Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Cannerus_The_Unbearable wrote:She'd be EPIC at talking dirty. That was fun.

Cannerus is great for providing comic relief when the thread starts to get too serious. Thank you, sir!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Kilkrazy wrote:
So do I, however it won't do any good to comment the video on You Tube.

And so I don't. However, I can still try to put my point across to those on Dakka, as I might be able to debate them round to my point of view with reason.

Kilkrazy wrote:

Castiel wrote:I think that there is also an element of "everyone is going this way, I'm going that way to be different" with it too though.

The thing with something like this is that in todays world if this goes on youtube etc, of course its going to go viral, and lots of people are going to be angry with that sort of behaviour.

I also find it annoying that when I see that kind of thing and it offends me and I say so that I get hit with labels such as "bandwagoning" and "self-righteous". Tell me why I shouldn't be angry about someone behaving in such an unacceptable manner?

I'm not bandwagoning or being self-righteous, the fact of the matter is that I find someone behaving in that manner towards another human being disgusting and offensive to the morals and standards I was raised to believe in.

So do I, however it won't do any good to comment the video on You Tube.

It's never a good idea to comment on a video on Youtube...
An off-hand comment about how you like a certain song turns into a petrol bomb debate about the Holocaust in which someone will claim it never happened and someone else will claim that the Allies wanted it to happen...

I thought the tram riders handled it well enough. Seems to me that the fact she was arrested kind of makes her a martyr though. I'm sure it's a minority, but a certain amount of people are going to be sickened by the fact that they can't speak their minds without fear of retribution.
Obama actually made a pretty good speech a few years back about racism and the way it's dealt with and effectively ignored through overreaction.

**I'm in no way an Obama honk, but this was an awesome speech**



My point being that if people aren't allowed to express distasteful and ignorant ideas, then those ideas are just left to fester and will find an outlet in increasingly obnoxious, ignorant, and violent ways.

Lint wrote:
My point being that if people aren't allowed to express distasteful and ignorant ideas, then those ideas are just left to fester and will find an outlet in increasingly obnoxious, ignorant, and violent ways.

Hilarious thing is that is exactly the explanation I've heard for why we still have OT.

Lint wrote:
My point being that if people aren't allowed to express distasteful and ignorant ideas, then those ideas are just left to fester and will find an outlet in increasingly obnoxious, ignorant, and violent ways.

Oh my god, they shut down 4chan?

purplefood wrote:
As it is I'm not 'English' according to her... not sure how I feel about that...

If you feel English, your English, regardless of what racists say.

I'm alright with that sort of idiot being arrested. I wish we had less tolerance for these sorts of idiots.

Da Boss wrote:I'm alright with that sort of idiot being arrested. I wish we had less tolerance for these sorts of idiots.

I thought the UK had a tradition of freedom of speech? Speech for me but not for thee?

Well she might be "sick" but then again you dont whack the cough, you go after the source of the disease.

Pyriel- wrote:Well she might be "sick" but then again you dont whack the cough, you go after the source of the disease.

IMMIGRATION!

I'm sure none of the other people yelling on the tram got arrested. I'd like to see what sparked this off. Surely she didn't just wander onto the tram screaming.

SlaveToDorkness wrote:I'm sure none of the other people yelling on the tram got arrested. I'd like to see what sparked this off. Surely she didn't just wander onto the tram screaming.

Interesting to see what happened before that. She's clearly angry about something from the start.
OT but a lot of people on that tram/bus (?)

On the flip side ranting on a bus is not good. Excelllent way to get your clock cleaned. I don't see any legal actions unless you arrest a whole bunch of people arguing with her too, but its not my country.

At the very least, that's disturbing the peace. I don't think arresting her is unfair by any stretch personally.

edit: As I think about it, she may well be safer in jail

Apparently she's been held for a week pending psychiatric reports - that's not typical of an arrest for anything. So clearly they think she's not in her right mind.

SlaveToDorkness wrote:I'm sure none of the other people yelling on the tram got arrested. I'd like to see what sparked this off. Surely she didn't just wander onto the tram screaming.

From what I read of the case there were a number of passengers who provoked her by being dark of complexion.

mattyrm wrote: Appalling. You can have freedom of speech as long as you agree with the trendy lefty people.

