Slashdot Mirror
UK Twitter Users Declare 'I'm Spartacus'
An anonymous reader writes "Tweeters have joined forces to support Paul Chambers, the man convicted and fined for a Twitter message threatening to blow up an airport. A so-called 'I'm Spartacus' campaign encouraging users to 're-tweet' his words has also become a huge hit. The hashtag #IAmSpartacus is currently the number one trending topic on Twitter in the UK, with #twitterjoketrial in second place. Chambers is believed to be the first person convicted in the UK for posting an offensive tweet. After the hearing, actor and Twitter fan Stephen Fry tweeted that he would pay Chambers' fine. Comedian Dara O'Briain tweeted that the verdict was 'ludicrous' while Peep Show actor David Mitchell said it was 'punishment for flippancy.'"
I suspect not as many people will re-tweet on behalf of Garreth Compton.
For those wondering, from TFA:
The I'm Spartacus campaign is inspired by the famous scene in the 1960s blockbuster, when slaves stood up one by one to claim "I'm Spartacus" in order to save their fellow gladiator from detection.
Why get hot and bothered about something when you can make a mockery of it?
It is usually more effective too.
let me be the first to say.
THIS IS SPARTAAAAAACUS!
Crap! Robin Hood airport is closed. You've got a week to get your shit together, otherwise I'm blowing the place sky high!! #IAmSpartacus
Just what is it about twitter that makes it so dangerous you daren't write "ahmonga bomb LAX" on it? Are they using MFC libraries?
mm .sig (once mefus)
--
now that's a
The trial shows that our judiciary are a bit out of touch. And that our institutional sense of political correctness has gone a bit too far.
But expressing solidarity through protest, by repeating the same "crime" - admittedly with a very minor risk of prosecution? That nobility. That's the British spirit. There's a reason that the colloquial phrase for contravention of fair play is "not cricket". It isn't "not baseball", is it?
I view the whole sorry affair as the result of over-exposure to American culture, a culture of flying off the handle, an overinflated sense of entitlement, and above all, an almost complete lack of understanding of the concept of irony. We've lost our ability to cope with the ambiguity and the grey areas in life, instead taking the simpletons viewpoint that right and wrong are black and white, that there is a sharply defined line you must not cross. Deary me. Life is complicated. For those of us who can't cope without a truly rigid set of rules, might I suggest that you go back to kindergarten.
Those same idiots will scream even louder when someone really does blow up something and the cops ignored it because of these protests.
Actually, I don't think cops are that dumb... But if they were, that's how it would go.
"If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; But if you really make them think, they'll hate you." - DM
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Such kind of failed appeals makes me want to bom.... %$!%$$*&! CARRIER LOST.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1996_Manchester_bombing
Most Mancunians I've spoken to say it was the best thing to happen to their city center.
1943 called.
The Nazis want their laws back.
If the only way you can accept an assertion is by faith, then you are conceding that it can't be taken on its own merits
I am Spartacus!
...other people need to knock that off
There's a difference between saying "Crap! Robin Hood airport is closed. You've got a week to get your shit together, otherwise I'm blowing the airport sky high!" among friends who know your personality and writing the same on the public internet. People have very little information which they can use to decide if you're joking or if you're someone with an real anger management problem. At the very least, put a smiley on it. On the internet, nobody knows that you're a dog and nobody knows that you're just kidding unless you make it bloody obvious. The reason why emoticons exist isn't that people are idiots who can't tell a joke from seriousness, it's that people who are not serious on the internet frequently forget that all non-textual cues are left out, so what's obvious to them isn't to others, even if the recipients have a fully developed sense of humor.
The Human Rights Act 1998 guarantees freedom of expression in article 10.1:
Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers. This Article shall not prevent States from requiring the licensing of broadcasting, television or cinema enterprises.
... and then takes away the protection on the contentious speech that might actually need protecting in 10.2:
The exercise of these freedoms, since it carries with it duties and responsibilities, may be subject to such formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society, in the interests of national security, territorial integrity or public safety, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, for the protection of the reputation or rights of others, for preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence, or for maintaining the authority and impartiality of the judiciary.
People who live in the UK are a crazy bunch of hopeless idiots.
There, fixed it for you. But you're wrong, you're an idiot.
