Keyboard warriors - will the jail sentences deter others?

I agree, the law has to be applied equally.If strong arm tactics (prison) are now going to be the new normal for bad mouthing on social media then it should be the same for everyone who’s indulged in it.
And for anyone saying that immigration has nothing to do with the riots, that’s laughable.It has everything to do with it.

ronib

Growstuff Interesting point but the 53 year old had very few followers even though the judge had not understood that. What are the chances of a possible terrorist being influenced by this woman? Does the actual terrorist have a greater responsibility?
Yes agree that it is very important to take responsibility but I can’t help but think in this case, the defendant was very badly defended.

I thought she sent her post to the local community Facebook page ronib?

Actually you do seem to have an obsession about Streeting’s historic tweets Galaxy? You keep saying they were in different times and not relevant and then bringing them up again and again?

What you mean is threats to kill are different when I say so. It was a tweet that listed the people he wanted to push under a train. He suggested he wanted to start up his own vigilante organisation. I couldnt give one fig about Streetings historic tweets but you cant have Bob from Sunderland being prosecuted whilst Streeting is seen as fine to be in the cabinet.
You are setting up a system that will push those without wes streetings advantages further to the edge.
It also leads to the question
if some of those making threats were young should they be let off.
Oh and just to give Streeting a break, hope not hates nick lowles misinformation was in the middle of the riots.

Growstuff Interesting point but the 53 year old had very few followers even though the judge had not understood that. What are the chances of a possible terrorist being influenced by this woman? Does the actual terrorist have a greater responsibility?
Yes agree that it is very important to take responsibility but I can’t help but think in this case, the defendant was very badly defended.

Not individuals but issues. How hard is that to contemplate? The government will use these dreadful people advocating violence as an excuse to avoid the issues. It is easier to do that than to admit it is just possible there is a reason other than sheer thuggery for the strong feelings. So middle class, aren’t we? I give up.

Galaxy

You can bsolutely prosecute people for inciting violence on social media, what you cant have at the same time is Wes Streeting in the cabinet. Poor Wes Streeting, who I like a lot, but he is the example I am using.
You probably also cant have many representatives of the SNP but thats less of a problem these days.

I think that most people would roll their eyes at the thought of Wes Streeting being barred from office because of something he said as a student. As I've said, it would be a dangerous road to go down if we started dredging up comments out of context and holding people responsible for youthful indiscretions. If he had been in office at the time it would, of course, be different, as it would if someone had taken Streeting at his word and pushed someone under a train, but otherwise holding him to account now would simply be vindictive. I've only heard about that 'incident' on here - where was it said, and who is likely to have seen/read/heard it?

I know there is precedent for retrospective punishment, eg the young woman who was appointed as a youth liaison person for the police, and was then found to have posted racist and homophobic tweets or FB posts. I couldn't sleep last night and watched a programme about things going wrong for TV stars (enough to send anyone to sleep), and there was a story about a young Asian soap actress who did something similar and was dropped. I think it's very unfair to do that - she was a teenager at the time of the comment - and would apply that across the political spectrum. It would be the blandest of the bland who never said something they regret, and had been 'responsible' since childhood. Learning to temper passions is part of growing up, and my guess is that many, if not most of those throwing stones about these things are likely to live in glass houses. Ruining someone's life, or taking away opportunities they have worked for feels spiteful to me.

If a soap star or police liaison person says things like that whilst representing their employer it's one thing, but going back decades to find indiscretions is quite another - it's no wonder mental health is so poor these days, if people are worrying about the dodgy joke they passed on in in 1976 or whatever.

Incitement is different. When there are riots on the streets anyone encouraging others to join in, or suggesting particular acts such as burning buildings is not remotely the same as saying something hot headed in your teens.

ronib

I think it would take a lot more for me to actually go and murder someone than reading an internet post by an unknown person.. In fact I would never murder anyone. Hopefully.

