|
Jail for trollig? Just wow.
|
On September 14 2011 23:55 Fir3fly wrote:Show nested quote +On September 14 2011 23:37 Brett wrote:On September 14 2011 23:21 Fir3fly wrote:On September 14 2011 23:09 Thorakh wrote:On September 14 2011 23:04 Fir3fly wrote:On September 14 2011 22:28 Cain0 wrote:
He's a fat little dwarf. He's probably just trying to make himself feel better by hurting others.
Also, 4 months isn't enough for what he did, I think it should be more like a year. im offended by your comment, i want you to go to jail for a year, i was left in shock and almost in tears from it. Grow the fuck up and realise that not everyone has an ironclad skin. Get some respect, honestly. Not every person can handle the most horrible verbal abuse you can think off. Great post Brett. Its not about having ironclad skin, its about cutting your losses and not getting in a vulnerable situation. you want internet? then you're going to have to deal with assholes. you want to get anywhere in business? then you're going to have to deal with assholes. you want to work in a pub? then you're going to have to deal with assholes. you want to work as a policeman? then you're going to have to deal with assholes. dont be such a moron. :o, i called you a moron, are you going to cry about it? or are you going to think "hmm, he is an angry young man with clearly different morales and opinions than me" or "this is making me angry, i should ignore him before i get more angry" the only way you'll ever get anywhere and learn anything is if you put away your tear-ducts and learn about other peoples opionions and morals. Kids of today are growing up like pansys because "OH BETTER NOT HURT THE CHILDREN." Also, i agree, it is a good post by Brett, sheding some light on the legality of it. EDIT: so i dont have to double post. im still at loss of words for the facebook memorium, i mean, that IS what drew attention to it. what, did she want "50,000 [random] likes for my dead daughter plz" we dont need that shit on facebook. and if she didnt put it up there then none of this would've happened. Just because people will exhibit behaviour X, does not mean that society or the law can, will or should tolerate it, ignore it, or fail to prosecute it. If a person leaves their car unlocked, it should not be stolen. Sure, the dumbass should have locked the car, but it's still an offence to jump into another person's car and drive off with it without their permission. If a person doesn't erect 3 metre high fences around their property, their white feature wall should not be subjected to graffiti. Sure, it might be a good idea for them to take precautionary measures to protect their property, but it's still an offence to go and draw a big hairy dick on your neighbour's wall. If a person decides to make a facebook memorial page, and doesn't put certain restrictions on it for some reason or another, it should not be subjected to derogatory, offensive and malicious communications. Sure, it might have been a good idea to restrict it, but it's still an offence to harass the shit out of the page's author. The law does not require people to act to the n'th degree to protect their rights, property, freedoms and general enjoyment because the law is that protection and the person acting against that law DOES NOT HAVE TO PURSUE THEIR ACTIONS. They don't have to steal that car. They dont have to grafiti the wall. They dont have to harass grieving family members by shitting on the memory of the deceased. Sure, intelligent people will act to protect themselves from these criminals, but they shouldnt have to. They are doing nothing wrong. touche, sir. i simply did not think about it like that. however, i do believe that "telling the police whenever he gets a mobile with internet" is a bit overdramatic, same as the 4 months of prison. although i suppose it does depend on how far he took it, if it was just defacing some facebook page, then that is nothing really of concern in my honest opinion, coninuing with your analogy, its as though she put the paint cans right next to the wall, or left the keys in the car and put a sign up: "free car", sure it doesnt MEAN that they HAD TO TAKE IT, but its purely asking for it. what more is there to expect?. unless he was seriously stalking the woman, a fine or such, would be more than enough.
Sure, I can understand that.
But that's an issue regarding his sentencing. Not whether this is a crime or not. Frankly I think a lot of people saw the penalty and revolted against the whole idea just because he was gaoled. I actually agree, I think 5 months gaol is excessive in the circumstances, absent any knowledge of his prior history... I also suspect his defence lawyer is pretty shit. For god's sake, she was just about prosecuting the matter herself... Calling him despicable and the like. I sure as fuck wouldn't hire her.
|
On September 14 2011 23:28 HereticSaint wrote:Show nested quote +On September 14 2011 23:05 Conti wrote:
To all those above who say "So? This is the internet, this happens all the time. Get used to it":
Get. A. Fucking. Life.
Seriously.
If you are so far disconnected from reality that you think that there should be no action taken against someone who repeatedly and intentionally seeks out grieving family members to insult them, then you really, seriously need to turn off the computer more often to interact with the real world. Your insinuation that I don't have a life is very insulting and inflammatory towards me and by another poster from your countries definition of your legal system is against the law where you are from. I'll see you in court.