The exact phrase to be re-tweeted is: "Crap! Robin Hood airport is closed. You've got a week to get your shit together, otherwise I'm blowing the airport sky high!"
I view the whole sorry affair as the result of over-exposure to American culture,
Are you kidding me? People in the US look at most of the stuff that goes on in the UK... getting arrested for Tweets, getting arrested for flying certain flags, while guys in America get police protection to obscenely picket funerals. We know that this sort of thing would NEVER fly in America, not in spirit nor in the letter of the law. We've got the First Amendment for that.
a culture of flying off the handle, an overinflated sense of entitlement, and above all, an almost complete lack of understanding of the concept of irony.
Yeah, whatever.
Everyone knows that the first place you look for hints of where terrorists will strike is TWITTER!
I hate being bipolar; it's awesome!
For a moment, I had started to write to defend American culture, but then a quick moment of thought revealed that you are correct. That wasn't the way in my grandparents' time (from what I hear), but it certainly is the case these day. In the U.S. we live in a culture of the squeaky wheel getting the grease. On top of that we have a political system where common sense takes a back seat to party squables and a media that looks only for the sensational. That's why political ads here focus on the negative: people would rather vote "against" somebody than for somebody.
I do disagree with your explination for the problem. I say that it's not a matter of too little ambiguity, but too much. There should be a sharply defined line that one should not cross. In this case, I don't see how the man would have crossed it. What crime did he commit? It's only since it is left to ambiguity that a judge could rule him a criminal. Traditionally, we were a nation of laws in America, and I think that worked well. That has changed with more and more unconstitutional "legislating from the bench" making us more like a common law system. Don't like the law banning homosexual "marriage"? Just ask a judge to remove that law for you. Want to kill a baby? Don't worry, a few judges is all it takes to make the law go away. I believe that it is exactly this that leads people to sensationalism. They've learned that if you make something emotional enough (e.g. "Think fo the children!") then that rigid line can disappear.
There are 10 commandments: 01)Thou shalt love the Lord Thy God 10)Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.Matt22:34-40
And in the NEXT shot it shows each and everyone of them killed... somehow people always forget this.
Also, is it just me or is there a difference between a man who fought against slavery and a man who made a bomb treath for no reason?
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
It is more effective. The judge's ruling was based on the idea that an "ordinary person" would not recognize the joke, take it seriously, and be terrified. The point of this campaign is to demonstrate that that's nonsense.
Not only that, but the campaign potentially puts law enforcement in a quandary. They can either arrest, charge and convict hundreds of people (including several popular celebrities) for posting a line of trivial text that harms precisely nobody, or have Paul Chambers' lawyers demand that they explain why they are applying the law selectively and unfairly.
That's one of the biggest problems with taking speech crime this far: it becomes utterly trivial for an angry population to effectively DDOS the enforcement of it.
http://i.imgur.com/uPovx.jpg
I mean... I'd somehow understand if it was "I'm Jack the Ripper". But Spartacus?
What would have happened had they referred to... say... "A Tale of Two Cities"? Or "Les Misérables"?
Would The Internet collapse or just the Twitter?
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
No one says "not cricket" in en-US, FWIW.
Those same idiots will scream even louder when someone really does blow up something and the cops ignored it because of these protests.
That's not the issue. The complaint is not that the police investigated the tweet; this might well be argued to fall under due diligence. The complaint is that they investigated it, discovered it to be totally harmless, and still brought the full force of the law to bear on the tweeter simply for the hell of it.
I guess someone doesn't realize just what sort of despicable garbage we in the U.S. have to defend (as someone mentioned earlier, protesting funerals) just so garbage like what is happening to this guy doesn't happen here (not saying our judicial system is perfect, far from it), but with Free Speech protections, it's a lot harder for the prosecution to win.
"There is a way that seems right to a man, but its end is the way of death." Proverbs 16:25 (NKJV)
parenthesis fail.
"There is a way that seems right to a man, but its end is the way of death." Proverbs 16:25 (NKJV)
Gosh I am paranoid but somehow I just always keep looking for what is MISSING from a story. So why the bomb threat? Which is by the way illegal. Why did he threathen people who had no way of knowing whether he was serious or not?
