By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General - Trolls can now be sent to prison

He's a pathetic person who went WAY too far, he definitely deserves jail time for what he did or he should at least have his internett access taken away. Cracking jokes is one thing, harrassing mourning families is another.

...But.

"He also posted a video on YouTube, entitled Tasha the Tank Engine, showing the children's character Thomas the Tank Engine with Miss MacBryde's face."

I admit that I laughed at this. I knew my sense of humour was sick but not that sick. xD



Around the Network
padib said:
Alby_da_Wolf said:
UltimateUnknown said:
Alby_da_Wolf said:
UltimateUnknown said:
I think you need to take serious action like this to actually show these mofos that there are consequences for being an asshole, even to people you don't know. Being nice doesn't cost you anything, but causing emotional pain to others just for the laughs is ridiculous.

That said though, I can't believe someone would kill themselves over some idiotic comments over the internet. It may have been hard to hear something bad said about herself, but she should have just blocked him.

Punishing bullies, even online, is right, but they just picked up one that has serious psychic problems and isn't one of those that bullied that poor girl when she was alive, he trolled her relatives when she was already dead: they didn't catch those guilty of actually pushing that girl to suicide and they punished just the first turd they could catch, even if he was guilty of a despicable but far less serious offence. The bullies that tormented her during the last period of her life are rich arrogant little bastards schoolmates of hers and "casually" they got away with it, unlike that poor mentally ill turd. Justice can't work this way.

For some reason, why doesn't  it surprise me that the troll has issues regarding alcohol and problems with socialising?

I mean yes I do feel bad that he has asperger's syndrome but I have trouble showing sympathy to someone who enjoys seeing others suffer, even if its mentally. I guess it goes back to the idea of resorting to trolling and making someone else miserable because you yourself are miserable.

And I do agree that the real bullies that caused her to commit suicide needed to be apprehended even moreso than this guy, but atleast this should send a clear message to those who take sick pleasure in causing others suffering.

They should determine whether Asperger syndrome let him understand well enough that what he was doing was wrong, if his ability to understand that is crippled, they should cure him. Obviously the cure should be mandatory, he couldn't refuse it, as, willing and conscious or not, he's harming other people, and he should be allowed to access the net again only after he completes rehab for alcoholism and if he carefully gets the psychiatric support he needs for all the time he needs it, even lifetime. If he was partially aware of what he was doing, he should receive mandatory treatment and, if the penalty appliable to what he did, considering the mitigating factors, still exceeds the period of mandatory treatment, a period of mandatory socially useful work, while continuing treatment.

But punishing just him sends at least two horribly wrong signals: that justice is happy to catch and punish the first poor turd it can, just to make public opinion and the victims or their relatives happy, and after that it doesn't care anymore, and that the rich can get away with crime.

Good post and I know this is a serious topic, but just a quick joke.

Don't you think if they stop him from going on the net he won't just create a new account like most trolls do after they're banned?

It's possible. Mandatory treatment and rehab shouldn't be just an option, but the first choice, whatever the degree of his guilt. And surveillance on him by doctors should be kept quite tight until he learns to spend his time in useful or at least not harmful ways. Maybe socially useful work could help him even if he was totally unwilling or unconscious to harm, if they find some job he likes.



Stwike him, Centuwion. Stwike him vewy wuffly! (Pontius Pilate, "Life of Brian")
A fart without stink is like a sky without stars.
TGS, Third Grade Shooter: brand new genre invented by Kevin Butler exclusively for Natal WiiToo Kinect. PEW! PEW-PEW-PEW! 
 


sapphi_snake said:
Kasz216 said:
sapphi_snake said:
Kasz216 said:

On the one hand, clearly this guy sucks.

On the other hand, this is yet another scary ass reason I wouldn't want to live in the UK.

It's quite literally the government tracking you down and locking you up in jail for something you said on the internet.

For why this happened, and also an opinion on why it shouldn't....

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/tobyyoung/100104832/loathsome-though-they-are-internet-trolls-should-not-be-sent-to-prison/

Considering the writer of that article, his opinion doesn't deserve much attention.

So you judge opinions by seeing who makes them rather then the merit of said arguements.

I mean, you honestly think it's GOOD that people are thrown into jail based on subjective criteria.

Let alone people born with a mental illness like the guy in this story.  (Who has Aspergers.)

Make no mistake, I actually read his whole post (despite the fact that I felt the need to stop reading after his first paragraph, because it clearly indicated what was coming), and I just didn't agree with him. Harassment shouldn't be protected by free speech laws.