Luckily, our court system (unlike you) knows the difference between an insinuation (which never addressed you personally in the first place) and repeated, specific harassment. That you cannot tell the difference - in addition to everything else I read from you in this thread - makes me feel very, very sorry for you.
If I would call you an asshole on the internet, nobody will give a shit.
If I would do the shit that guy did, then yes, I would end up in front of a German court, and my best guess is that I would end up serving a few months on probation or something while having to pay a nice sum of money to the families of the deceased, depending on the severity of the case. And that's how it fucking should be.
|
On September 15 2011 00:02 Conti wrote:Show nested quote +On September 14 2011 23:28 HereticSaint wrote:On September 14 2011 23:05 Conti wrote:
To all those above who say "So? This is the internet, this happens all the time. Get used to it":
Get. A. Fucking. Life.
Seriously.
If you are so far disconnected from reality that you think that there should be no action taken against someone who repeatedly and intentionally seeks out grieving family members to insult them, then you really, seriously need to turn off the computer more often to interact with the real world. Your insinuation that I don't have a life is very insulting and inflammatory towards me and by another poster from your countries definition of your legal system is against the law where you are from. I'll see you in court. Luckily, our court system (unlike you) knows the difference between an insinuation (which never addressed you personally in the first place) and repeated, specific harassment. That you cannot tell the difference - in addition to everything else I read from you in this thread - makes me feel very, very sorry for you. If I would call you an asshole on the internet, nobody will give a shit. If I would do the shit that guy did, then yes, I would end up in front of a German court, and my best guess is that I would end up serving a few months on probation or something while having to pay a nice sum of money to the families of the deceased, depending on the severity of the case. And that's how it fucking should be.
And that's why I think your court system is awful and would fight tooth and nail to avoid it ever being like yours.
|
On September 15 2011 00:05 HereticSaint wrote:Show nested quote +On September 15 2011 00:02 Conti wrote:On September 14 2011 23:28 HereticSaint wrote:On September 14 2011 23:05 Conti wrote:
To all those above who say "So? This is the internet, this happens all the time. Get used to it":
Get. A. Fucking. Life.
Seriously.
If you are so far disconnected from reality that you think that there should be no action taken against someone who repeatedly and intentionally seeks out grieving family members to insult them, then you really, seriously need to turn off the computer more often to interact with the real world. Your insinuation that I don't have a life is very insulting and inflammatory towards me and by another poster from your countries definition of your legal system is against the law where you are from. I'll see you in court. Luckily, our court system (unlike you) knows the difference between an insinuation (which never addressed you personally in the first place) and repeated, specific harassment. That you cannot tell the difference - in addition to everything else I read from you in this thread - makes me feel very, very sorry for you. If I would call you an asshole on the internet, nobody will give a shit. If I would do the shit that guy did, then yes, I would end up in front of a German court, and my best guess is that I would end up serving a few months on probation or something while having to pay a nice sum of money to the families of the deceased, depending on the severity of the case. And that's how it fucking should be. And that's why I think your court system is awful and would fight tooth and nail to avoid it ever being like yours.
I'm very happy not to know you personnaly.
|
On September 14 2011 23:58 hypnoxide wrote:Show nested quote +On September 14 2011 23:53 Brett wrote:On September 14 2011 23:41 hypnoxide wrote:On September 14 2011 23:37 Brett wrote:On September 14 2011 23:21 Fir3fly wrote:On September 14 2011 23:09 Thorakh wrote:On September 14 2011 23:04 Fir3fly wrote:On September 14 2011 22:28 Cain0 wrote:
He's a fat little dwarf. He's probably just trying to make himself feel better by hurting others.