Some of the highschool shootings had the criminals making claims they would do something as well. So clearly the police now HAS to act when someone makes a public threath.
Yet many a slashdotter is saying that terrorists wouldn't use twitter to announce it? How small minded, only terrorists use bombs now? Only terrorists carry out attacks? Plenty of nutters do as well AND some of them make announcements about it. http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1355/is_17_112/ai_n27436671/
If only then people had listened. How is the police to know if someone is just spouting off or making a serious threat? Damned if they do nothing, damned if they do something.
But the law is very clear, you are not allowed to make threats, no not even as a joke. Just try this at an airport "he got a bomb" and see what happens. But I wasn't serious? Tell that to the police dog chewing on your crotch.
Should the police have ignored the threat, like they ignored others that did turn out to be right? Or just put a fullscale alert on the airport just in case and let the taxpayer pay for it?
This story is just more evidence of the sad state of our voting population who just doesn't seem to be aware of the real world and its rules. If you do not like them vote to change them but don't go into some kind of hissy fit when long established laws end up biting you in the ass.
It reminds me of a story years ago when the british press went into sob story mode about a mum whose driving license was taking away and she needed it so badly... yeah... those anti-drunk driving laws sure do suck don't they. Guess what, freedom of speech does not exist in the UK, stop being suprised by it constantly and either change the law (and invite anarchy) or learn to accept that bomb threats are not allowed.
Real story: Asshole who wanted to show off got send to jail for breaking the law. Fellow assholes outraged that breaking the law is not allowed!
Really, this guy wasn't making a political statement, this was just someone wanting to scare others because his penis is to small. And before you get all outraged, answer me this. WHY did he send this message out into the world? When THAT reason gets reported I think his public sympathy outside wanker land will be lost instantly.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
That's a very British attitude. You may insult me all you like, but I shall take offence if you do so with with poor grammar.
(Apologies if you're not British - however your attitude certainly is )
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/terrorism-in-the-uk/8072043/77-Inquest-suicide-bombers-used-names-of-A-Team-characters-in-text-messages.html
"Mohammed Sidique Khan and Jermaine Lindsay quoted catchphrases used by BA Baracus, played by Mr T in the 1980s television series, and referred to others as Face and Murdock.
.
.
The terrorists then began to argue over which of them was BA and which was Face. On July 4, Khan, who killed six people at Edgware Road, sent a text to Lindsay saying: “Face you motha---- il rearrange ya face if ya stab me wiv dat needle cos i said i ain’t getin on no plain [sic] fool.” "
Also, this interview with Chris Morris should be obligatory reading for everyone.
Particularly for those people who happen to be elected officials of governments. Terrorists are mostly not criminal masterminds. In most cases, they are utterly inept.
I mean, let's face it - if you are blowing yourself up to defeat your enemy, there is a significant chance that you are doing it wrong.
http://www.aintitcool.com/node/47332
That has changed with more and more unconstitutional "legislating from the bench" making us more like a common law system. Don't like the law banning homosexual "marriage"? Just ask a judge to remove that law for you. Want to kill a baby? Don't worry, a few judges is all it takes to make the law go away. I believe that it is exactly this that leads people to sensationalism. They've learned that if you make something emotional enough (e.g. "Think fo the children!") then that rigid line can disappear.
What the fuck are you talking about? This is some of the most incoherent nonsense I've seen on this site -- and that's saying something.
Yes, your judges have been watching way too much Mary Tyler Moore late at night and that's why they made this stupid decision. It has nothing to do with your lack of a written constitution.
The fact that you don't acknowledge the phrase kinda proves his point.
uh, HE's Spartacus. I'm not. I'm Biggus Dickus.
rewriting history since 2109
Scenario 1.) Airport gets bombed and people are angry. "What?! He tweeted about it, why didn't anyone pay attention to him!?!"
Scenario 2.) Man is investigated, found innocent, taxes are raised to pay for it, and people are angry. "What?! Why was this investigated?! Waste of my money!"
Scenario 3.) Man is investigated, found innocent, individually fined to pay for it, and people are angry. "What?! His rights were violated! Defend the tweeter against The Man!!"
We know that this sort of thing would NEVER fly in America, not in spirit nor in the letter of the law. We've got the First Amendment for that.
