Woman arrested for saying 'bang' and hurting someone's feelings.
Stupid and insensitive, agreed. But criminal?
(, Wed 2 Mar 2011, 13:54, Reply)
You can't taunt the blind anymore?
It's political madness gone correct which you couldn't make up!
(, Wed 2 Mar 2011, 14:01, Reply)
You could make it up
but you'd need a handcart to take it to hell
(
Joe Scaramanga with a G-double-O-D vibration, Wed 2 Mar 2011, 14:05,
Reply)
I am mortally offended by your sarcasm and have therefore informed the police
(, Wed 2 Mar 2011, 14:05, Reply)
You can taunt the blind.
That's fine.
It's the horrible, cripplingly debilitating disease of law enforcement which people get touchy about. Try insulting a normal police officer. Same treatment.
(
Butters and his titanium codsocket, Wed 2 Mar 2011, 14:48,
Reply)
I don't have a problem with this at all
Would it be any different to laughing in the face of someone in a wheelchair?
Actually, is it different, because you do it to their face rather than behind their back
(
Joe Scaramanga with a G-double-O-D vibration, Wed 2 Mar 2011, 14:06,
Reply)
While agree that it was an offensive and crass thing to say,
I dont think it should be the state's role to arrest citizens for saying anything - unless they're inciting violence.
(, Wed 2 Mar 2011, 14:13, Reply)
Well it's down to interpretation of Section 5 Public Order Act
Use of threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour.
So swearing is a public order offence for which you can be arrested. Though more often than not can be dealt with using a fixed penalty.
However, they should be arrested and escorted off the premises to prevent further breach of the peace.
(, Wed 2 Mar 2011, 14:20, Reply)
This is similar to section 4a
4a is where you intend to cause alarm or distress through use of threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour.
5 is where you cause it without intention (I think).
(, Wed 2 Mar 2011, 14:22, Reply)
and the fact the victim was a copper
makes her doubly stupid and therefore more worthy of arrest
(
Joe Scaramanga with a G-double-O-D vibration, Wed 2 Mar 2011, 14:32,
Reply)
there's not going to be many people left on the streets if they arrest all the stupid ones
(, Wed 2 Mar 2011, 14:39, Reply)
But she was arrested for a Public Order offence, not for 'being stupid'
She'll probably get a £60 fine and told to fuck off and not do it again, but the point is, she still committed an offence.
(, Wed 2 Mar 2011, 14:41, Reply)
Well I think it should
Using words than can be harassing and/or threatening is one of the key reasons why ASBOs were introduced. It's not just about how you perceive it, it's about how others do.
It's been illegal since before 1984, when the revised Public Order Act was introduced.
There's always your MP to talk to about it, if you aren't happy with it.
(, Wed 2 Mar 2011, 15:03, Reply)
I agree
they should have just tasered her there on the spot and be done with it
(, Wed 2 Mar 2011, 14:21, Reply)
Well, it's not as if she was going to look him in the eyes and say it.
(
Butters and his titanium codsocket, Wed 2 Mar 2011, 14:42,
Reply)
4eva in are harts...
...and faces.
(
mr.dogshit The world's premier anthropomorphic canine faeces, Wed 2 Mar 2011, 14:14,
Reply)
it's RAUL MOAT
IN. YOUR. FAAAACE. FUCKERSSSS.
*Flips the V's*
*Skateboards off*
(, Wed 2 Mar 2011, 14:39, Reply)
I think fair enough that it's a criminal case.
Her motivation clearly wasn't to "have a laugh", it was to harass and bully.
I'd say it's right that harassment is illegal.
(
monkeon schmonkeon, Wed 2 Mar 2011, 14:21,
Reply)
causing offence to someone shouldnt be grounds for arrest.
While I'm not defending what this woman said, I think freedom of speech is more important.
(, Wed 2 Mar 2011, 14:49, Reply)
It's not about freedom of speech though.
She spoke entirely in onomatopoeia, and didn't really say anything.
Offence and harassment are different things (admittedly with a blurry boundary)
If she politely explained to him why she believed he deserved to be shot in the face, then fair enough. As it was, she obviously just wanted to harass a policeman and believed (incorrectly) that she was above the law in doing so.
Do you think people should have the right to shout abuse at you when you are walking down the street in the name of "freedom of speech"?
Do you think verbal bulling in the workplace is acceptable?
(
monkeon schmonkeon, Wed 2 Mar 2011, 14:55,
Reply)
^this
explains it better than I ever could
(
h3donist tryin' to play me out as if my name is Sega.., Wed 2 Mar 2011, 15:04,
Reply)
It's certainly easier to read than the legal-speak in the Public Order Act, anyway.
(, Wed 2 Mar 2011, 15:09, Reply)
I suppose it comes down to semantics
Harrassment or bullying - to me at least - implies a sustained campaign of abuse which was clearly not the case here.
I'd also say that people dont generally shout abuse at me in the street. Not because it's illegal, I suspect, but because they share a common humanity which this woman obviously does not.
(, Wed 2 Mar 2011, 15:24, Reply)
^that one^
What they said
(
Extinct Jesus Dossier "...I think it counteracts Hitler's magic...", Wed 2 Mar 2011, 15:51,
Reply)
(
Tab Hunter Make this useless process end and so, begin again, Wed 2 Mar 2011, 15:59,
Reply)
Yeah, but is the dirt gone?
(
monkdagola but how do you TURN a phrase?, Wed 2 Mar 2011, 16:08,
Reply)