| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
recessiontime
Joined: 21 Jun 2010
Location: Got avatar privileges nyahahaha
|
 Posted: Tue Nov 29, 2011 6:38 am Post subject: Britain at it again |
 |
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-15933829
| Quote: |
Croydon-to-Wimbledon racist tram rant accused in court
A woman has appeared in court after a video apparently showing a passenger abusing ethnic minority people on a south London tram was posted online.
The clip, viewed more than two million times since being uploaded to YouTube on Sunday, shows a woman sitting with a child, shouting at fellow passengers.
Emma West, of New Addington, Croydon, was accused of a racially/religiously aggravated intentional harassment.
The 34-year-old was remanded in custody while reports are prepared.
She is next due to appear at Croydon Magistrates' Court on 6 December.
British Transport Police said the YouTube clip was of an incident on the Croydon-to-Wimbledon Tramlink route. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Julius
Joined: 27 Jul 2006
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Butterfly
Joined: 02 Mar 2003
Location: Kuwait
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 29, 2011 6:28 pm Post subject: Re: Britain at it again |
|
|
| recessiontime wrote: |
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-15933829
| Quote: |
Croydon-to-Wimbledon racist tram rant accused in court
A woman has appeared in court after a video apparently showing a passenger abusing ethnic minority people on a south London tram was posted online.
The clip, viewed more than two million times since being uploaded to YouTube on Sunday, shows a woman sitting with a child, shouting at fellow passengers.
Emma West, of New Addington, Croydon, was accused of a racially/religiously aggravated intentional harassment.
The 34-year-old was remanded in custody while reports are prepared.
She is next due to appear at Croydon Magistrates' Court on 6 December.
British Transport Police said the YouTube clip was of an incident on the Croydon-to-Wimbledon Tramlink route. |
|
What do you mean, Britiain is at it again? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rollo
Joined: 10 May 2006
Location: China
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 29, 2011 6:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Britain does not have free speech??? What do you suggest Julius perhaps a reeducation camp? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Julius
Joined: 27 Jul 2006
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 29, 2011 7:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| rollo wrote: |
| Britain does not have free speech??? |
Free speech does not include racial slurs, incitement to violence or causing public disturbance last time I checked.
| Quote: |
| What do you suggest Julius perhaps a reeducation camp? |
-, yes, involving her actually living in a foreign culture.
Its obvious she has never set foot out of Britain.
Thats where the narrow-mindedness comes from. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
recessiontime
Joined: 21 Jun 2010
Location: Got avatar privileges nyahahaha
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 29, 2011 8:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Julius wrote: |
| rollo wrote: |
| Britain does not have free speech??? |
Free speech does not include racial slurs, incitement to violence or causing public disturbance last time I checked.
| Quote: |
| What do you suggest Julius perhaps a reeducation camp? |
-, yes, involving her actually living in a foreign culture.
Its obvious she has never set foot out of Britain.
Thats where the narrow-mindedness comes from. |
Julius, where do you draw the line? If this type of free speech isn't allowed then I really don't know if it will be possible to criticise anything without getting arrested by the police for public disturbance. Who will challenge the government at the risk of being thrown in jail for merely expressing their thoughts in the public domain? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
radcon
Joined: 23 May 2011
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 29, 2011 8:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| And yet I have seen Muslims in Britain spew some extremely hateful crap as the police just watched on. Were any of those lovely chaps ever arrested? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RangerMcGreggor
Joined: 12 Jan 2011
Location: Somewhere in Korea
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 29, 2011 9:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| recessiontime wrote: |
Julius, where do you draw the line? If this type of free speech isn't allowed then I really don't know if it will be possible to criticise anything without getting arrested by the police for public disturbance. |
Harassing other people in a public place is not a form of free speech. Nearly causing a brawl in a public tram is not a form of free speech. Situations like that have never been regarded as such. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
recessiontime
Joined: 21 Jun 2010
Location: Got avatar privileges nyahahaha
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 29, 2011 10:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| RangerMcGreggor wrote: |
| Harassing other people in a public place is not a form of free speech. Nearly causing a brawl in a public tram is not a form of free speech. Situations like that have never been regarded as such. |
She didn't lay a finger on anyone. The person that initiates force first is the one that is guilty of assault and disturbering the peace. Again, I ask what is the distinction between what she did and say protesters of the OWS movement? Tea Party movement? It's very subjective and I could easily say that these protesters should be arrested for "causing a brawl in a public place and that it is not a form a free speech." Do you see where I'm going with this? By this logic, the civil rights movement would of been crushed before it even began.