Sure, you can threaten to kill thousands or ordinary folk, as long as it's not a threat against some politician, which would be covered under section 871 of US code title 18: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/usc_sec_18_00000871----000-.html
For example, Adam Albrett, who pleaded insanity to get away with it:
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/local/Fairfax-man-accused-of-threatening-Obama-pleads-insanity-1008023-100164259.html
I'm not saying UK law isn't stupid, but the US isn't as great as you might think.
Or you can threaten to blow up Apple after having a bad day...
http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/414/right-to-remain-silent
http://www.joelipari.com/
So do terrorists generally issue bomb warnings over Twitter? I don't think so; the police (in their saner moments) don't think so; and the judge in question probably doesn't even know what Twitter is.
The IRA usually called-in warnings that a bomb had been planted.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1340995/story.html
Of course "terrorist" is a loaded word (especially nowadays), and many people wouldn't call the IRA that; others would. [shrug]
Are you kidding me? People in the US look at most of the stuff that goes on in the UK... getting arrested for Tweets... We know that this sort of thing would NEVER fly in America, not in spirit nor in the letter of the law. We've got the First Amendment for that.
You can get six months in a federal jail for posting ridiculous threats posting on 4chan though. It seems to me that the main difference between the US and the UK is that you would get punished much more severely in the US.
And the current SCOTUS is looking for a way to make those picketers liable for civil damages for hurt feelings without, somehow, completely fucking up the First Amendment -- just because they find the notion of the protests so abhorrent. Once that decision's handed down, we're going to be just as bad as the UK except that free speech will be limited by how much money you have rather than as limited to the upper class as the lower.
People do dumb stuff all the time. And scare people.. usually their reaction is.. I didn't mean too, wasn't thinking.. Should they get sent to jail for it? Maybe, depends on the extent of the stupidity. But the police responded and arrested him. At this point, a little research.. is he violent? Does he have a history? Does his explanation make sense? Instead, it's we arrested him and from now on, we are not capable of making mistakes. Doesn't matter if he's just being a wanker, we want him imprisoned and fined. But when you look at the case, the guy doesn't even know how to make a bomb, wouldn't hurt a fly. Was just frustrated.. That's where we need some balance..
Have you fscked your local propeller head today?
parenthesis fail.
Man, now I badly want my compilers to say that when I mess up the syntax.
Switch back to Slashdot's D1 system.
How dare you put my marriage in quotes, you bag of biblical mumbojumbo.
You've reminded me of the latin scene in Life of Brian - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IIAdHEwiAy8
Since your God has directed you to "love thy neighbour as thyself" (Matt22:34-40), to quote your sig, and since you are against homosexual marriage, may I presume that you, too, have refrained from marrying? Out of, you know, solidarity for your gay neighbors whom you love.
Or would that be requiring more logical consistency than you're willing to offer?
by crucifying the lot of them. Maybe the UK courts will send them all to jail.
I know I'm just an American so my sense of irony is sorely lacking, but how does one blame not being entitled to free speech online on being exposed to our citizen's overinflated sense of entitlement?
But expressing solidarity through protest, by repeating the same "crime" - admittedly with a very minor risk of prosecution? That nobility. That's the British spirit. There's a reason that the colloquial phrase for contravention of fair play is "not cricket". It isn't "not baseball", is it?
That is not unique to the British. Apparently you've never heard of the Boston tea party, the American revolution, the American feminist movement, the Hippy movement, the Vietnam war deserters, and illegal file sharing.
I view the whole sorry affair as the result of over-exposure to American culture, a culture of flying off the handle, an overinflated sense of entitlement, and above all, an almost complete lack of understanding of the concept of irony. We've lost our ability to cope with the ambiguity and the grey areas in life, instead taking the simpletons viewpoint that right and wrong are black and white, that there is a sharply defined line you must not cross. Deary me. Life is complicated. For those of us who can't cope without a truly rigid set of rules, might I suggest that you go back to kindergarten.
Sure thing. I view your whole post as a pompous diatribe of bull shit. You have an obvious superiority complex, and its completely unfounded in reality. In America, you could do exactly what this guy did and no one can do anything to you. Its called freedom of speech, and its guaranteed our government cannot interfere with this natural born right. I can call you Euro-trash and say you deserve to have your ass kicked without my government doing anything to me.
