Joking about terrorism definitely not OK, court rules.

"Twitter anger over 'bomb' tweeter

A man named Paul Chambers lost an appeal yesterday. He had been convicted of sending a menacing electronic message. The judge said the tweet was:

Quote :

"menacing in its content and obviously so. It could not be more clear. Any ordinary person reading this would see it in that way and be alarmed".

Shield your eyes, folks. I am going to reproduce the text of the tweet. Any of you ordinary people may be alarmed by the clearly threatening nature of this tweet:

Spoiler:

I screamed.
And cried.

I felt very threatened.


(There's an airport named after Robin Hood?)

Verandering wrote:

(There's an airport named after Robin Hood?)

Apparently, yes.

This whole thing has been excellent viral marketing for them.

So, joking about terrorism = bad

BUT

publishing a book on how to rape children = good?

XLT-100852.0 wrote:

So, joking about terrorism = bad

BUT

publishing a book on how to rape children = good?

Welcome to America

the asylum wrote:

Welcome to America

Terror threat level is at red and is delicious.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

UK? Harp darp, I'm a barp.

the asylum wrote:

XLT-100852.0 wrote:

So, joking about terrorism = bad

BUT

publishing a book on how to rape children = good?

Welcome to America

1) This case happened in the UK.

2) See my posts in the Amazon.com thread - one is speech that is considered a federal crime (just as threatening public officials is a crime even if you don't act on those threats), the other isn't.

Spotts1701 wrote:

2) See my posts in the Amazon.com thread - one is speech that is considered a federal crime (just as threatening public officials is a crime even if you don't act on those threats), the other isn't.

How about if you made a book about how to molest a public official's children? What then?!

Obviously, they're the only children that matters.

XLT-100852.0 wrote:

Spotts1701 wrote:

2) See my posts in the Amazon.com thread - one is speech that is considered a federal crime (just as threatening public officials is a crime even if you don't act on those threats), the other isn't.

How about if you made a book about how to molest a public official's children? What then?!

If you don't actually do it, or directly incite anyone to do it, then it's protected speech. Just like people who write books on how to make mail bombs or how to manufacture ricin aren't breaking any laws.

Look who else is in trouble because of twitter

I wonder if this piece of shit will get in trouble for "joking" on twitter that a Muslim journalist should be stoned to death for daring to make comments on the radio.

Cyberwulf wrote:

Look who else is in trouble because of twitter

I wonder if this piece of shit will get in trouble for "joking" on twitter that a Muslim journalist should be stoned to death for daring to make comments on the radio.

There's no reason why he shouldn't, given the precedent there.

It annoys me that I have to defend that excruciating arsewad because he should not be arrested for that awful tweet. Chucked out? Hell yes. That's what's good about free speech. You can identify the seeping bum-boils all the easier.

I think that level of shitty police work is par for the course in our good ol' United Kingdom, though.