But you're not other people. There are people who get radicalised by such posts, especially if that's all they read. They get caught up with a group mentality. What you're saying is that the woman posted something she didn't accept responsibility for. If just one person had decided to bomb a mosque, I guess she'd have just shrugged her shoulders and claimed that she didn't think people would take her seriously. In that case, why post it?

Freya5

Galaxy

They were about lots of things, pretending that immigration wasnt one of the factors is suicidal in terms of society's functioning in my view.

Totally agree.

So the murder of the little girls in Southport was just an excuse and not the real catalyst for the riots?

The "underlying issues" have been caused by the decimation of manufacturing in favour of services and more "modern" industries such as pharmaceuticals and IT, which require different skills and education. This has left behind areas which relied on traditional industries. Immigrants aren't the main cause, but they are the scapegoats.

nanna8

Oh some sense . Thank you for that. It is so easy to label people as fascist, racist, far right etc but the underlying issues are being ignored. I would hope a party referring to itself as Labour would address this or try to but we’ll see, doesn’t look promising. It won’t be easy,that’s obvious , but at least they could acknowledge the issues.

Don't you think that a person who incites others to bomb a mosque with people in it is racist?

TerriBull

Galaxy

I am intelligent enough to know Babs that many of us have been talking for a very long time about a group of people who are utterly ignored and who have tried repeatedly to voice their views via the ballot. I just cant believe that anyone can be surprised by the towns which were the 'hubs' of the riots, has anyone actually been to Hartlepool? If you think this is just a question of a few violent thugs (who of course were very much present and who need to be dealt with by the law) then I dont know what to say.

This I agree with, it doesn't just apply here, it's all over the western world particularly in the US's rust belt. Politicians who continue to ignore the left behind do so at their peril. Referring to them as"the basket of deplorables" for example, just underlines the disconnect between an out of touch elite's disdain, they don't even go to any great lengths to hide the fact that there are certain demographics who they can't really be bothered with. There's possibly a perception that incomers are valued over long established indigenous communities borne from previous generations who had manufacturing industries that sustained them, but in our global world those disappeared with little to replace them, add to that social breakdowns, wide spread drug use, industrial wastelands the world's moved on and it has taken it with them so what we have are hornet nests of ingrained discontent born out of under privilege.

I don’t disagree with what you’ve said TerriBull, I just don’t think it’s a new issue for society, or that there is a solution. There is always a disaffected minority. Their numbers and power rises and falls, but it’s always there. Not that knowing that helps, I know.

Oh some sense . Thank you for that. It is so easy to label people as fascist, racist, far right etc but the underlying issues are being ignored. I would hope a party referring to itself as Labour would address this or try to but we’ll see, doesn’t look promising. It won’t be easy,that’s obvious , but at least they could acknowledge the issues.

I think thats a very accurate comparison with the USA situation TerriBull and equally needful to address.

has hasn't

Galaxy

I am intelligent enough to know Babs that many of us have been talking for a very long time about a group of people who are utterly ignored and who have tried repeatedly to voice their views via the ballot. I just cant believe that anyone can be surprised by the towns which were the 'hubs' of the riots, has anyone actually been to Hartlepool? If you think this is just a question of a few violent thugs (who of course were very much present and who need to be dealt with by the law) then I dont know what to say.

This I agree with, it doesn't just apply here, it's all over the western world particularly in the US's rust belt. Politicians who continue to ignore the left behind do so at their peril. Referring to them as"the basket of deplorables" for example, just underlines the disconnect between an out of touch elite's disdain, they don't even go to any great lengths to hide the fact that there are certain demographics who they can't really be bothered with. There's possibly a perception that incomers are valued over long established indigenous communities borne from previous generations who had manufacturing industries that sustained them, but in our global world those disappeared with little to replace them, add to that social breakdowns, wide spread drug use, industrial wastelands the world's moved on and it has taken it with them so what we have are hornet nests of ingrained discontent born out of under privilege.

You can bsolutely prosecute people for inciting violence on social media, what you cant have at the same time is Wes Streeting in the cabinet. Poor Wes Streeting, who I like a lot, but he is the example I am using.
You probably also cant have many representatives of the SNP but thats less of a problem these days.