That brings me to an interesting point, / . is just "the ramblings of socially-inept, technology-literate news-mongers".
Why don't people seemm to understand? This is Britian. The government does not recognize freedom of speech. This is how it's always been. If you want to change it, great, but a bunch of tweets is unlikely to do much, if any, good.
That is not unique to the British. Apparently you've never heard of the Boston tea party, the American revolution...
Actually, if you think about it, you are agreeing with the OP. The Boston Tea Party and American Revolution involved British citizens rebelling against the British government which is pretty much what is happening here. It was only after you were successful that you became non-British.
You can get six months in a federal jail for posting ridiculous threats posting on 4chan though. It seems to me that the main difference between the US and the UK is that you would get punished much more severely in the US.
4chan? You can potentially get six years or more in federal jail for visiting 4chan. Or for that matter, any website that allows users to post images without review or filtering.
Due to the fact anything goes on /b/, sheer anarchy, people can post any text or pictures they want, and there exist pictures in the world that it is such a crime for your computer to retrieve. It is against site rules to post those pictures, but according to Wikipedia, the rule is not obeyed and is a running joke.
People can wind up in jail, and an unemployable social pariah when you get out, just because they visited 4chan on the wrong day.
And note, 4chan is not special in that regard..... any unknown website is in theory a possible risk
It occurs problems with ensuring 'free speech' might not be the worst things wrong with society and government. When there exist [potentially] more innocent people in society than those making threats, who are subject to even more severe action.
You mean the laws against gay marriage which contravene the equal rights guaranteed by the constitution?
The 'Old Testament' thumper shines through. After all, Jesus never said anything about homosexuals. Leviticus certainly did. Give me 5 minutes to go through your daily habits and I'll show you at least one case for you to be killed by your fellow YHWH worshipers.
Would you also like to go back to the old standard of Deuteronomy 22? You know, the part where raping a virgin is an acceptable precursor to marrying her?
And the "baby killing", that would refer to abortion of a fetus right?
Exodus 21:22 says that a man who causes a miscarriage should receive a fine. That's it.
In Genesis life comes with the first *breath*. So where has it been made legal to kill kids by a judge?
In your sig, why didn't you include "Though shalt not seethe a kid in it's mothers milk"? Is some of the 'Word of God' not up to your standards? Seems like the love thy neighbor stuff that you *did* include went out the window with your griping about homosexual marriage.
Do YOU happen to have a ring on your finger from a Christian wedding ceremony? As that would make you a "bride of Christ", whatever genitalia you might have.
Words have meaning. Threats have consequences. Chambers and his supporters seem to live in a fantasy world and do not understand this.
That is not unique to the British. Apparently you've never heard of the Boston tea party, the American revolution, the American feminist movement, the Hippy movement, the Vietnam war deserters, and illegal file sharing.
The Americans were British during the first two - just sayin... Feminist movement, deserters yeah you could be proud of that, but illegal file sharing? phew..
Sure thing. I view your whole post as a pompous diatribe of bull shit. You have an obvious superiority complex, and its completely unfounded in reality.
And it is confined to him and not you in any way, clearly..
There are so many more worthwhile instances of "free speech" that need to be protected. For instance, why aren't these people tweeting images of Muhammad? Or tweeting about the Chinese Nobel Peace Prize winner.
Here is why:
1. There is no risk to support this guy. Those who support him aren't brave, they are cowards for not supporting more "dangerous" causes.
2. People who Tweet / Facebook / Blog are content with talking, not action. That's why Prop 8 failed. That's why Prop 19 failed.
Until people realize that action mean everything and Tweets mean nothing then we will keep having this stuff happen.
The Americans were British during the first two - just sayin... Feminist movement, deserters yeah you could be proud of that, but illegal file sharing? phew..
American's were not entirely British. There were Germans, Dutch, French, Mexican, ect. The portion that rebelled was a British Colony, but the people many times where fairly removed from their British roots and they rebelled because they didn't want British rule. For example, half my ancestry stretches back pre-Revolution and is composed of Scottish and French. Doesn't matter if illegal file sharing is right or not, its still done in protest of paying for media and of copyright law.
And it is confined to him and not you in any way, clearly..
