|
On September 15 2011 00:32 Whoranzone wrote:Show nested quote +On September 15 2011 00:29 Brett wrote:On September 15 2011 00:27 Desirous wrote:
There are many jokes at the expense of the less fortunate. Should we jail them all?
If we're going to lock up people for stupid shit that doesn't affect anyone anymore than they'll let it, then let's lock up all the idiots who think no Jews died in WW2. I think that would be a lot more justified than some guy editing videos and trolling. Can people stop with the terrible analogies? .... Fuck me.. How is that a terrible analogy ?
Because a comedian making a joke about Irishmen does not specifically target an irish man and set out on a course of action to cause harm, anguish or grief..
|
Pretty sick, sure, but so is making a page to tell the entire world your mother committed suicide. No-one's in the right here, in my opinion, not even the court. What law did he break?
|
On September 15 2011 00:33 Whoranzone wrote:Show nested quote +
look you got to take responsibility for youre actions. in united states we might not be as sophisticated as korea or europe but hopefully well get there. cyberbullying is not acceptable. as a prominant member of slayers pointed out you dont have to hit someone for it to be assault.
Sticks and stones...ahh I am sure you know the rest.
words have consequences
http://www.thinkb4youspeak.com/glsen/consequences/
|
On September 15 2011 00:38 BlackJack wrote:
If you're going to make an online public forum about your daughter then you should be prepared to handle public scrutiny. What if this were a memorial page for a serial killer and people went out of their way to call him a monster and a piece of scum. People should be sent to jail for that? Or does protection from trolling only extend to little girls?
If the mother of a serial killer made a memorial page to her son to remember the times when he was a better person, and is unfortunately silly enough or technologically retarded enough to make it public, and is then subjected to this form of focused intense hatred, then yes, the perpetrators should be and could be prosecuted...
|
On September 15 2011 00:41 Thorakh wrote:Show nested quote +On September 15 2011 00:32 Whoranzone wrote:On September 15 2011 00:29 Brett wrote:On September 15 2011 00:27 Desirous wrote:
There are many jokes at the expense of the less fortunate. Should we jail them all?
If we're going to lock up people for stupid shit that doesn't affect anyone anymore than they'll let it, then let's lock up all the idiots who think no Jews died in WW2. I think that would be a lot more justified than some guy editing videos and trolling. Can people stop with the terrible analogies? .... Fuck me.. How is that a terrible analogy ? Because you can't fucking compare making a joke or a one time insult, to continued harassment with the sole intent of causing emotional harm to the victim. Is this really that hard to understand?
pleaded guilty to two counts of sending malicious communications relating to Natasha.
so continued harassment equals two. Good to know.
On September 15 2011 00:42 Brett wrote:Show nested quote +On September 15 2011 00:32 Whoranzone wrote:On September 15 2011 00:29 Brett wrote:On September 15 2011 00:27 Desirous wrote:
There are many jokes at the expense of the less fortunate. Should we jail them all?
If we're going to lock up people for stupid shit that doesn't affect anyone anymore than they'll let it, then let's lock up all the idiots who think no Jews died in WW2. I think that would be a lot more justified than some guy editing videos and trolling. Can people stop with the terrible analogies? .... Fuck me.. How is that a terrible analogy ? Because a comedian making a joke about Irishmen does not specifically target an irish man and set out on a course of action to cause harm, anguish or grief..
My favorite cabaret artists specifically targets a couple of the great politicians my country has to offer and I am pretty sure he is dead serious about what he is saying.
|
On September 15 2011 00:47 Whoranzone wrote:Show nested quote +On September 15 2011 00:41 Thorakh wrote:On September 15 2011 00:32 Whoranzone wrote:On September 15 2011 00:29 Brett wrote:On September 15 2011 00:27 Desirous wrote:
There are many jokes at the expense of the less fortunate. Should we jail them all?
If we're going to lock up people for stupid shit that doesn't affect anyone anymore than they'll let it, then let's lock up all the idiots who think no Jews died in WW2. I think that would be a lot more justified than some guy editing videos and trolling. Can people stop with the terrible analogies? .... Fuck me.. How is that a terrible analogy ? Because you can't fucking compare making a joke or a one time insult, to continued harassment with the sole intent of causing emotional harm to the victim. Is this really that hard to understand? pleaded guilty to two counts of sending malicious communications relating to Natasha. so continued harassment equals two. Good to know. I'm pretty sure there's more to this story because if he only sent two messages his punishment is completely ridiculous.
|
On September 15 2011 00:47 Whoranzone wrote:Show nested quote +On September 15 2011 00:41 Thorakh wrote:On September 15 2011 00:32 Whoranzone wrote:On September 15 2011 00:29 Brett wrote:On September 15 2011 00:27 Desirous wrote:
There are many jokes at the expense of the less fortunate. Should we jail them all?