"My goodness, look at these black folk causing a brawl in a public bus, that's not free speech. Arrest her for daring to say upsetting things to us white people." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Captain Corea
Joined: 28 Feb 2005
Location: Seoul
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 29, 2011 10:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Whether we like it or not, most countries have limits on freedom of speech.
Uttering death threats
Conspiracy to commit murder
Incitement of a riot
Slander
Child abuse
Aiding the enemy
I'm sure a more informed person that I could easily double that list. Limiting speech is nothing new, and I'm not at all shocked by these charges. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RangerMcGreggor
Joined: 12 Jan 2011
Location: Somewhere in Korea
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 29, 2011 10:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| recessiontime wrote: |
She didn't lay a finger on anyone. The person that initiates force first is the one that is guilty of assault and disturbering the peace. |
Irrelevant. She was causing a ruckus and harassing others. If someone did hit her, she would have been considered partially at fault. This is why the police often get involved in shouting matches, and will remove people for such. It's dangerous.
| Quote: |
| Again, I ask what is the distinction between what she did and say protesters of the OWS movement? Tea Party movement? |
Are the OWS and Tea Party Movements on a while going after specific people and harassing them on public transport? If they are, they could get in legal trouble.
| Quote: |
| It's very subjective and I could easily say that these protesters should be arrested for "causing a brawl in a public place and that it is not a form a free speech." |
There are people who are actually being arrested for such charges. Whether or not they are legit is another matter, but this is not unheard of. There is a reason why many laws require permits to do certain public actions.
| Quote: |
Do you see where I'm going with this? By this logic, the civil rights movement would of been crushed before it even began.
"My goodness, look at these black folk causing a brawl in a public bus, that's not free speech. Arrest her for daring to say upsetting things to us white people." |
Except that actually did happen, minus the "free speech" part. The civil rights activists were breaking the law intentionally and were trying to get arrested. That is pretty big part of civil disobedience. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bigverne
Joined: 12 May 2004
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 29, 2011 11:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Were any of those lovely chaps ever arrested? |
They're brown and are thus subject to a different set of rules. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
recessiontime
Joined: 21 Jun 2010
Location: Got avatar privileges nyahahaha
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 30, 2011 12:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Captain Corea wrote: |
Whether we like it or not, most countries have limits on freedom of speech.
Uttering death threats
Conspiracy to commit murder
Incitement of a riot
Slander
Child abuse
Aiding the enemy
I'm sure a more informed person that I could easily double that list. Limiting speech is nothing new, and I'm not at all shocked by these charges. |
All of those have to do with physical damage or losses in money. She didn't damage or hurt anyone financially or physically.
"racially/religiously aggravated intentional harassment."
Not buying it all. If this truly is a law in Britain it's a sad day for it's citizens and the entire concept of dissent. Not only that, it's a slap in the face to suggest that Racism and denouncing religion go hand and hand. Richard Dawkins in particular might want to be weary of "religiously aggravated intentional harassment."
Last edited by recessiontime on Wed Nov 30, 2011 12:53 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Floating World
Joined: 01 Oct 2011
Location: Here
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 30, 2011 12:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
Yeah coz Britain is like a Police State compared to the US....
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
radcon
Joined: 23 May 2011
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 30, 2011 2:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
The white woman basically said that foreigners have ruined Britian. She included Poles so her message wasn't totally about race.
The black woman said that whites were lazy and didnt work. Why wasnt the black woman arrested for her comments as well? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