It is confined to him. I didn't go out of my way to insult someones culture. As a matter of fact, I admire parts of British culture. I also admire UK government, such as the parliament being made up of representatives from a variety of parties by a percentage of votes. I wouldn't trade that for the Bill of Rights however. Its ok to be proud of your own culture, but when you blame your own nation's and cultural failings on another culture's influence its complete horse shit. Not to mention this individual has a gross misunderstanding of what American culture even is.
That brings me to an interesting point, / . is just "the ramblings of socially-inept, technology-literate news-mongers".
This is a bomb threat:
"This is $ORGANISATION. We have placed a bomb at $LOCATION. It is set to go off at $TIME unless you fulfill $DEMAND." Typically called in to a news paper or the police.
This is not a bomb threat:
"Crap! Robin Hood airport is closed. You've got a week to get your shit together, otherwise I'm blowing the airport sky high!" on Twitter.
One would think that a country that has decades of experience in these matters would know the difference. The behavior of the folks at Robin Hood and the police would suggest this, too.
I know the GP started it, but this isn't the time for nationalism - things are going to shit on both sides of the Atlantic, and trying to argue that one side is doing better or worse is not productive; they're bad in different ways.
To paraphrase your post "People in the UK look at stuff that goes on in the US... teens being charged as sex offenders for taking pictures of themselves, or strip searched at school for carrying a headache pill...".
In my experience, Britain is more susceptible to allowing 'big brother' style intrusions from the government, while the US is more likely to get caught up in moral panics. Not to say that either country is immune to either problem, of course.
America looks at some of Britain's free speech violations and shakes their head at how the likes of this could never happen with the constitution for protection, while Britain looks back at America and wonders how much more power the fire-and-brimstone Christian minority can seize.
Albrett was arrested after the White House Correspondence Office received a message on May 14 that read:
"This is not a joke. Inform the FBI, CIA, U.S. military and DOJ that I am going down to D.C. to blow the brains out of Obama unless he vacates the White House and I am going to shoot up the place and Rahm if I see him...This is not a joke...I am going to leave Mara at home with water and some food..."
That's pretty different from a tweet.
I agree with MoonBuggy, "Our system is slightly less broken that yours" is not a bragging right. Both nations can be justifiably proud a system that has had excellent human rights and freedom of speech, both of which have been eroded by the past couple of governments. The time is now to correct the downwards trend.
Phillip.
Property for sale in Nice, France
Use Lisp.
I feel fantastic, and I'm still alive.
Its ok to be proud of your own culture, but when you blame your own nation's and cultural failings on another culture's influence its complete horse shit. Not to mention this individual has a gross misunderstanding of what American culture even is.
This statement makes sense and I agree with it, he might indeed misunderstand "American culture" but as many have shown before you he is not alone in this.
Your job as a literate American is to prove him wrong, not the opposite.
As part of this campaign, some UK Tweeters are now adopting the "May Be A Joke" disclaimer twibbon.
http://twb.ly/cpom1w
how was this modded flamebait?
apart from misspelling "squabbles"?
i think the UK badly needs a 1st amendment equivalent. they also need to clear out the remnants of the hereditary (inbred) peer system before they can do any more damage.
fleet street also could do well to fall into a giant sinkhole.
Not that I give two craps, but Exodus 21:22 says that it's a fine if everything turns out to be alright with the baby. If not, well, that's where the whole "eye for an eye" saying comes from.
They've "prettied" it up with successive versions.
The KJV:
If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart from her, and yet no mischief follow: he shall be surely punished, according as the woman's husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine.
The "new" KJV:
“If men fight, and hurt a woman with child, so that she gives birth prematurely, yet no harm follows, he shall surely be punished accordingly as the woman’s husband imposes on him; and he shall pay as the judges determine.
Not that I agree with banning gay marriage, but the Constitution doesn't give ANYONE the "right" to get married, straight or otherwise.
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." ~Thomas Jefferson
When the romans went to free Brian from crucifiction -
Centurion: Where is Brian of Nazareth?
Brian: You sanctimonious bastards!
Centurion: I have an order for his release!
Brian: You stupid bastards!
Mr. Cheeky: Uh, I'm Brian of Nazareth.
