Murr Posted March 20, 2012 Posted March 20, 2012 I'm sure the majority of you guys have heard about what happened to Bolton Wanderers footballer Fabrice Muamba whether you’re a football fan or not. Regardless if you follow football or not, support Bolton or not I’d assume you’d all agree that this it’s a rather terrible thing to happen to a supposedly fit and healthy 23 year old man? Something else that happened on that day which again I assume a few of you would of heard is that some vile individual took to their twitter account and made rather disgusting and racial comments about Fabrice Muamba – (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-17434587) I like certain American sports, so frequently check ESPN to get news from stateside sports; well I took a look at the ‘Soccer’ Page to see if the news of Muamba was as big a deal there as it is here, and it turns out it is. I began browsing the comments and there are a lot of well wishes, prayers are with him and genuine best wishes to him. Further down the page it would appear news of the Twitter comments made had been discovered in USA and they’d found out the individual could face potential jail time. This is when things took a turn. Freedom of speech… A lot of people thought that the idea of jail time over comments even as vile as the ones posted about Fabrice Muamba shouldn’t warrant potential jail time, and many believed that they could post and say whatever they thought on the situation regardless of how uncivilised it was. Just got me thinking really… is Freedom of speech a good thing or bad thing. Do you agree with the fact that in the UK we’re potentially arresting someone for comments about the event? Or do you believe that freedom of speech is a given right, and that you can say or feel whatever you want about any topic, that no comment should be taboo. It would appear in the USA they believe arresting this individual is wrong. Whereas here the general basis (on twitter comments back to this individual) is that he’s getting what he deserves. What are your thoughts?
Iun Posted March 20, 2012 Posted March 20, 2012 I'll tell you what I tell all the Chinese nationalists who hate the West, white people and anyone different from themselves: Freedom of speech is a privilege, and not the right to abuse, harass or threaten others. Period.
Cube Posted March 20, 2012 Posted March 20, 2012 People always mix up freedom of speech and posting on an internet site. They have nothing to do with each other. On the internet you aren't simply saying it to someone: you're effectively publishing your thoughts. While I think that a jail sentence is wrong, the removal of the comment (and getting banned from the service) should still happen. Any internet site has the right to remove any comments posted on their servers that they wish to remove. People need to stop thinking they have the right to do what they want on (effectively) other people's property.
The Bard Posted March 20, 2012 Posted March 20, 2012 (edited) It's tough right? I mean this effectively demonstrates the fight between two different tendancies in our minds that should cause some cognitive dissonance: We find racism loathsome, yet champion freedom of speech. I think jail time is wrong, and perhaps it should have been relied on the community at large to castigate this fool (in turn exercising their own freedoms) rather than subject him to the penal system. Twitter is subject to freedom of expression laws right? (Not too up on law) Edited March 20, 2012 by The Bard
Cube Posted March 20, 2012 Posted March 20, 2012 Twitter is subject to freedom of expression laws right? (Not too up on law) They try to allow it as much as possible (except for spammers), but I don't think it's an actual law. They had to announce that they would removed tweets if governments requested it.
Yvonne Posted March 20, 2012 Posted March 20, 2012 Seems very knee jerk though, I see shit way worse than this all the time and no one does anything. Not sure how I feel about it.
chairdriver Posted March 20, 2012 Posted March 20, 2012 Seems pretty extreme for a racist Tweet, considering the site could have just blocked his account. Like, why isn't everyone on 4chan getting arrested?
Cube Posted March 20, 2012 Posted March 20, 2012 I'm guessing that with 4chan takes a bit more effort than pasting someone's email address that they used on Twitter into Facebook to find out who they are.
arab_freak Posted March 20, 2012 Posted March 20, 2012 People always mix up freedom of speech and posting on an internet site. They have nothing to do with each other. On the internet you aren't simply saying it to someone: you're effectively publishing your thoughts. While I think that a jail sentence is wrong, the removal of the comment (and getting banned from the service) should still happen. Any internet site has the right to remove any comments posted on their servers that they wish to remove. People need to stop thinking they have the right to do what they want on (effectively) other people's property. This. I would assume removing the comments would have been enough; not because he doesn't have the right to say them (he does), but because the tweets violated the site's policies. From the perspective of someone who has no right to free speech in his country, I would say that prosecuting someone for saying something rude, racist, or immoral is ridiculous. In the case of the US, hate groups like the KKK and IKA are allowed to exist to this day because they aren't harming anyone (as far as I know). People do not have the right to not be offended. If you have to worry about stopping the whole world from hurting your feelings, that means you have to try to control the whole world, and that means trampling on the first amendment.