Also, 4 months isn't enough for what he did, I think it should be more like a year. im offended by your comment, i want you to go to jail for a year, i was left in shock and almost in tears from it. Grow the fuck up and realise that not everyone has an ironclad skin. Get some respect, honestly. Not every person can handle the most horrible verbal abuse you can think off. Great post Brett. Its not about having ironclad skin, its about cutting your losses and not getting in a vulnerable situation. you want internet? then you're going to have to deal with assholes. you want to get anywhere in business? then you're going to have to deal with assholes. you want to work in a pub? then you're going to have to deal with assholes. you want to work as a policeman? then you're going to have to deal with assholes. dont be such a moron. :o, i called you a moron, are you going to cry about it? or are you going to think "hmm, he is an angry young man with clearly different morales and opinions than me" or "this is making me angry, i should ignore him before i get more angry" the only way you'll ever get anywhere and learn anything is if you put away your tear-ducts and learn about other peoples opionions and morals. Kids of today are growing up like pansys because "OH BETTER NOT HURT THE CHILDREN." Also, i agree, it is a good post by Brett, sheding some light on the legality of it. EDIT: so i dont have to double post. im still at loss of words for the facebook memorium, i mean, that IS what drew attention to it. what, did she want "50,000 [random] likes for my dead daughter plz" we dont need that shit on facebook. and if she didnt put it up there then none of this would've happened. Just because people will exhibit behaviour X, does not mean that society or the law can, will or should tolerate it, ignore it, or fail to prosecute it. If a person leaves their car unlocked, it should not be stolen. Sure, the dumbass should have locked the car, but it's still an offence to jump into another person's car and drive off with it without their permission. If a person doesn't erect 3 metre high fences around their property, their white feature wall should not be subjected to graffiti. Sure, it might be a good idea for them to take precautionary measures to protect their property, but it's still an offence to go and draw a big hairy dick on your neighbour's wall. If a person decides to make a facebook memorial page, and doesn't put certain restrictions on it for some reason or another, it should not be subjected to derogatory, offensive and malicious communications. Sure, it might have been a good idea to restrict it, but it's still an offence to harass the shit out of the page's author. The law does not require people to act to the n'th degree to protect their rights, property, freedoms and general enjoyment because the law is that protection and the person acting against that law DOES NOT HAVE TO PURSUE THEIR ACTIONS. They don't have to steal that car. They dont have to grafiti the wall. They dont have to harass grieving family members by shitting on the memory of the deceased. Sure, intelligent people will act to protect themselves from these criminals, but they shouldnt have to. They are doing nothing wrong. 100% Agree. Let's have people tell us how to behave and totally disregard personal responsibility because it's really working out so far. Besides, I'm pretty sure if you're negligent in securing your property you won't be covered by insurance. Isn't that based in law? WTF does the a person's insurance policy have to do with the criminality of the grafiti artist's actions? Nothing. Stay on topic. Further, you're right, this is entirely about personal responsibility. The responsibility of the criminal NOT to commit criminal offences... Nobody forced this idiot to pursue his course of action. I was referring to your first example. You try to assert that the owner of the vehicle assumes no responsibility to secure his car and instead it is left up to society to make sure it isn't stolen by choosing not to steal it. How about you just lock your fucking door? I'm not saying this kid shouldn't take responsibility, I'm saying that without an opportunity he wouldn't have committed a "crime".
So you're basicly saying the facebook page maybe wasn't the smartest move.
That's ok, but it still has nothing to do with his charge. Sure he would not have committed the crime if there was no facebook page but are you going to tell me I'm not allowed to build a house because that could make someone paint my walls with graffiti?
Because that's what it looks like
Again. I too think jail is overdoing it and a fine would be perfectly fine, but a punishment is needed.
|
On September 14 2011 23:55 HereticSaint wrote:Show nested quote +On September 14 2011 23:51 Brett wrote:On September 14 2011 23:28 HereticSaint wrote:
Here's the thing man, I completely understand why in an otherwise utopian society this would be such a big deal, however we aren't in such a society. I understand laws and how laws and laws and if you break them you should be punished (Again, whether this should be punishable is another issue), however that isn't the direct issue here. The direct issue here is this is such a rampant problem, (AKA: If I game online not a day goes by that I don't get a death threat, mocked about someone in my family dying, attacks that are racist or homophobic in nature, etc) that when you get down to the nitty gritty of it, you aren't going to stop it or really even slow it down by prosecuting one individual.
Either ramp it up, or knock it off and I'm inclined to say knock it off when you consider that there are a million other larger issues that could use those funds in a better way but instead are being wasted on this issue which has methods of stopping it or at least significantly slowing it down already, such as banning the accounts and or IP's of the individuals, are there ways around it? Sure, at least until those start getting circumvented this shouldn't even be considered a "maybe" court issue.
That's also neglecting his Aspergers.
All I'm going to say regarding you is that your side of the debate already appears to be the minority and yet you are contradicting one another in what seems every other post, you say it's "centuries of case law" and yet someone else says "it's because the mother was offended". Well bub, until every single troll is going to court you're wrong. Well, with respect, the fact of the matter is that the criminal law, in some way, shape or form, has been in place for thousands of years. Crime continues to exist despite this fact. But nobody else seems to think that we should stop prosecuting all those other crimes. Why? Because there are other factors to be considered in the prosecution of crime other than the concept of general deterrence. Go and look into sentencing principles. It will show you a myriad of reasons for prosecutions to continue despite inefficacy of criminal prosecutions with respect to the concept of general deterrence. This sort of harassment has real, lasting psychological effects on those concerned. It is worthy of prosecution. That's not really up for discussion.... As to your last paragraph, sure, a minority in this very small internet forum thread. Step outside of this sphere however, particularly into the 18+ demographic away from the internet and I'm absolutely certain that I'm not in the minority. Also, my reference to case law is not contradictory at all. It can be both. Case law often provides PRINCIPLES, not strict examples to be followed, because every case is different and the specific circumstances of each case need to be considered and applied to the elements of each offence. Maybe I'm wrong but it still feels like even the people being more reasonable about this but still thinking he deserves harsher punishment than being banned from social networking are glazing over the issue that we don't have infinite space in our prison systems nor for investigations and prosecutions. There are bigger issues out there, sure we still prosecute robberies even though there are murders and assaults, but I dunno to me it just feels that this is a minor enough issue with other safeguards in place (such as banning accounts and IP's) that unless someone circumvents those measures that this shouldn't even be considered a possible court case.
