UK jails another for saying offensive things on the internet

[Bacon King]

Calling for murder would be incitement, not fighting words Related, but distinct, concepts.

"fighting words" is basically speech that's so blatantly hateful, obscene, and directed that it's something an average person would understand that it's very liable to cause a spontaneous breach of the peace (e.g., saying something when you shouldn't be surprised if someone punched you for saying it). In Georgia, it used to be a valid defense for simple battery, if the victim had directed "fighting words" at the aggresor immediately prior to the incident. IIRC it's still used in consideration as a significant mitigating factor. 

I can understand this being a factor in face-to-face communication, but over the Internet? It takes considerable more premeditation to go from reading a Facebook post and forming vigilante groups.

Oh, I was talking about the most recent link, about the guy wearing the cop-killer shirt. Not the facebook thing; I agree that case is definitely ridiculous and I don't see much justification for such laws.

[YL]

Here's another one I feel a bit uneasy about.  Stupid and offensive, yes, but 8 months in jail?

4 months of that was for breaching of a suspended sentence for cannabis possession.

Ah much better, only 4 months for the "offensive behavior" then.

It's actually an 8 month sentence for the offensive behavior; the other 4 month charge is concurrent.

While the sentence is a bit harsh, I'm pretty sure something like this would be prosecuted similarly in the United States. I'd argue wearing and publicly displaying a shirt that reads "One Less Pig, Perfect Justice" and "Kill A Cop For Fun," immediately after two local cops were killed in the line of duty, would quite obviously be "fighting words" which aren't Constitutionally protected. Under Georgia law it'd count as "disorderly conduct" which carries a maximum sentence of a year in county jail.

Yes, I'm not really trying to argue that this shouldn't be illegal, but to me a prison sentence for it seems over the top.

[politicus]

Calling for murder would be incitement, not fighting words Related, but distinct, concepts.

"fighting words" is basically speech that's so blatantly hateful, obscene, and directed that it's something an average person would understand that it's very liable to cause a spontaneous breach of the peace (e.g., saying something when you shouldn't be surprised if someone punched you for saying it). In Georgia, it used to be a valid defense for simple battery, if the victim had directed "fighting words" at the aggresor immediately prior to the incident. IIRC it's still used in consideration as a significant mitigating factor. 

Fighting words is a problematic concept. Freedom of speech should be unlimited - apart from libel. I can agree that attacking a person using fighting words should be a mitigating factor, but not that it shouldin any way be considered a crime.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Freedom of speech should be unlimited - apart from libel.

But how is libel to be defined?

Though, actually, libel is the one area of 'speech' that is certainly excessively, unreasonably and unusually restricted in Britain. A particularly extreme example of the consequences is currently unfolding in the papers and on the news every day...

[Jacobtm]

The ENTIRE FREAKING POINT to Freedom of Speech is to protect unpopular speech from censure by the govt.  If it doesn't do that, it's not Freedom of Speech^TM.

The United States then, does not have your "Freedom of Speech"

"After the raid, the residents pored over the papers handed them by a detective. One explained: “This warrant says that they were specifically looking for ‘anarchist materials’ — which lays out the political police state nature of this right there."

http://dailycloudt.com/voice/257/violent-thought-crime-raid-in-seattle

http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2012/10/201210178542935716.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_free_speech_exceptions

Also see:

Julian Assange

[alexmanu]

The whole jailing someone for saying something on the internet thing is ridiculous. For one, I don't know who their lawyers are but how can one prove that the person in question was the man/woman behind the phone, computer screen when the message was sent. Surely it could've been a 'hacker' or a friend that got hold of your phone and was joking. Seems like an easy case to make up a defence that can't really be proven false.

People should have their accounts suspended or banned, but not go to jail, even if they are lowlife idiots.

[Јas]

Man arrested in connection with Facebook posting - Kent Police

You must be logged in to read this quote.