And many people are actually misdiagnosed with Asperger syndrome, so the guy could've been just a jerk. From what I know about Asperger syndrome, they're capable of controlling their actions, and this guy clearly displayed a pattern of harassing people deliberately, hence he is a danger to society.

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?



Alby_da_Wolf said:

They should determine whether Asperger syndrome let him understand well enough that what he was doing was wrong, if his ability to understand that is crippled, they should cure him. Obviously the cure should be mandatory, he couldn't refuse it, as, willing and conscious or not, he's harming other people, and he should be allowed to access the net again only after he completes rehab for alcoholism and if he carefully gets the psychiatric support he needs for all the time he needs it, even lifetime. If he was partially aware of what he was doing, he should receive mandatory treatment and, if the penalty appliable to what he did, considering the mitigating factors, still exceeds the period of mandatory treatment, a period of mandatory socially useful work, while continuing treatment.

But punishing just him sends at least two horribly wrong signals: that justice is happy to catch and punish the first poor turd it can, just to make public opinion and the victims or their relatives happy, and after that it doesn't care anymore, and that the rich can get away with crime.

That's not how Asperger syndrome works. Look it up online. They're perfectly capable of controlling their actions (they're at least perfectly capable of controlling what they post online), and they can't be 'cured'. Regarding your previous post, this guy had bullied other people in a similar fashion, which clearly shows a criminal pattern. He deliberately went out to harass people, and looked for similar scenarios such as this. Even that YouTube video padib was talking abotu shows that this guy was no crazy person being controlled by voices he was hearing, but a cruel calculated individual.



"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)

"Duffy, of Grovelands Road, admitted two offences of "trolling"

I'm sorry but this is too funny.



---

Around the Network
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)

kowenicki said:
Kasz216 said:
sapphi_snake said:
Kasz216 said:

On the one hand, clearly this guy sucks.

On the other hand, this is yet another scary ass reason I wouldn't want to live in the UK.

It's quite literally the government tracking you down and locking you up in jail for something you said on the internet.

For why this happened, and also an opinion on why it shouldn't....

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/tobyyoung/100104832/loathsome-though-they-are-internet-trolls-should-not-be-sent-to-prison/

Considering the writer of that article, his opinion doesn't deserve much attention.

So you judge opinions by seeing who makes them rather then the merit of said arguements.

I mean, you honestly think it's GOOD that people are thrown into jail based on subjective criteria.

Let alone people born with a mental illness like the guy in this story.  (Who has Aspergers.)

Are you forgetting the US treatment of the UK guy who was a fairly patheric individual with aspergers that hacked the Pentagon from his bedroom?

You mean, a guy that committed a real crime that was like... literally the biggest hacking in of a military website, in the history of hacking, who's mental illness no doubt would of been considered in sentencing.

Vs this case where they didn't allow anything as a mitgating factor?

Besides which, seems hypocritical of the UK government, no?  Holding back people with the disease for facing trials with real crimes, yet sending someone to jail with the same disease for being "mean."



sapphi_snake said:
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).

So in otherwords.  It's your opinion that the vast majority of people in the media, most people who post on message boards and the like,  all should be thrown in jail for harrassment.

Including people like say... John Stewart from the Daily Show... or really even yourself.  What with as eaisly as you throw the word bigot around.

 

As for the view of a "psychologist".  Different things effect people in different ways.  Someone may be as hurt and stresse because you didn't like their dress, or disagreed with them.

I know people who were violently ill and upset just because somebody else didn't want to be their friend.  To the level of where you think he was worried about a cancer test result or something.

Because i'm a psychologist i know more then anybody how basing things off a subjective measure is a problem. 



although that guy was a dick,I think jail time is a little to excessive in my opinion. So,are we going to jail anybody that saids something really hurtful and uncalled for. Don't get me wrong,guy was a jerk,but I just think the punishment was alittle to excessive and he should have just been banned from social media sites altogether.



kowenicki said:
Kasz216 said:
 

What does the British government have to do with this guys sentencing....?  The British government has no power to over-rule an English court decision by a Judge.     And it isnt a crime if the man has no concept of a crime... you have much more faith in the US treatment of overseas defendents than I do.

The whole point is they feel someone with Aspergers would be treated differently and unfairly in the US.

If people with aspergers are being arrested and thrown in jail for the max penalty with no mitigating factors, for lesser crimes...

That destroys all credibility in the arguement.

Furhtemore, the government should be outraged at what happened and be speaking on this internet trolls behalf right? 

I've yet to hear any public outrage.