Brian: What?
Mr. Cheeky: Yeah, I - I - I'm Brian of Nazareth.
Centurion: Take him down!
Brian: I'm Brian of Nazareth!
Victim #1: Eh, I'm Brian!
Mr. Big Nose: I'm Brian!
Victim #2: Look, I'm Brian!
Brian: I'm Brian!
Victims: I'm Brian!
Gregory: I'm Brian, and so's my wife!
Victims: I'm Brian! I'm Brian!...
Brian: I'm Brian of Nazareth!
Centurion: All right. Take him away and release him.
Mr. Cheeky: No, I'm only joking. I'm not really Brian. No, I'm not Brian. I was only - It was a joke. I'm only pulling your leg! It's a joke! I'm not him! I'm just having you on! Put me back! Bloody Romans! Can't take a joke!
I know the GP started it, but this isn't the time for nationalism - things are going to shit on both sides of the Atlantic, and trying to argue that one side is doing better or worse is not productive; they're bad in different ways.
To paraphrase your post "People in the UK look at stuff that goes on in the US... teens being charged as sex offenders for taking pictures of themselves, or strip searched at school for carrying a headache pill...".
In my experience, Britain is more susceptible to allowing 'big brother' style intrusions from the government, while the US is more likely to get caught up in moral panics. Not to say that either country is immune to either problem, of course.
America looks at some of Britain's free speech violations and shakes their head at how the likes of this could never happen with the constitution for protection, while Britain looks back at America and wonders how much more power the fire-and-brimstone Christian minority can seize.
Yeah I'm tempted to draw the same conclusions. But, even if we were make the dubious assumption that media reporting is generally excellent, bear in mind it is logical that there be an inverse relationship between reporting and the actual general position. By nature media reports on things that are unusual or exceptional, so if it was common for UK teenagers to be charged for sexting it'd rarely be covered, while US media might prominently report every one of the very rare instances of it happening there.
The real story to take from OP is not that you can be convicted for making silly jokes about bombing in the UK, but that the public is shocked by what is seen as an anomaly and sufficiently confident in the judicial system's ability to make this right that they go and make the same joke.
This quote from the West wing seems appropriate...
09F91102 no, 455FE104 nope, F190A1E8 uh-uh, 7A5F8A09 that's not it, C87294CE no. Ah! 452F6E403CDF10714E41DFAA257D313F.
yeah the threat was non-serious
guy wasn't going to do anything
but what happens when you let _everyone_ make those comments
then one the airport gets blown up by a citizen, who do you blame?
- the government for not chasing up all these "leads"
- society for not taking this kind of thing seriously
i'm lets change this situation slightly
lets say they let him off with a warning and left it be
what happens if someone "following" him on twitter does the act
not even by instruction, but by sheer coincidence
the investigation eventually finds this link between the two
at that point the media and people will pick up on it
the guy will then be dragged over hot coals by half the population
the other half will argue it's just words so the guy is innocent
separately, half blames government for being incompetent
the other half argues government did the right thing and blames people
so wtf do you expect a government to do?
a) be a prick about the issue initially
b) be a retarded and never do anything
(though some would argue governments are already covering a) and b) quite nicely)
Albrett was arrested after the White House Correspondence Office received a message on May 14 that read:
"This is not a joke. Inform the FBI, CIA, U.S. military and DOJ that I am going down to D.C. to blow the brains out of Obama unless he vacates the White House and I am going to shoot up the place and Rahm if I see him...This is not a joke...I am going to leave Mara at home with water and some food..."
That's pretty different from a tweet.
Too long?
I just love it when you guys ignorantly summarize the US.
If you ignore ACs because they are anonymous - you're an idiot.
With with?
I'll admit that I was tired when I posted, but the points still stand. First, as for homosexuality, it is wrong, the same as stealing or any other sin, in the new testament as well as the old (Romans, etc). A homosexual man has every right to marry a woman the same as any other man does. Marriage is not about fulfilling sexual lusts. The question is why would somebody who doesn't care about the Bible want to get married. Why not just have a civil union rather than redefine marriage?
