Jump to content

 

 

Recommended Posts

Don't think the guy should be sacked for being a cretin in his own time but do think he should be punished by the legal system. It would be different if it was a work tweet. People need to realise that doing this on Twitter is not sharing a sick joke with your mates, you are publishing your offensive views or quips to the world. It's like broadcasting from the rooftops with a bull horn.

 

I think people are generally a bit too free and easy with their social media and don't realise the extent of their audience.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Don't think the guy should be sacked for being a cretin in his own time but do think he should be punished by the legal system. It would be different if it was a work tweet. People need to realise that doing this on Twitter is not sharing a sick joke with your mates, you are publishing your offensive views or quips to the world. It's like broadcasting from the rooftops with a bull horn.

 

I think people are generally a bit too free and easy with their social media and don't realise the extent of their audience.

 

If the legal system punishes people simply for being offensive then we really have no such thing as free speech. It's different if he's attacking a racial group, but apart from that surely the whole point of having free speech is to allow people to be offensive and/or to say things which the establishment doesn't like?

Link to post
Share on other sites
If the legal system punishes people simply for being offensive then we really have no such thing as free speech. It's different if he's attacking a racial group, but apart from that surely the whole point of having free speech is to allow people to be offensive and/or to say things which the establishment doesn't like?

 

I see your point and it's a contentious subject, although for everyone to have freedom to an extent, you have to have some kind of boundaries to protect everyone. We have such rules on this forum so are our human rights impinged by be forced to abide by them?

 

For me this comes under some kind of deliberate incitement. Punishing by law could help prevent punishing by mob rule.

 

Maybe you're right, but it does feel like he's overstepped some mark that is abhorrent to a decent society which creates a need for at least some kind of shaming or admonishment.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I see your point and it's a contentious subject, although for everyone to have freedom to an extent, you have to have some kind of boundaries to protect everyone. We have such rules on this forum so are our human rights impinged by be forced to abide by them?

 

For me this comes under some kind of deliberate incitement. Punishing by law could help prevent punishing by mob rule.

 

Maybe you're right, but it does feel like he's overstepped some mark that is abhorrent to a decent society which creates a need for at least some kind of shaming or admonishment.

 

Possibly so - but he should still have the right to be a cunt if he wants to without risking losing his job. If he worked with children, it might be a different matter since you wouldn't want them exposed to somebody as twisted as he is but if he's a paper shuffler or keyboard puncher, let him get on with his sad little life.

 

When we join this forum we agree to forego a degree of free speech in order to abide by the rules of the forum we want to join.That's a self-imposed curtailment so we're not forced to abide by them because we're not forced to be here.

 

I think we all agree that there is a limit to free speech - and that surely must be when it has the potential to harm others, like shouting "Fire" in a packed cinema or inciting people to "kill the Jews/blacks/your favourite group here". The eejit from Dundee wasn't inciting anyone to violence against us or anyone else, he was just being an immature wee twat and as Voltaire said "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."

i don' know if I'd take to the barricades to defend this clown, but I'd at least shake my head ruefully if he lost his job.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Possibly so - but he should still have the right to be a cunt if he wants to without risking losing his job. If he worked with children, it might be a different matter since you wouldn't want them exposed to somebody as twisted as he is but if he's a paper shuffler or keyboard puncher, let him get on with his sad little life.

 

When we join this forum we agree to forego a degree of free speech in order to abide by the rules of the forum we want to join.That's a self-imposed curtailment so we're not forced to abide by them because we're not forced to be here.

 

I think we all agree that there is a limit to free speech - and that surely must be when it has the potential to harm others, like shouting "Fire" in a packed cinema or inciting people to "kill the Jews/blacks/your favourite group here". The eejit from Dundee wasn't inciting anyone to violence against us or anyone else, he was just being an immature wee twat and as Voltaire said "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."

i don' know if I'd take to the barricades to defend this clown, but I'd at least shake my head ruefully if he lost his job.

 

Spot on.

 

I suspect he's learned his lesson already, given the attention he's received.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Possibly so - but he should still have the right to be a cunt if he wants to without risking losing his job. If he worked with children, it might be a different matter since you wouldn't want them exposed to somebody as twisted as he is but if he's a paper shuffler or keyboard puncher, let him get on with his sad little life.

 

When we join this forum we agree to forego a degree of free speech in order to abide by the rules of the forum we want to join.That's a self-imposed curtailment so we're not forced to abide by them because we're not forced to be here.

 

I think we all agree that there is a limit to free speech - and that surely must be when it has the potential to harm others, like shouting "Fire" in a packed cinema or inciting people to "kill the Jews/blacks/your favourite group here". The eejit from Dundee wasn't inciting anyone to violence against us or anyone else, he was just being an immature wee twat and as Voltaire said "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."

i don' know if I'd take to the barricades to defend this clown, but I'd at least shake my head ruefully if he lost his job.

 

Have you ever lost someone close to you, a child maybe? That is a hole in the heart that never leaves you. There are triggers every where that can evoke memories that can be very painful.

For a person to deliberately induce that kind of trauma on a person is utterly indefensible. -

 

MiriamWebster,

Full Definition of INDEFENSIBLE

a : incapable of being maintained as right or valid : untenable

b : incapable of being justified or excused : inexcusable -

 

If you were using the 'free speech' argument while discussing the 'GB' seven for singing their terrorist songs I could cede the point, football banter. If you were bemoaning the fact that the supporter called Limmey who called Angela Haggerty 'a ****** bitch' and was jailed for six months, I could see your point.

I think I can safely say that everyone I have met in life is two-faced. The level of two-facedness is set by the person themself and how they view society's level of acceptance of that behaviour. Similarly, the level of unsavoury, inappropriate and downright sick speech that a person is prepared to air is set forth by that person and how he views society's acceptance of same.

Perhaps this is one of these instances where society needs to make a statement. There can be no empathy for his youth, naivety or crassness. He was entirely wrong, and should be forced to accept responsibility for his post whether or not he realised his target audience was bigger than he thought. Life has consequences.

Ask the relatives of the sixty-six.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Possibly so - but he should still have the right to be a cunt if he wants to without risking losing his job. If he worked with children, it might be a different matter since you wouldn't want them exposed to somebody as twisted as he is but if he's a paper shuffler or keyboard puncher, let him get on with his sad little life.

 

When we join this forum we agree to forego a degree of free speech in order to abide by the rules of the forum we want to join.That's a self-imposed curtailment so we're not forced to abide by them because we're not forced to be here.

 

I think we all agree that there is a limit to free speech - and that surely must be when it has the potential to harm others, like shouting "Fire" in a packed cinema or inciting people to "kill the Jews/blacks/your favourite group here". The eejit from Dundee wasn't inciting anyone to violence against us or anyone else, he was just being an immature wee twat and as Voltaire said "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."

i don' know if I'd take to the barricades to defend this clown, but I'd at least shake my head ruefully if he lost his job.

 

Voltaire never said that, it was Evelyn Beatrice Hall.

 

 

Pedantic Loyal.....:(

Edited by forlanssister
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.