| Kasz216 said: It seems like a stretch to call that harrasment without any threat of physical harm. Though then again, UK harrasment laws have been used to prosecute peaceful protesters... so I guess it's more an issue with the UK's batshit crazy laws in general... I mean hell, how many people bash other people in public? If repeated insulting of a girl who killed herself (who he had never met before hand) is harrasment, what's to say that repeatidly insulting the Prime Minister on national TV isn't harrassment? |
Harassment doesn't need to include 'threat to physical harm'. All it needs to do is be a repetitive behaviour meant to distub or upset. The repeating insult of this girl definately is harassment. And as a psychologist, I'd expect you would be more aware of the negative impact this type of harassment can have on the victim.
And there's a huge difference between criticising a politician for his/her political actions or decisions (which is what free spech laws are really meant to protect - the right to criticise public authority, and prevent things like tyrannies from emerging), and throwing around senseless insults, which are nothing more than cheap ad hominem attacks, used by modern-day politicians and partisan media outlets to manipulate the masses (one of the biggest issues with contemporary media).
"I don't understand how someone could like Tolstoy and Dostoyevsky, but not like Twilight!!!"
"Last book I read was Brokeback Mountain, I just don't have the patience for them unless it's softcore porn."
(The Voice of a Generation and Seece)
"If you cant stand the sound of your own voice than dont become a singer !!!!!"
(pizzahut451)