Your point does stand, though, that there's plenty of things that people do wrong that are just as damning since breaking one law breaks them all. The point of the law as a school master is to show people what righteousness is and that none of us are good and in need of salvation. Although we should strive to follow it, we are all worthy of death. The gospel is that even people who have done wrong can be forgiven, but that doesn't make the wrong right. Loving a sinner doesn't mean accepting their sin. How much love is it to lie to somebody?
If you will read that passage in Deut 22, you will find that the rape (lay hold on) is not excused, but that the remedy is that the man be forced to marry her. In fact, a few verses earlier in a case where a man raped (force) an engaged woman, the man would be put to death. Yes, I think that we would be better as a nation under the OT law, but since we aren't I don't think that we should legislate morality. I wouldn't support a law prohibiting homosexuals from sin, only I don't want to be legally required to recognise it.
The "bride of Christ" is the church (all born again believers) whether or not thy are married. Marriage is a picture of that divine union which is why it is so important to defend its sanctity.
I'm not aware of any scripture declaring that life begins with a breath. If you know of such, please share it as that would be important. I do know that there are penalties for harming a pregnant woman if harm come to the child.
There are 10 commandments: 01)Thou shalt love the Lord Thy God 10)Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.Matt22:34-40
Not only is there a lesser penalty for causing a miscarriage, said miscarriage explicitly isn't considered a fatality.
The prosecution backed down on that first one; they didn't get off scot-free (as they should have) but they were not convicted of any sex offense.
Cite
The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the strip search was wrong
Cite
In the UK, not only was the Robin Hood tweeter convicted, but his conviction was upheld on appeal. So I'm afraid that while the US is indeed fucked up, the UK is more fucked up.
Does this mean that I'm going to have to find out WTF a Twit is, and how to Tweet one's nose at them?
Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
You are being harder on me than I deserve, and softer on the OP as he deserves. I admire your stance as "devil's advocate" and I admit that I am reacting poorer than I should. However, his post is simply asinine. I try my hardest to take the higher ground but sometimes I get pissed off at people and my human nature overrides by frontal lobe. Touche sir, and I think we would probably agree more than disagree if we were to discuss things outside of /. .
That brings me to an interesting point, / . is just "the ramblings of socially-inept, technology-literate news-mongers".
Having been stuck in an airport for an extended period of time looking after my three year old and a one year old boys, during a bomb threat (that turned out to be a hoax), I can only say that this idiot should be punished to deter other idiots causing misery to innocent people. The "terrorists" who support the murder of innocent people are bad enough but wannabe's who descend to this level of juvenile humour are as degraded human beings as those they seek to emulate. After all part of the strategy of "terrorists" is to cause confusion and hysteria to attract attention to their "cause".
Publically announcing, whatever the medium, a bomb threat has to be taken seriously by the authorities. Idiotic behaviour just costs the tax payer more money.
BTW I do tweet, and no I have no affiliation with any security/enforcement service.
Sadly, I don't think the US and UK have more stupid laws or people than the rest of the world in general.
Corinthians 6:9–10 and a few others. However, Christ was generally pretty supportive of daddy.
I see nowhere in that comment where he condemns gay marriage, he just says that the courts are being abused to squash unpopular laws. It is the law in most of the country that marriage is between a man and a women. If you don't like that, protest. But, going to the courts to get the law taken out is the wrong way, as it encourages legislation (part of the legislative branch of government) from the bench (party of the judicial side of the government) which is against the constitution.
APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
I don't agre with your summary there, are you sure you are reading it correctly? It sounds like:
If there is a premature birth due to above actions there are two outcomes
1. the baby lives, there will be restitution
2. the baby dies, he will die
Pretty clear to me, though it seems like this has little to do with abortion as it is talking about a woman being hit during a fight.
APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
First, as for homosexuality, it is wrong...
First, as for that statement, it is wrong, so fuck you.
Yes, I think that we would be better as a nation under the OT law...
So you don't think we should be allowed to eat pork or shellfish? Oh, you're just a crazy moralist dick that wants to impose his own set of arbitrary values on the rest of the society in which he lives. I get it.
On that note, double fuck you. Asshole.
Motorcycles, Robots, Space Gossip and More!
The way I read it, the question revolves around the outcome for the mother. The word 'miscarry' says to me that the baby didn't make it. With bronze age medical care, I have to imagine the mother's chances weren't that good in the aftermath.