I understand where you're coming from, but that's a sentencing issue. I agree, I think 5 months gaol is excessive. But people in this thread are arguing all this other nonsense such as freedom of speech, inability to prosecute, slippery slope etc, to assert that he shouldn't even be prosecuted... That's nonsense. What he did is pathetic... And thankfully, a criminal offence in his jurisdiction.
|
On September 15 2011 00:06 mr_tolkien wrote:Show nested quote +On September 15 2011 00:05 HereticSaint wrote:On September 15 2011 00:02 Conti wrote:On September 14 2011 23:28 HereticSaint wrote:On September 14 2011 23:05 Conti wrote:
To all those above who say "So? This is the internet, this happens all the time. Get used to it":
Get. A. Fucking. Life.
Seriously.
If you are so far disconnected from reality that you think that there should be no action taken against someone who repeatedly and intentionally seeks out grieving family members to insult them, then you really, seriously need to turn off the computer more often to interact with the real world. Your insinuation that I don't have a life is very insulting and inflammatory towards me and by another poster from your countries definition of your legal system is against the law where you are from. I'll see you in court. Luckily, our court system (unlike you) knows the difference between an insinuation (which never addressed you personally in the first place) and repeated, specific harassment. That you cannot tell the difference - in addition to everything else I read from you in this thread - makes me feel very, very sorry for you. If I would call you an asshole on the internet, nobody will give a shit. If I would do the shit that guy did, then yes, I would end up in front of a German court, and my best guess is that I would end up serving a few months on probation or something while having to pay a nice sum of money to the families of the deceased, depending on the severity of the case. And that's how it fucking should be. And that's why I think your court system is awful and would fight tooth and nail to avoid it ever being like yours. I'm very happy not to know you personnaly.
Why are you so aggressive?
On September 15 2011 00:07 Toadesstern wrote:Show nested quote +On September 14 2011 23:58 hypnoxide wrote:On September 14 2011 23:53 Brett wrote:On September 14 2011 23:41 hypnoxide wrote:On September 14 2011 23:37 Brett wrote:On September 14 2011 23:21 Fir3fly wrote:On September 14 2011 23:09 Thorakh wrote:On September 14 2011 23:04 Fir3fly wrote:On September 14 2011 22:28 Cain0 wrote:
He's a fat little dwarf. He's probably just trying to make himself feel better by hurting others.
Also, 4 months isn't enough for what he did, I think it should be more like a year. im offended by your comment, i want you to go to jail for a year, i was left in shock and almost in tears from it. Grow the fuck up and realise that not everyone has an ironclad skin. Get some respect, honestly. Not every person can handle the most horrible verbal abuse you can think off. Great post Brett. Its not about having ironclad skin, its about cutting your losses and not getting in a vulnerable situation. you want internet? then you're going to have to deal with assholes. you want to get anywhere in business? then you're going to have to deal with assholes. you want to work in a pub? then you're going to have to deal with assholes. you want to work as a policeman? then you're going to have to deal with assholes. dont be such a moron. :o, i called you a moron, are you going to cry about it? or are you going to think "hmm, he is an angry young man with clearly different morales and opinions than me" or "this is making me angry, i should ignore him before i get more angry" the only way you'll ever get anywhere and learn anything is if you put away your tear-ducts and learn about other peoples opionions and morals. Kids of today are growing up like pansys because "OH BETTER NOT HURT THE CHILDREN." Also, i agree, it is a good post by Brett, sheding some light on the legality of it. EDIT: so i dont have to double post. im still at loss of words for the facebook memorium, i mean, that IS what drew attention to it. what, did she want "50,000 [random] likes for my dead daughter plz" we dont need that shit on facebook. and if she didnt put it up there then none of this would've happened. Just because people will exhibit behaviour X, does not mean that society or the law can, will or should tolerate it, ignore it, or fail to prosecute it. If a person leaves their car unlocked, it should not be stolen. Sure, the dumbass should have locked the car, but it's still an offence to jump into another person's car and drive off with it without their permission. If a person doesn't erect 3 metre high fences around their property, their white feature wall should not be subjected to graffiti. Sure, it might be a good idea for them to take precautionary measures to protect their property, but it's still an offence to go and draw a big hairy dick on your neighbour's wall. If a person decides to make a facebook memorial page, and doesn't put certain restrictions on it for some reason or another, it should not be subjected to derogatory, offensive and malicious communications. Sure, it might have been a good idea to restrict it, but it's still an offence to harass the shit out of the page's author. The law does not require people to act to the n'th degree to protect their rights, property, freedoms and general enjoyment because the law is that protection and the person acting against that law DOES NOT HAVE TO PURSUE THEIR ACTIONS. They don't have to steal that car. They dont have to grafiti the wall. They dont have to harass grieving family members by shitting on the memory of the deceased. Sure, intelligent people will act to protect themselves from these criminals, but they shouldnt have to. They are doing nothing wrong. 