Keyboard warriors - will the jail sentences deter others?

So for example would expressing the view that someone should be pushed under a train be hateful speech.

Casdon

I didn’t know about that, except the person who has been discussed on a thread recently, GrannyGravy, and I have never seen anything posted on Gransnet which approached the nature of the posts people are being jailed for, maybe we should keep Gransnet out of this discussion, I hadn’t thought about it applying here?

Of course it applies to GN

It is a social media site, once something is posted it is out there for all to see.

Mollygo

Who’s going to do the policing and decide what is hate speech is what concerns me.
The subject matter of her post is clearly wrong, as it is also when crowds shout “death to the infidels” where will the decision making lie.

And so is

from the river to the the sea

but allowed to go unchallenged.

I agree with your post Mollygo.

We have a law against hate speech. I’m not convinced that abdicating the rule of law during times of crisis helps anyone.

GG13, I know of one banned poster but not others. I liked her despite our politics being very different.
We haven’t seen what I consider racist comments here recently . I find it hard to believe posters were banned because their comments were against the flow of the thread.

If it's a topic of conversation with others, who all think a person would be best off under a train, then yes.

If people are egging each other on, and glorifying in the idea of someone being mangled by a train, then yes.

It was Wes Streetings old tweet.

I don't care if it was the king's tweet.
I'm happy to see people shown that it is unacceptable, whoever they may be.

maddyone

Mollygo

Who’s going to do the policing and decide what is hate speech is what concerns me.
The subject matter of her post is clearly wrong, as it is also when crowds shout “death to the infidels” where will the decision making lie.

And so is

from the river to the the sea

but allowed to go unchallenged.

I agree with your post Mollygo.

I agree with both of you

Iam64

We have a law against hate speech. I’m not convinced that abdicating the rule of law during times of crisis helps anyone.

GG13, I know of one banned poster but not others. I liked her despite our politics being very different.
We haven’t seen what I consider racist comments here recently . I find it hard to believe posters were banned because their comments were against the flow of the thread.

I agree with you Iam.

I only know of one definitely banned poster, but I think it was only a short term ban (but not sure if d she’ll come back) and she definitely doesn’t post anything racist. There’s another I suspect is banned who I liked a lot, called a spade a spade, but never rude. Clearly someone didn’t like her views, but most respected her. I don’t know of any others. No one has incited rioting or said anything so outrageous that they needed permanent bans in my humble opinion.

GrannyGravy13

There are three GN members who will not be returning due to them posting their views

These views were not racist, we’re not inciting violence, they were against the flow of the thread

I think we need to be cautious as to how the Freedom of Speech act is being interpreted.

I do think that in the case of the female, what she posted was vile, did it warrant a custodial sentence, I am not sure.

I'm not sure that this works as an example though. I'm often behind the times with things like this, so everyone else may know more than me, but I am only aware of one person's banning as it's been widely discussed. Even then, I don't know what, specifically, led to it. I don't know who the other two are or what they did, so they are not serving to deter me (if I were planning to post ban-inspiring material, that is). Also, GN 'rules' are notoriously unclear, which makes it a judgement call anyway.

The law of the land should, IMO, be much much clearer, so there is no doubt in anyone's mind if what they are doing is illegal. By all means give judges discretion so that those acting under duress or in exceptional circumstances are treated more leniently (eg stealing to eat, as in Les Miserables), but we should still know what's illegal and what isn't.

I deplore what the jailed woman said, and believe that she should be punished, but I'm not convinced that she deserves a jail sentence. Is she worth being sacrificed to deter others? That is a philosophical point that I struggle to answer. I don't know.

Galaxy

It was Wes Streetings old tweet.

WHAT?

Iam64

We have a law against hate speech. I’m not convinced that abdicating the rule of law during times of crisis helps anyone.

GG13, I know of one banned poster but not others. I liked her despite our politics being very different.
We haven’t seen what I consider racist comments here recently . I find it hard to believe posters were banned because their comments were against the flow of the thread.

I agree with this first paragraph.
I am not on every thread so don’t know if the banned poster was racist or not but it does seem unlikely, as Iam says, that someone would be banned because their views were “against the flow of the thread”? We may feel safe on GN but it is social media and can be accessed …

This woman was inciting violence. The mob were disgusting, and wound up, but they have free will and know right from wrong.
I don't feel sorry for any of them, they all got what they deserved, her as well, she knew what she was doing.