Emasher Posted March 20, 2012 Posted March 20, 2012 As a libertarian I see freedom of speech as one of the most important rights we, well actually we don't really have it, but at any rate, I think its important. The only restrictions I find appropriate are real threats, convincing others to commit acts of violence, spreading seriously harmful information you know to be false, and stuff that violates more important rights of others. People get offended way to easily these days, and laws to keep people from getting offended are generally arbitrary, and almost always only passed to create a political advantage for whoever is in power at the time. Most of the time they also have ridiculous double standards associated with them. I know from past threads that most of you disagree with my viewpoint, so I'll leave it at that.
Rummy Posted March 20, 2012 Posted March 20, 2012 Twitter is a bit more of a public broadcast website too, compared to 4chan. I mean they both have their place and it can be argued that both are public, but I think they're certainly very different. As Iun said, freedom of speech is not just saying anything and everything that you like to/at/about anyone you like. Or it kinda is, but with punishment where it's due. Nobody actually censored him from what I could, which would be restricting his freedom of speech, rather he was allowed to say it and then punished. His speech was indeed free! Though having said that, I'm finding it very hard to actually find many of the apparently racist and sexist tweets that he apparently made, because no news articles seem to be repeating/reporting them.
Murr Posted March 20, 2012 Author Posted March 20, 2012 Though having said that, I'm finding it very hard to actually find many of the apparently racist and sexist tweets that he apparently made, because no news articles seem to be repeating/reporting them.
Cube Posted March 20, 2012 Posted March 20, 2012 Well, the fact that those are actually directed towards the people changes it a lot.
Rummy Posted March 20, 2012 Posted March 20, 2012 Thanks, pretty harsh stuff but it's nice to be able to actually see them and get a whole picture(just skimmed them though cos I'm at work). If we take it out of the online realm, hypothetically, and put him or me or someone else on a street/town centre full of crowded people, with a megaphone, and started saying stuff like that; how would we expect or wish our authorities to react?
Cube Posted March 20, 2012 Posted March 20, 2012 They should jail him and everyone on Xbox Live. Speaking of that: Terrorists are using Xbox Live and PSN chat to plan attacks. This article would not be out-of-place in The Onion.
Dannyboy-the-Dane Posted March 20, 2012 Posted March 20, 2012 It's a complex topic, but to put my general opinion shortly: I fully support freedom of speech and don't believe thoughts and words should be illegal, only actions.
MoogleViper Posted March 20, 2012 Posted March 20, 2012 Would he be facing jail time if those comments were equally offensive, but not racially motivated?
chairdriver Posted March 20, 2012 Posted March 20, 2012 Would he be facing jail time if those comments were equally offensive, but not racially motivated? What does "equally offensive" mean? How do you judge if two things are equally offensive?
MoogleViper Posted March 20, 2012 Posted March 20, 2012 What does "equally offensive" mean? How do you judge if two things are equally offensive? I think you understood the point of my post.
Jonnas Posted March 20, 2012 Posted March 20, 2012 The racist idiot has the right to free speech. He has the right to say whatever the hell he wants to others, and the public. He has the right to hold these horrible opinions, as long as he doesn't incite violence, or other grave crimes. Similarly, he should also hold full responsibility for the things he says. Twitter can do whatever they feel like doing to his account. People have the right to call him out on his views. He should not be jailed, however. If an ideal is the "correct" one, then it doesn't need the government to help enforce it. The arsehole will be shunned by those around him (including companies like Twitter), which is a fitting consequence for his disrespect and irresponsibility. If he's jailed, it just shows an utter lack of faith in society. It discredits any moral high ground the government claims to have.
Zechs Merquise Posted March 20, 2012 Posted March 20, 2012 People do not have the right to not be offended. You have summed it up perfectly!
Charlie Posted March 20, 2012 Posted March 20, 2012 Would allowing 'free speech' such as racism not essentially condone saying these things as okay? I could come out and say that "I hate Group X, those people are all one and the same bla bla bla". It's incredibly racist and shouldn't be allowed and people should be pulled up for it in a court of law. There is no place for racism in the world today. People are saying he would be shunned by society but that wouldn't happen because he wouldn't have been pulled up for it in the way that he has.
ipaul Posted March 20, 2012 Posted March 20, 2012 (edited) My general 'approach' with this is that people should perhaps be massively bollocked, but never imprisoned, for saying dumb racist/homophobic shit, or indeed, shit of any sort. Unless it can be determined that a group of people are genuinely going to attack someone/the group pose some sort of general security risk through their words. If someone shouts fire in a crowded theatre..... Edited March 20, 2012 by ipaul
Dannyboy-the-Dane Posted March 20, 2012 Posted March 20, 2012 Would allowing 'free speech' such as racism not essentially condone saying these things as okay? I don't believe so, no. It's not legal to discriminate based on colour or gender etc., and that's the judicial acknowledgement that it's wrong. But I find it fundamentally wrong if the government can outlaw what people are allowed to think or express.
Recommended Posts