100% Agree. Let's have people tell us how to behave and totally disregard personal responsibility because it's really working out so far. Besides, I'm pretty sure if you're negligent in securing your property you won't be covered by insurance. Isn't that based in law? WTF does the a person's insurance policy have to do with the criminality of the grafiti artist's actions? Nothing. Stay on topic. Further, you're right, this is entirely about personal responsibility. The responsibility of the criminal NOT to commit criminal offences... Nobody forced this idiot to pursue his course of action. I was referring to your first example. You try to assert that the owner of the vehicle assumes no responsibility to secure his car and instead it is left up to society to make sure it isn't stolen by choosing not to steal it. How about you just lock your fucking door? I'm not saying this kid shouldn't take responsibility, I'm saying that without an opportunity he wouldn't have committed a "crime". So you're basicly saying the facebook page maybe wasn't the smartest move. That's ok, but it still has nothing to do with his charge. Sure he would not have committed the crime if there was no facebook page but are you going to tell me I'm not allowed to build a house because that could make someone paint my walls with graffiti? Because that's what it looks like Again. I too think jail is overdoing it and a fine would be perfectly fine, but a punishment is needed.
I don't know why people keep talking about graffiti and houses but yes, I believe without opportunity he would not have actively sought out a victim. That is why, in my opinion, banning him from social networking was the best choice. To all these people postulating that he'd go to a internet cafe to continue; do you really think he gives a shit enough to go down to a net cafe to piss someone off? The easiest way to stop a troll is just to block them, if you don't respond with instant gratification then it's boring.
|
The article actually says
pleaded guilty to two counts of sending malicious communications relating to Natasha.
Harassment is something entirely different and from my experiences this still would never go to court in Germany.
|
Maybe this is a different type of thing but it's not that far from people who flame you on sc2 on hoping you die etc, making that vid just shows he's got problems.
I am pretty sure this guy needs different help then jail.. He probably has some other problems.. What he did was pretty fucking sad but I think he should get a different treatment.
Therapy and like a 5 year ban on any social network but jailling people like him won't help anyone.
If they do this to make a statement I feel it's still not the best thing for the future.. I don't believe in an authoritarian society, this is an entire different thing then real life threats in actual reality.
Is this guy a criminal? No. Is what he did wrong and he should be punished and helped at the same time? Yes.
|
On September 15 2011 00:06 mr_tolkien wrote:Show nested quote +On September 15 2011 00:05 HereticSaint wrote:On September 15 2011 00:02 Conti wrote:On September 14 2011 23:28 HereticSaint wrote:On September 14 2011 23:05 Conti wrote:
To all those above who say "So? This is the internet, this happens all the time. Get used to it":
Get. A. Fucking. Life.
Seriously.
If you are so far disconnected from reality that you think that there should be no action taken against someone who repeatedly and intentionally seeks out grieving family members to insult them, then you really, seriously need to turn off the computer more often to interact with the real world. Your insinuation that I don't have a life is very insulting and inflammatory towards me and by another poster from your countries definition of your legal system is against the law where you are from. I'll see you in court. Luckily, our court system (unlike you) knows the difference between an insinuation (which never addressed you personally in the first place) and repeated, specific harassment. That you cannot tell the difference - in addition to everything else I read from you in this thread - makes me feel very, very sorry for you. If I would call you an asshole on the internet, nobody will give a shit. If I would do the shit that guy did, then yes, I would end up in front of a German court, and my best guess is that I would end up serving a few months on probation or something while having to pay a nice sum of money to the families of the deceased, depending on the severity of the case. And that's how it fucking should be. And that's why I think your court system is awful and would fight tooth and nail to avoid it ever being like yours. I'm very happy not to know you personnaly.
Thanks for your absolutely wonderful addition to this topic. If you'd like to further discuss just how much you love me may I suggest you make a thread about it or send me some private messages. I promise not to sue you or wish prison rape upon you if you say something nasty towards me.
|
This is fucking ludicrous. They might as well throw just about 90% of every middle and high schooler in jail, because the stuff that goes down between teenagers in real life is far more scarring than some dumb kid on the internet.
