Twitter trolls get prison sentences
I'd say they needed help more than incarceration
(
HappyToast Groat froth, Fri 24 Jan 2014, 20:14,
Reply)
www.psychologytoday.com/blog/saving-normal/201303/prison-or-treatment-the-mentally-ill
(
gunmetal drove slowly in the passing lane on, Fri 24 Jan 2014, 20:17,
Reply)
Agreed
total waste of money sending them to jail
(
CysticSpazzGland has just puwked on your mum, Fri 24 Jan 2014, 20:31,
Reply)
would be cheaper to just snip their thumbs off
(
buffet_the_appetite_slayer ٩(●̮̃•)۶ jacked in to the ICE on, Fri 24 Jan 2014, 20:59,
Reply)
It's the deterrence factor though.
It doesn't send much of a message if the first people to be prosecuted for abusing people on the internet are given what would be perceived to be a slap on the wrist. That goes double considering the attention that the trial was getting from the media.
The only real option is to give them a stiff sentence up front to make the point, then to have it reduced on appeal (when fewer are watching).
(
wheresthefish Partly filled with wrong, Fri 24 Jan 2014, 20:39,
Reply)
Abusing people on the internet...
Might as well make a dedicated /talk prison.
(
gunmetal drove slowly in the passing lane on, Fri 24 Jan 2014, 20:42,
Reply)
/talk is talk
and telling each other to fuck off or get bent is par for the course and mainly in jest. The line is crossed with personal threats, bullying and abuse about race, religion, sexual preferences etc. Not seen any of that and I hope the Mods then step in. I may be wrong though.
(
spazzcaptain Misses Valin @, Fri 24 Jan 2014, 21:14,
Reply)
the evidence for exemplary sentencing is
extremely weak and what evidence there is points fairly clearly in the opposite direction. I'm just off to find an excellent paper published in 2006..
bear with me
papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=660742
(
colmcq2, Fri 24 Jan 2014, 20:47,
Reply)
Nope they needed to do time as some sort of message to other people who behave like cunts behind their monitors to other people
"Rape is the least of your worries" managed to really freak out that woman, and perhaps understandably so.
People need to realise their actions and behaviour in the online world have consequences, and a campaign of targeted and sustained abuse shouldn't be without accountability.
Basically don't behave towards other people on social media any different from how you would to their face.
(
Jahled Three shades of black, Fri 24 Jan 2014, 21:05,
Reply)
It's true. I think what they were saying falls under terroristic threats, and common law assault at the least.
(
gunmetal drove slowly in the passing lane on, Fri 24 Jan 2014, 21:26,
Reply)
I think that's naive
Think of the web as the men's WC in the worst pub in Britain. The most unimaginable shithole with the worst fuckers in the country. Drunk.
If you put a poster up in those bogs saying Jane Austen for the £10 note, it's going to get vicious graffiti. To convict whoever wrote it would be absurd.
And the web is like that pub x 1000. All the most horribly damaged, sad, lonely, desperate, mad and, admittedly, just plain nasty people are here.
Either you refuse to believe that those people exist or you accept that anything put on here is subject to their bile, and pity them.
What you don't do is send them to jail.
(
After you my dear Alfonse No. After you., Fri 24 Jan 2014, 21:52,
Reply)
That's a completely dead way of thinking of the internet
The internet isn't some shady corner of society inhabited by social rejects, it co-exists with the rest of the world, and the mindset it's still somehow some edgy little world where the rules of the rest of society don't apply is very much a dead way of viewing the internet. Why on earth do you think of it as like some bog in the worst pub in the UK? That's entirely the mindset that people have to wake upto that it's not anymore. Our kids, our grandparents, everyone is more or less using it these days and to categorise the whole lot as some fearful, foul dodgy backwater is basically retarded.
Why shouldn't that woman express her opinion that a woman be put on a fucking banknote? Why must she expect the way of the web to think it's somehow acceptable to make threats of violence and sexual violence against her for expressing that opinion? Anyone who thinks she and anyone else must be muted into silence by such intimidation is very much living in some fantasy cyber-reality the rest of us don't want to share, and shouldn't have to share.
So what you do do is send wankers like that to prison, as you would if they had been sending physical letters threatening the same, or spoke like that to someone's face. Most people won't understand this retarded "It's only the internet, don't take it personally," type of crap. They will take threats of rape or violence personally, and they have every right to do so.
(
Jahled Three shades of black, Fri 24 Jan 2014, 22:40,
Reply)
It's bad for another reason:
It pretty much quashed any chance of campaigning for a more deserving lady (in my opinion), in the form of Ada Lovelace. Jane Austen has had quite enough press compared to someone who has likely had a much larger impact on the modern world.
(
jonbob loves you, Fri 24 Jan 2014, 22:56,
Reply)
^what he said
The Wild West internet of ten years ago is gone - it's been gentrified. That filthy pub you use as an analogy has been gutted, repainted, and now sells overpriced burgers from menus printed on 200 GSM paper.
The shabby old man who used to prop up the bar, making lewd comments to the barmaid is now treated like the contemptible individual he always was and has been slung out on his arse.
(
wheresthefish Partly filled with wrong, Fri 24 Jan 2014, 22:59,
Reply)
I'm with you, I really am
All the best people are here on the web. Everyone's here. And what I was trying to illustrate was that along with the best come the worst. And only they would object to Jane Austen being on a bank note. It's the least objectionable issue imaginable. ANYTHING on here is subject to abuse - memorials to dead children have been subject to venom. And that would be far more deserving of prison time than that poor, sad girl who went down today in her bobble hat who, I'm guessing, has never had a break in her life, and was all excited about being in London...
People shouldn't behave like she did. But given some ill treatment in your youth, you might too.
(
After you my dear Alfonse No. After you., Fri 24 Jan 2014, 23:12,
Reply)
So sending abuse to memorials to dead children is somehow worse than sending threats of rape to women?
I'm not sure I understand that.
"that poor, sad girl who went down today in her bobble hat who, I'm guessing, has never had a break in her life, and was all excited about being in London."
Wow, that actually reads like you genuinely mean it. How mental. If her victim had been a Bangladeshi family and it had been a campaign of racist abuse would she have got such a sympathy vote? I very much doubt it
(
Jahled Three shades of black, Fri 24 Jan 2014, 23:32,
Reply)
falls unders offensive or malicious communications
max. sentence is 6 months imprisonment or a fine not exceeding Level 5 (£5,000) or both
(
custard, Fri 24 Jan 2014, 22:09,
Reply)
very interesting area of criminology
judicial terms deter other people that are *rational* but tend to have little or no effect on the mentally ill or pathologically criminal.
(
colmcq2, Fri 24 Jan 2014, 22:44,
Reply)
Sentencing comments here (pdf)
clicky
(her twitter account - clicky)
(
custard, Fri 24 Jan 2014, 21:33,
Reply)
Take it up with 4Chan
They're the ones who've effectively changed the meaning of the word.
Personally though, I'd say leave it as a lost cause. We had exactly the same issue with the whole hackers/crackers thing. Noone listened because noone else cared.
(
wheresthefish Partly filled with wrong, Fri 24 Jan 2014, 21:51,
Reply)
take an average of their faces
And I reckon they might an attractive symbiotic.
Waiting to find easier pictures.
*not really hopefull
(
zacherynuk @echo off, Fri 24 Jan 2014, 21:41,
Reply)