If we're going to lock up people for stupid shit that doesn't affect anyone anymore than they'll let it, then let's lock up all the idiots who think no Jews died in WW2. I think that would be a lot more justified than some guy editing videos and trolling. Can people stop with the terrible analogies? .... Fuck me.. How is that a terrible analogy ? Because you can't fucking compare making a joke or a one time insult, to continued harassment with the sole intent of causing emotional harm to the victim. Is this really that hard to understand? pleaded guilty to two counts of sending malicious communications relating to Natasha. so continued harassment equals two. Good to know.
No it doesn't. Please learn a bit about the law... Two charges, which would be regarded as "representative counts", and a prosecution summary which alluded to numerous instances, including uncharged acts, wherein this man participated in the malicious behaviour...
|
On September 15 2011 00:47 Whoranzone wrote:Show nested quote +On September 15 2011 00:41 Thorakh wrote:On September 15 2011 00:32 Whoranzone wrote:On September 15 2011 00:29 Brett wrote:On September 15 2011 00:27 Desirous wrote:
There are many jokes at the expense of the less fortunate. Should we jail them all?
If we're going to lock up people for stupid shit that doesn't affect anyone anymore than they'll let it, then let's lock up all the idiots who think no Jews died in WW2. I think that would be a lot more justified than some guy editing videos and trolling. Can people stop with the terrible analogies? .... Fuck me.. How is that a terrible analogy ? Because you can't fucking compare making a joke or a one time insult, to continued harassment with the sole intent of causing emotional harm to the victim. Is this really that hard to understand? pleaded guilty to two counts of sending malicious communications relating to Natasha. so continued harassment equals two. Good to know. Show nested quote +On September 15 2011 00:42 Brett wrote:On September 15 2011 00:32 Whoranzone wrote:On September 15 2011 00:29 Brett wrote:On September 15 2011 00:27 Desirous wrote:
There are many jokes at the expense of the less fortunate. Should we jail them all?
If we're going to lock up people for stupid shit that doesn't affect anyone anymore than they'll let it, then let's lock up all the idiots who think no Jews died in WW2. I think that would be a lot more justified than some guy editing videos and trolling. Can people stop with the terrible analogies? .... Fuck me.. How is that a terrible analogy ? Because a comedian making a joke about Irishmen does not specifically target an irish man and set out on a course of action to cause harm, anguish or grief.. My favorite cabaret artists specifically targets a couple of the great politicians my country has to offer and I am pretty sure he is dead serious about what he is saying.
I'm just taking a guess here although I haven't seen the thing: There were probably more than 2 specific "insults", but only 2 were harsh enough to get punished for.
|
On September 15 2011 00:44 Asday wrote:
What law did he break?
He was persecuted under the Malicious Communications Act.
|
On September 15 2011 00:46 Brett wrote:Show nested quote +On September 15 2011 00:38 BlackJack wrote:
If you're going to make an online public forum about your daughter then you should be prepared to handle public scrutiny. What if this were a memorial page for a serial killer and people went out of their way to call him a monster and a piece of scum. People should be sent to jail for that? Or does protection from trolling only extend to little girls? If the mother of a serial killer made a memorial page to her son to remember the times when he was a better person, and is unfortunately silly enough or technologically retarded enough to make it public, and is then subjected to this form of focused intense hatred, then yes, the perpetrators should be and could be prosecuted...
Well I disagree. We don't need the police moderating facebook or teamliquid. In fact, I think that is about the last thing in the world this site needs.
|
lol. they should better watch for real crimes and not for trolls and attention whores.
srsly its just a troll...dont need to give him attention.
|
Man, the General Forum has gone down hill. It's actually unbelievable.
I mean look at the following quotes, what the hell? I thought that this was the place for intelligent discussion.
On September 15 2011 00:34 SevenBunnies wrote:Show nested quote +On September 15 2011 00:06 mr_tolkien wrote:
I'm very happy not to know you personnaly.
Dear Mr. Tolkien: The man you insulted is very super sad because some life event just happened to him that has clouded his logical thinking. Your insult was horribly malicious. You will be getting a court summons in a few days. To any victims: do not worry! In the next couple of days we will be going after anyone who chooses to say the government is bad. They are being horribly malicious by this statement, as in fact, the government is amazing! Thank you for you time, U.K. Government
|
On September 15 2011 00:42 Brett wrote:Show nested quote +On September 15 2011 00:32 Whoranzone wrote:On September 15 2011 00:29 Brett wrote:On September 15 2011 00:27 Desirous wrote:
There are many jokes at the expense of the less fortunate. Should we jail them all?