I cannot, for the life of me, understand the policies on "internet bullying". Is this just old men making legislation based on things they don't understand? And why on earth doesn't real life bullying, which is a million times more prevelant and impactful, get treated the same way - if not with a far less lenient policy?
Call me crazy for feeling this way, and while it's certainly far from a nice thing that he did, I can't help but feel this is just completely backwards. When is the last time a teacher took a bullying charge seriously? Someone getting the shit kicked out of them for being an outcast? Ever try stepping to other authorities with that? Good luck. Hell, most of the time the teachers treat the kid getting bullied worse than the others, but that's flown for dozens of years now, why is internet bullying suddenly so important?
|
their seems to be a strong devide between people from europe and the united statess about this and im suprised to say i gotta side with the euros... i cant tell you how many times ive seen someone attack top players like incontrol crunCher and machine for having an off day if there was a threat of jail for this kind of trolling maybe they wouldnt do it... just my 2 sense
|
On September 14 2011 23:58 hypnoxide wrote:Show nested quote +On September 14 2011 23:53 Brett wrote:On September 14 2011 23:41 hypnoxide wrote:On September 14 2011 23:37 Brett wrote:On September 14 2011 23:21 Fir3fly wrote:On September 14 2011 23:09 Thorakh wrote:On September 14 2011 23:04 Fir3fly wrote:On September 14 2011 22:28 Cain0 wrote:
He's a fat little dwarf. He's probably just trying to make himself feel better by hurting others.
Also, 4 months isn't enough for what he did, I think it should be more like a year. im offended by your comment, i want you to go to jail for a year, i was left in shock and almost in tears from it. Grow the fuck up and realise that not everyone has an ironclad skin. Get some respect, honestly. Not every person can handle the most horrible verbal abuse you can think off. Great post Brett. Its not about having ironclad skin, its about cutting your losses and not getting in a vulnerable situation. you want internet? then you're going to have to deal with assholes. you want to get anywhere in business? then you're going to have to deal with assholes. you want to work in a pub? then you're going to have to deal with assholes. you want to work as a policeman? then you're going to have to deal with assholes. dont be such a moron. :o, i called you a moron, are you going to cry about it? or are you going to think "hmm, he is an angry young man with clearly different morales and opinions than me" or "this is making me angry, i should ignore him before i get more angry" the only way you'll ever get anywhere and learn anything is if you put away your tear-ducts and learn about other peoples opionions and morals. Kids of today are growing up like pansys because "OH BETTER NOT HURT THE CHILDREN." Also, i agree, it is a good post by Brett, sheding some light on the legality of it. EDIT: so i dont have to double post. im still at loss of words for the facebook memorium, i mean, that IS what drew attention to it. what, did she want "50,000 [random] likes for my dead daughter plz" we dont need that shit on facebook. and if she didnt put it up there then none of this would've happened. Just because people will exhibit behaviour X, does not mean that society or the law can, will or should tolerate it, ignore it, or fail to prosecute it. If a person leaves their car unlocked, it should not be stolen. Sure, the dumbass should have locked the car, but it's still an offence to jump into another person's car and drive off with it without their permission. If a person doesn't erect 3 metre high fences around their property, their white feature wall should not be subjected to graffiti. Sure, it might be a good idea for them to take precautionary measures to protect their property, but it's still an offence to go and draw a big hairy dick on your neighbour's wall. If a person decides to make a facebook memorial page, and doesn't put certain restrictions on it for some reason or another, it should not be subjected to derogatory, offensive and malicious communications. Sure, it might have been a good idea to restrict it, but it's still an offence to harass the shit out of the page's author. The law does not require people to act to the n'th degree to protect their rights, property, freedoms and general enjoyment because the law is that protection and the person acting against that law DOES NOT HAVE TO PURSUE THEIR ACTIONS. They don't have to steal that car. They dont have to grafiti the wall. They dont have to harass grieving family members by shitting on the memory of the deceased. Sure, intelligent people will act to protect themselves from these criminals, but they shouldnt have to. They are doing nothing wrong. 100% Agree. Let's have people tell us how to behave and totally disregard personal responsibility because it's really working out so far. Besides, I'm pretty sure if you're negligent in securing your property you won't be covered by insurance. Isn't that based in law? WTF does the a person's insurance policy have to do with the criminality of the grafiti artist's actions? Nothing. Stay on topic. Further, you're right, this is entirely about personal responsibility. The responsibility of the criminal NOT to commit criminal offences... Nobody forced this idiot to pursue his course of action. I was referring to your first example. You try to assert that the owner of the vehicle assumes no responsibility to secure his car and instead it is left up to society to make sure it isn't stolen by choosing not to steal it. How about you just lock your fucking door? I'm not saying this kid shouldn't take responsibility, I'm saying that without an opportunity he wouldn't have committed a "crime".