Having common sense and being a rationale, decent person isn't trendy, in fact the concept goes back pretty far, and even when it wsn't popular to do so. I'm not sure Frederick Douglass was a hipster (for example)...


As to your outrage above: I'm all for people like this being able to speak away loudly and often as it is allows you to identify them and act accordingly...

Cannerus_The_Unbearable wrote:At the very least, that's disturbing the peace. I don't think arresting her is unfair by any stretch personally.

edit: As I think about it, she may well be safer in jail

To play devil's advocate: Talking on a bus is disturbing the peace? Better walk all the people on cellphones, plus everyone else in the bus with her.

Frazzled wrote:

Cannerus_The_Unbearable wrote:At the very least, that's disturbing the peace. I don't think arresting her is unfair by any stretch personally.

edit: As I think about it, she may well be safer in jail

To play devil's advocate: Talking on a bus is disturbing the peace? Better walk all the people on cellphones, plus everyone else in the bus with her.

There's more than one kind of speech. As an example, here (as you know) you can get a ticket for cussing in public. In this issue I'm a little more liberal in the sense that I'd prefer people not to yell "extreme" things. I trust that's a line that can be common-sensed as something that would rarely need to be invoked. A good example is that when walking through downtown Fort Worth there's a religious group that yells at everyone loudly that they're going to hell for their sinful ways and how all the women are whores. I wish I was exaggerating this at all. I'd be fine with a cop halling them off, because they're really effing annoying.

No, I disagree completely. In the UK A religious Group espousing such values and using such language would be ordered to cease and disperse. If they refused they would be arrested, you are allowed to protest to certain degree, depending on by-laws, Safety and Security. E.g you cannot stand hand in hand on a Motorway/freeway or a on a railway line or verbally abuse citizens going about their lawful business. In most towns and Cities you must apply for a Permit to protest, this allows the Police and such to organise resources and ensure certain groups do not end up in the same geographic area.

Read the following.

European Convention on Human Rights

Article 10: Freedom of Expression

(1) Everyone has the right of freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without inference by public authority and regardless of frontiers. This Article shall not prevent States from requiring the licensing of broadcasting, television or cinema enterprises.

(2) The exercise of these freedoms, since it carries with it duties and responsibilities, may be subject to such formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society, in the interests of national security, territorial integrity or public safety, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, for the protection of the reputation or rights of others, for preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence, or for maintaining the authority and impartiality of the judiciary.

The key part of this is Paragraph 2... The UK is beholden to this Convention, are own laws supplement this. You cannot say what you like when you like without recourse, you are responsible for what you say if it is illegal, offensive, you will be prosecuted.

No Country in the World has free speech without responsibility, it is an ideal espoused by people who have never taken the time to study law, political science, or study philosophy. If you have true free speech, Liable and defamation would not exist.

What she was engaged in was a Clear case of "Inciting Racial Hatred" which is an Offence in UK law.

Under the Law of the United Kingdom, "incitement to racial hatred" was established as an offence by the provisions of 17-29 of the Public Order Act 1986. It was first established as a criminal offence in the Race Relations Act 1976. The Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 made publication of material that incited racial hatred an arrestable offence.

Speaking as a Lay Magistrate, she could receive a custodial sentence (although this is unlikely), a heavy fine, censure and possible suspended sentence is more likely and a Criminal Record.

So you don't in fact, have freedom of speech? What happened to the tradition of standing on a soap box and ranting about some nutty thing.

Britain tolerates Soap box preachers, so long as they follow the law. No one, But the Monarch is above the law.

On another point the USA doesn't have free speech either. Read this page specifically "Paternalistic Justification for Limiting Speech"

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/freedom-speech/

Britian and the US, we are cut of the same cloth when it comes to Law, we have slight variations but we are almost identical (standfast the constitutional issues) as your Case Law/Common fell out of the UK's Case Law/Common Law. Damn John Adams, I admire that man more than any other US President, he ensured the United States was built on a solid legal foundation.

There is no good government but what is republican. That the only valuable part of the British constitution is so; because the very definition of a republic is an empire of laws, and not of men.

John Adams 1776

Kilkrazy wrote:

SlaveToDorkness wrote:I'm sure none of the other people yelling on the tram got arrested. I'd like to see what sparked this off. Surely she didn't just wander onto the tram screaming.