The thing is nothing happened to Wes Streeting, I am sure it was before the hate speech laws but you can see how discontent can grow when some bloke from Sunderland is locked up whilst Wes ( who I like a lot) is able to have a glittering career (possible PM in the future) having expressed 'hate speech'.

It's much the same as any repulsive human behaviour.

With the internet, you can find others of the same mindset, and it normalises it.

It was an old tweet Maddy, student activist days, in reaction to homophobia or what he saw as homophobia from a journalist, I just worry we are showing the seeds for even more problems if we start down the line of further controls.

GrannyGravy13

Casdon

I didn’t know about that, except the person who has been discussed on a thread recently, GrannyGravy, and I have never seen anything posted on Gransnet which approached the nature of the posts people are being jailed for, maybe we should keep Gransnet out of this discussion, I hadn’t thought about it applying here?

Of course it applies to GN

It is a social media site, once something is posted it is out there for all to see.

I know that, I’d just prefer if the discussion doesn’t degenerate into an ‘us and them’ one though, which happens so often on here these days, maybe others disagree.

GrannyGravy13

There are three GN members who will not be returning due to them posting their views

These views were not racist, we’re not inciting violence, they were against the flow of the thread

I think we need to be cautious as to how the Freedom of Speech act is being interpreted.

I do think that in the case of the female, what she posted was vile, did it warrant a custodial sentence, I am not sure.

Is GSM mum one person that has been banned? Or have dreamt that, couldn’t find anything about it afterwards.
I don’t think I have ever read on here, about people inciting violence or encouraging people to go out & riot.
I don’t think there is anything wrong in having a healthy debate but I do find the do gooders on here alway seem to have the final say! So alway one sided, in my view- I’ll just stick to the weather, jam making, etc on, otherwise I am no longer interested

Hate speech is already a crime. I’d classify this both as Hate Speech, and inciting violence.

Do I think prison is appropriate?

Probably not, do I want to see an end to freedom of speech, absolutely not, do I want those “owning” the rights to FB, X etc to be more responsible, absolutely.

Would I ever consider posting something of this nature? No!

Btw, I don’t think ANY of our GNs should be banned! I’ve don’t believe I’ve ever seen the ones concerned being personal, inciting violence, or preaching hate speech.

maddyone

I don’t think Britain is anywhere near civil war. Probably the vast majority of us on here heard and saw nothing when all these riots were taking place. There was a half hearted demonstration in Portsmouth, which is the nearest city to where I live, but I live in Hampshire, not in a city, and whilst it’s not a sleepy backwater, there’s not a lot going on. Certainly no riots, and very little else. I suspect many of us live in similar situations. These awful riots, and they were awful, were restricted to big cities, where for whatever reasons, there is always more crime, more poverty, more unrest. And it was hot and the nights were light. People sat at home on social media, sharing information that would have been shared by mouth years ago. I don’t know, I’m uncomfortable about too much policing of speech.

No, I don't believe that either (and said so at the time). But it was being said on here, interestingly by the same poster who is now saying that free speech should be allowed to continue, as stopping it would bring us into line with China and Russia.

Even more interestingly, the 'civil war is inevitable in the UK' lie was started by Elon Musk, whose vast wealth depends on people being able to say what they like on his SM platform. Is he also behind the idea that having incitement laws and applying them is authoritarian? I don't use X so don't know, but I wouldn't be surprised.

Galaxy

So for example would expressing the view that someone should be pushed under a train be hateful speech.

Yes!

I don’t think there is anything wrong in having a healthy debate but I do find the do gooders on here alway seem to have the final say! So alway one sided, in my view- I’ll just stick to the weather, jam making, etc on, otherwise I am no longer interested

But you are trying to have the final say by using terms like 'do gooders' . I absolutely agree that there is nothing wrong with healthy debate, but I don't think that digs like that are at all healthy, in fact they are the sort of thing that causes trouble on threads.

The previous owner of X suppressed the hunter Biden laptop story, and kicked of anyone who said er men arent women, it was also at the time a platform for some deeply dangerous people in regard to children. No one said a word.

Cossy

Galaxy

So for example would expressing the view that someone should be pushed under a train be hateful speech.

Yes!

Yes, usually. But context is all. My grandmother used to say (of people equally to blame for something) that she'd 'put them in a boat and sink it'. A bit like 'bang their heads together'. Of course she didn't mean it literally, or even hatefully - she's apply it to her own grandchildren when we were arguing .