Your entire argument is blame the victim. Taking it to its logical conclusion, killing somebody who isn't wearing bulletproof armor isn't murder. A crime is a crime no matter how much the victim takes steps to protect themselves.
|
On September 15 2011 00:16 Juanald wrote:
their seems to be a strong devide between people from europe and the united statess about this and im suprised to say i gotta side with the euros... i cant tell you how many times ive seen someone attack top players like incontrol crunCher and machine for having an off day if there was a threat of jail for this kind of trolling maybe they wouldnt do it... just my 2 sense
I'm amazed that you or anyone else actually believes that talking shit to people is worthy of jail time. I really hope that some of you never get to make decisions like this in the future.
On September 15 2011 00:18 andrewlt wrote:Show nested quote +On September 14 2011 23:58 hypnoxide wrote:On September 14 2011 23:53 Brett wrote:On September 14 2011 23:41 hypnoxide wrote:On September 14 2011 23:37 Brett wrote:On September 14 2011 23:21 Fir3fly wrote:On September 14 2011 23:09 Thorakh wrote:On September 14 2011 23:04 Fir3fly wrote:On September 14 2011 22:28 Cain0 wrote:
He's a fat little dwarf. He's probably just trying to make himself feel better by hurting others.
Also, 4 months isn't enough for what he did, I think it should be more like a year. im offended by your comment, i want you to go to jail for a year, i was left in shock and almost in tears from it. Grow the fuck up and realise that not everyone has an ironclad skin. Get some respect, honestly. Not every person can handle the most horrible verbal abuse you can think off. Great post Brett. Its not about having ironclad skin, its about cutting your losses and not getting in a vulnerable situation. you want internet? then you're going to have to deal with assholes. you want to get anywhere in business? then you're going to have to deal with assholes. you want to work in a pub? then you're going to have to deal with assholes. you want to work as a policeman? then you're going to have to deal with assholes. dont be such a moron. :o, i called you a moron, are you going to cry about it? or are you going to think "hmm, he is an angry young man with clearly different morales and opinions than me" or "this is making me angry, i should ignore him before i get more angry" the only way you'll ever get anywhere and learn anything is if you put away your tear-ducts and learn about other peoples opionions and morals. Kids of today are growing up like pansys because "OH BETTER NOT HURT THE CHILDREN." Also, i agree, it is a good post by Brett, sheding some light on the legality of it. EDIT: so i dont have to double post. im still at loss of words for the facebook memorium, i mean, that IS what drew attention to it. what, did she want "50,000 [random] likes for my dead daughter plz" we dont need that shit on facebook. and if she didnt put it up there then none of this would've happened. Just because people will exhibit behaviour X, does not mean that society or the law can, will or should tolerate it, ignore it, or fail to prosecute it. If a person leaves their car unlocked, it should not be stolen. Sure, the dumbass should have locked the car, but it's still an offence to jump into another person's car and drive off with it without their permission. If a person doesn't erect 3 metre high fences around their property, their white feature wall should not be subjected to graffiti. Sure, it might be a good idea for them to take precautionary measures to protect their property, but it's still an offence to go and draw a big hairy dick on your neighbour's wall. If a person decides to make a facebook memorial page, and doesn't put certain restrictions on it for some reason or another, it should not be subjected to derogatory, offensive and malicious communications. Sure, it might have been a good idea to restrict it, but it's still an offence to harass the shit out of the page's author. The law does not require people to act to the n'th degree to protect their rights, property, freedoms and general enjoyment because the law is that protection and the person acting against that law DOES NOT HAVE TO PURSUE THEIR ACTIONS. They don't have to steal that car. They dont have to grafiti the wall. They dont have to harass grieving family members by shitting on the memory of the deceased. Sure, intelligent people will act to protect themselves from these criminals, but they shouldnt have to. They are doing nothing wrong. 100% Agree. Let's have people tell us how to behave and totally disregard personal responsibility because it's really working out so far. Besides, I'm pretty sure if you're negligent in securing your property you won't be covered by insurance. Isn't that based in law? WTF does the a person's insurance policy have to do with the criminality of the grafiti artist's actions? Nothing. Stay on topic. Further, you're right, this is entirely about personal responsibility. The responsibility of the criminal NOT to commit criminal offences... Nobody forced this idiot to pursue his course of action. I was referring to your first example. You try to assert that the owner of the vehicle assumes no responsibility to secure his car and instead it is left up to society to make sure it isn't stolen by choosing not to steal it. How about you just lock your fucking door? I'm not saying this kid shouldn't take responsibility, I'm saying that without an opportunity he wouldn't have committed a "crime". Your entire argument is blame the victim. Taking it to its logical conclusion, killing somebody who isn't wearing bulletproof armor isn't murder. A crime is a crime no matter how much the victim takes steps to protect themselves.