People aren't being "banned" for having different views. What do you mean by "banned?" We have had a small number of prosecutions but who has been banned from what exactly?

Some people are being prosecuted by the police for incitement to racial hatred and to actual violence not just race wise but for threatening (as alluded to above) violence against individuals such as MP's or even ordinary people who have been unfortunate enough to come onto the headlines.

Or posting material dangerous to young people. (yes Iam one of the original driving forces was the girl who Casdon mentioned upthread who took her own life).

As Maerion posted on the last page 9 at 22,08, we have pre-existing laws from 1988 (Malicious Communications Acts) but they didnt cover the world we live in , when the 2023 Act was passed.

Galaxy you are right to look at people who feel disenfranchised the problem is that voting % in those areas are generally very low indeed. Governments have said they will do something about levelling up but so far it hasn't happened.

Behind the scenes are those who are neither poor nor uneducated but have a political agenda to stir civil unrest. Not just the Tommy Robinsons of this world, but the constant Social Media postings that just avoid prosecution but stir hatred up.

I should have said "inciting violence against a category of people". Actually committing violence against them is obviously wrong, but inciting others to do so is also illegal.

Galaxy

They were about lots of things, pretending that immigration wasnt one of the factors is suicidal in terms of society's functioning in my view.

Totally agree.

Oreo

I very much doubt that anyone knew about the online safety law brought in just last year.I will be totally honest and say I didn’t.

Perhaps those who post on Twitter/X inciting violence think that as they are not sending their hatred to a named recipient it will not count as a "poison pen letter". This new legislation makes it very clear that violence against a category of people is also illegal - but that is not a new fact.

As Mearion posted on Friday 16th Aug 22.08.03, "The Malicious Communications Acts has been in force since 1988. It makes plain that anyone who sends a communication either by letter or electronic medium which is indecent or grossly offensive to cause distress or anxiety to the recipient or to any other person is guilty of an offence which carries a custodial sentence of up to two years."

As the auld Scots saying goes, "Weel, ye ken noo' !" (in legend first said by God to a murderer and massive commandment-breaker who, when he arrived before Him for Judgment, had claimed, "But Lord, Lord, I didna' ken!")

During the election campaign, canvassers reported the first concern voters raised was immigration, followed by nhs , cost of living, housing.
Thank you for that comment.
When I was canvassing in a comfortable part of the south coast very few expressed concern about any of the above, being concerned with refuse collection, parking and , oh, brexit. Some ladies who lunch in an extremely expensive area laughed at the idea of concerns over immigration; it really has very little effect, they said, and the figures are exaggerated by the right wing press.

I don’t see convicting people who break the law as censorship. That’s different than closing down debate on the growing gap between those who have more than enough and those who have less than enough.
I live in a former proud cotton mill/engineering/manufacturing town which no longer has pride. We have high levels of unemployment, growing numbers of people on long term sickness benefit and a town centre full of people with substance dependence, begging.
We are a city of sanctuary so have increasing numbers of asylum seekers.
During the election campaign, canvassers reported the first concern voters raised was immigration, followed by nhs , cost of living, housing.
We were red wall 4 years ago, Labour this time.
The awful murders in Southport, followed by the mid-information/deliberate lies then incitement on line triggered riots.
I wish I’d easy answers about how the government can manage the numbers of people seeking sanctuary or looking for a better life. Key obviously is processing speedily but thst won’t stop people who meet the criteria for asylum arriving

I am intelligent enough to know Babs that many of us have been talking for a very long time about a group of people who are utterly ignored and who have tried repeatedly to voice their views via the ballot. I just cant believe that anyone can be surprised by the towns which were the 'hubs' of the riots, has anyone actually been to Hartlepool? If you think this is just a question of a few violent thugs (who of course were very much present and who need to be dealt with by the law) then I dont know what to say.

It's not good to ban people just because they have a different view, we need healthy debate on subjects not censorship.