very least could be interpreted as racist. Should she go to jail as well?
People most certainly have the right to be arseholes. No laws against that.
Spaceman
Ruel Fox
absolutely made up
An inalienable right to be an arsehole? Is that written into our (unwritten) constitution?
That's a new one.
So he's being made an example of?
Guess what.....I don't give a fudge.
Frankly, anything that makes ****s like this young lad think twice about repeatedly behaving like ****s has to be a good thing.
All the hand wringing civil rights talk is just melodramatic overreaction. This isn't the thin end of the wedge. It's just decency and solid values, for once, getting the upper hand.
Last edited:
Thats a bit vague though.
Giving a nazi salute is illegal, and could get you arrested. Its classed as inciting racial hatred. Claiming that you have a right to be an arsehole, doesnt mean you are not breaking certain laws. The guy on Twitter broke the law. He was not simply excercising his "freedom of speech", or any other "rights"of his.
Its not about messing around on Twitter. Forget the internet for a moment. Had he said it to Stan Collymore in the street, and been filmed as evidence, he'd have got the same punishment.
braineclipse
Willie Hall
Laws generally state what isn't permitted, not what is permitted. And being and arsehole isn't illegal - luckily.
There are many reactions to brick like what this guy did that should and in my opinion will make people think twice, public reactions, reactions from his friends and family and so forth. Doesn't mean it has to be punishable by law.
This also goes much further than people voicing their opinion, a law might prevent loads of people from voicing those opinions, but that doesn't make the opinions go away. And I believe in a free marketplace of ideas of a sort, where the stupid, bigoted ideas get exposed for the world to see and ridicule. I would much rather have that than have those people form groups, voicing their opinions only in private forums where there is no one to speak against them. While at the same time feeling (rightly) persecuted for what are only thoughts and opinions to help them build their "us against them" siege mentality.
I'm not arguing that he didn't break the law as it seems to be in The UK. Nor am I arguing that "just because this was on twitter" he should go unpunished.
My question is if a law like this is a good idea. I don't think it is.