From what I read of the case there were a number of passengers who provoked her by being dark of complexion.

So, she just starts screaming every time she sees Blacks? There's gotta be something that made her prejudices boil to the surface like that. Seriously, do you think that's the first tram ride full of immigrants she's taken?

mwnciboo wrote:Britain tolerates Soap box preachers, so long as they follow the law. No one, But the Monarch is above the law.

On another point the USA doesn't have free speech either. Read this page specifically "Paternalistic Justification for Limiting Speech"

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/freedom-speech/

Britian and the US, we are cut of the same cloth when it comes to Law, we have slight variations but we are almost identical (standfast the constitutional issues) as your Case Law/Common fell out of the UK's Case Law/Common Law. Damn John Adams, I admire that man more than any other US President, he ensured the United States was built on a solid legal foundation.

There is no good government but what is republican. That the only valuable part of the British constitution is so; because the very definition of a republic is an empire of laws, and not of men.

John Adams 1776

Freedom of speech is protected by the First Amendment, not common law. Its protections are quite strong.
-In the instance in the US, if she's babbling incoherencies at best she can be kicked off the bus for creating a disturbance. Most likely she just babbles (lots of homeless babble on buses).
-Religious protestors who abide by permit regulations generally have free reign as well as anyone else.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

SlaveToDorkness wrote:

Kilkrazy wrote:

SlaveToDorkness wrote:I'm sure none of the other people yelling on the tram got arrested. I'd like to see what sparked this off. Surely she didn't just wander onto the tram screaming.

From what I read of the case there were a number of passengers who provoked her by being dark of complexion.

So, she just starts screaming every time she sees Blacks? There's gotta be something that made her prejudices boil to the surface like that. Seriously, do you think that's the first tram ride full of immigrants she's taken?

Agreed, when the video starts she's hyper pissed about something. From her body posture, she's already had an altercation with someone on or off the bus.

Sounds to me like she's drunk or stoned. I thought they other people who asked her to stop swearing were fairly reasonable- loud public swearing is a taboo in the UK.

Da Boss wrote:Sounds to me like she's drunk or stoned. I thought they other people who asked her to stop swearing were fairly reasonable- loud public swearing is a taboo in the UK.

Here also, especially in a confined locale like that.

I will admit
1) because of the accents I can't tell subtleties like that.
2) I didn't have it above whisper volume as am at work.

FRAZZ I did write standfast constitutional issues, 1st Amendment is part of the constitution. I never said US Freedom of Speech is Common or Case law, I merely commented on how much of our law is similar because of the common parentage. I agree with the rest of your post.

Oh and miss your old Avatar, the John Wayne/ Mongolian cross one!

mwnciboo wrote:FRAZZ I did write standfast constitutional issues, 1st Amendment is part of the constitution. I never said US Freedom of Speech is Common or Case law, I merely commented on how much of our law is similar because of the common parentage. I agree with the rest of your post.

Oh and miss your old Avatar, the John Wayne/ Mongolian cross one!

That was when I was a Mod. The power of TBone the Terrible (or "Terrax the Overlord" as GC calls him, along with the other wiener "Bonecrusher" and the giant tank dog "Buffles" )
is too irresistible. All tremble before him!

Sorry I saw your discussion of common law. Certain concepts came from there, but dramataically shifted once the First Amendment was put in play.

No, I disagree completely. In the UK A religious Group espousing such values and using such language would be ordered to cease and disperse. If they refused they would be arrested,

How many of those nice protesters who held up signs saying "behead those who insult islam" were dispersed or arrested again?
I know only of one.

As I recall, that level of loud abuse and bad language regardless of the target would be at least a public order offence worthy of arrest. As would also be the case if she were under the influence.

If she genuinely believes that that kind of language/behaviour is appropriate in front of children, then she probably does need at least a stern talking to from Social Services.

Freedom of Speech should never be used as carte blanche to attack others, or shout others down. Defeats the point otherwise.

mwnciboo wrote:for the protection of health or morals, for the protection of the reputation or rights of others

Right here is where she fell out with the law over freedom of speech.

She quite clearly breached the reputation and rights of the others on the carriage.