That's not my argument at all. I'm not blaming the victim I'm saying the episode could be avoided if the victim took precautions against it, like not making it public or not creating it at all. Why do you need a memorial on facebook anyway?
If we were to talk about someone getting murdered the only question I have is: Did the victim enter a bad area and did they take precautions to ensure their safety? Walking around in a bulletproof vest is impractical and illegal. Avoiding a known hazardous area is not.
|
On September 15 2011 00:15 HoldenR wrote:
This is fucking ludicrous. They might as well throw just about 90% of every middle and high schooler in jail, because the stuff that goes down between teenagers in real life is far more scarring than some dumb kid on the internet.
I cannot, for the life of me, understand the policies on "internet bullying". Is this just old men making legislation based on things they don't understand? And why on earth doesn't real life bullying, which is a million times more prevelant and impactful, get treated the same way - if not with a far less lenient policy?
Call me crazy for feeling this way, and while it's certainly far from a nice thing that he did, I can't help but feel this is just completely backwards. When is the last time a teacher took a bullying charge seriously? Someone getting the shit kicked out of them for being an outcast? Ever try stepping to other authorities with that? Good luck. Hell, most of the time the teachers treat the kid getting bullied worse than the others, but that's flown for dozens of years now, why is internet bullying suddenly so important?
I'll second this, can't count the number of times I got the shit kicked out of me and didn't even fight back because half the time there was more than one person. Yet any time this was brought up to a higher up authority I was basically laughed at. Being on the end of both of these, I can tell you getting the shit kicked out of you is both emotionally and physically more scarring.
On September 15 2011 00:16 Juanald wrote:
their seems to be a strong devide between people from europe and the united statess about this and im suprised to say i gotta side with the euros... i cant tell you how many times ive seen someone attack top players like incontrol crunCher and machine for having an off day if there was a threat of jail for this kind of trolling maybe they wouldnt do it... just my 2 sense
I'm pretty sure if you asked inControl himself if people should get jailed for trolling he'd disagree, then again I could be completely wrong...but from his overall personality the only person he'd do that to is maybe CombatEx.
|
if he does this kind of thing over the internet couldn't the mother just ban him? ask facebook to ip ban?
i mean jailing someone over something like this... i know that what he did was wrong but still the internet is free ground, even for things of that nature. if it crosses the boundary of internet-real life and became a problem then jail should be a serious option, otherwise things should be kept cyber.
|
On September 15 2011 00:19 HereticSaint wrote:Show nested quote +On September 15 2011 00:16 Juanald wrote:
their seems to be a strong devide between people from europe and the united statess about this and im suprised to say i gotta side with the euros... i cant tell you how many times ive seen someone attack top players like incontrol crunCher and machine for having an off day if there was a threat of jail for this kind of trolling maybe they wouldnt do it... just my 2 sense I'm pretty sure if you asked inControl himself if people should get jailed for trolling he'd disagree, then again I could be completely wrong...but from his overall personality the only person he'd do that to is maybe CombatEx.
dont do the crime if u cant do the time.
|
On September 15 2011 00:23 Juanald wrote:Show nested quote +On September 15 2011 00:19 HereticSaint wrote:On September 15 2011 00:16 Juanald wrote:
their seems to be a strong devide between people from europe and the united statess about this and im suprised to say i gotta side with the euros... i cant tell you how many times ive seen someone attack top players like incontrol crunCher and machine for having an off day if there was a threat of jail for this kind of trolling maybe they wouldnt do it... just my 2 sense I'm pretty sure if you asked inControl himself if people should get jailed for trolling he'd disagree, then again I could be completely wrong...but from his overall personality the only person he'd do that to is maybe CombatEx. dont do the crime if u cant do the time.
Wow. Just wow... I, no, you know what.
You just melted my brain, thanks.
|
On September 15 2011 00:23 Juanald wrote:Show nested quote +On September 15 2011 00:19 HereticSaint wrote:On September 15 2011 00:16 Juanald wrote:
their seems to be a strong devide between people from europe and the united statess about this and im suprised to say i gotta side with the euros... i cant tell you how many times ive seen someone attack top players like incontrol crunCher and machine for having an off day if there was a threat of jail for this kind of trolling maybe they wouldnt do it... just my 2 sense I'm pretty sure if you asked inControl himself if people should get jailed for trolling he'd disagree, then again I could be completely wrong...but from his overall personality the only person he'd do that to is maybe CombatEx. dont do the crime if u cant do the time.
Implying what he did is actually worthy of any amount of "time".
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