If we're going to lock up people for stupid shit that doesn't affect anyone anymore than they'll let it, then let's lock up all the idiots who think no Jews died in WW2. I think that would be a lot more justified than some guy editing videos and trolling. Can people stop with the terrible analogies? .... Fuck me.. How is that a terrible analogy ? Because a comedian making a joke about Irishmen does not specifically target an irish man and set out on a course of action to cause harm, anguish or grief..
so what youre saying is you can be racist, homophobic and an all around ass as long as you dont mention any names and put 'comedian' in your job section on the census?
doing what he did doesnt warrent a jail sentence, hes been scape goated by the anti internet media craze.
|
On September 15 2011 00:55 BlackJack wrote:Show nested quote +On September 15 2011 00:46 Brett wrote:On September 15 2011 00:38 BlackJack wrote:
If you're going to make an online public forum about your daughter then you should be prepared to handle public scrutiny. What if this were a memorial page for a serial killer and people went out of their way to call him a monster and a piece of scum. People should be sent to jail for that? Or does protection from trolling only extend to little girls? If the mother of a serial killer made a memorial page to her son to remember the times when he was a better person, and is unfortunately silly enough or technologically retarded enough to make it public, and is then subjected to this form of focused intense hatred, then yes, the perpetrators should be and could be prosecuted... Well I disagree. We don't need the police moderating facebook or teamliquid. In fact, I think that is about the last thing in the world this site needs.
Police States are awesome dood, oh wait, I guess in this case it'd be Police World, even better!
|
United States5162 Posts
On September 15 2011 00:59 HereticSaint wrote:Show nested quote +On September 15 2011 00:55 BlackJack wrote:On September 15 2011 00:46 Brett wrote:On September 15 2011 00:38 BlackJack wrote:
If you're going to make an online public forum about your daughter then you should be prepared to handle public scrutiny. What if this were a memorial page for a serial killer and people went out of their way to call him a monster and a piece of scum. People should be sent to jail for that? Or does protection from trolling only extend to little girls? If the mother of a serial killer made a memorial page to her son to remember the times when he was a better person, and is unfortunately silly enough or technologically retarded enough to make it public, and is then subjected to this form of focused intense hatred, then yes, the perpetrators should be and could be prosecuted... Well I disagree. We don't need the police moderating facebook or teamliquid. In fact, I think that is about the last thing in the world this site needs. Police States are awesome dood, oh wait, I guess in this case it'd be Police World, even better!
You don't have to monitor anything. Just like with real life harassment, when someone comes forward saying they feel they're being harassed, the police look into it and decide based on the evidence.
|
2 days in jail to poke a malicious troll up the ass, sure.
|
On September 15 2011 01:03 Myles wrote:Show nested quote +On September 15 2011 00:59 HereticSaint wrote:On September 15 2011 00:55 BlackJack wrote:On September 15 2011 00:46 Brett wrote:On September 15 2011 00:38 BlackJack wrote:
If you're going to make an online public forum about your daughter then you should be prepared to handle public scrutiny. What if this were a memorial page for a serial killer and people went out of their way to call him a monster and a piece of scum. People should be sent to jail for that? Or does protection from trolling only extend to little girls? If the mother of a serial killer made a memorial page to her son to remember the times when he was a better person, and is unfortunately silly enough or technologically retarded enough to make it public, and is then subjected to this form of focused intense hatred, then yes, the perpetrators should be and could be prosecuted... Well I disagree. We don't need the police moderating facebook or teamliquid. In fact, I think that is about the last thing in the world this site needs. Police States are awesome dood, oh wait, I guess in this case it'd be Police World, even better! You don't have to monitor anything. Just like with real life harassment, when someone comes forward saying they feel they're being harassed, the police look into it and decide based on the evidence.
How do you suggest they fund this? Also, assuming we take it from funds that would be dedicated towards other areas of investigation and prosecution such as murder, rape, drugs, robberies, kidnappings, etc, which one of those do we take away from?
|
He should have gotten longer in prison.
|
On September 15 2011 00:18 hypnoxide 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 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. Show nested quote +On September 15 2011 00:18 andrewlt wrote: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.
While I agree that this person should not be going to jail for what he did, I have to point out that, yes, you are doing the epitome of victim blaming. See the following link:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victim_blaming#Rape_shield_laws
"She shouldn't have been walking alone at night dressed that way."
|
Trolls who post pointless stuff on the already trash internet, whose actions has about 0 effect contrary what the families say, and whose posts and accounts can be deleted with a few clicks, face jail time and severed rights in the name of a poorly defined "anti-social" offense which conflicts with freedom of speech among other things,
While ex-girlfriends stalking and harassing men (65000+ calls in one case), and women falsely accusing men of rape, causing very real distress, suffering and panic to the point of suicide among other heavy adverse effects, get no penalty, sometimes not even a slap on the wrist, not even if they continue their acts, which more than fulfill the definition of harassment.
Am I the only one who finds this strange?
Sure, the stuff the guy did is of bad taste, but it is blown way out of proportion, it is more of a simple banworthy offense than a court case. Jail is for criminals, not retards.
Seems like authorities have too much time and money on their hands if they can pursue cases like "sending malicious communications" and "posting offensive messages". It is quite absurd if you ask me. "The offences are so serious...", "harm and damage" - YEAH SURE MR SUPERFLUOUS OFFICER or whoever you are. Welcome to the internet, enjoy your stay.
I vaguely remember a case where 4chan repeatedly called the parents of a kid who committed suicide (basis of the "an hero" meme I believe), sometimes thousands of phone calls and letters. Now THAT'S fucking harassment, yet the authorities didn't even lift a finger.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
