FA Cup FA Cup Final 22/23

[Golden Dr Otto]

I do hate it when commentators talk about the 'red half' and 'blue half' of Manchester, as if everyone in Manchester supports either Man Utd and Man City. I'm sure Wigan, Bolton, Salford, Rochdale, Stockport, Oldham fans might have something to say about that.

What an insult to Blackburn

 

[Golden Dr Otto]

You disagree with his arrest?

I find it offensive. It’s an abhorrent view.

I’m pretty sure I wouldn’t like him or choose to be near him.

But I will always defend the right of people to offend and for others to be offended.

I don’t think words should ever be a crime as I don’t know how you decide that

 

[bashamwonderland]

I find it offensive. It’s an abhorrent view.

I’m pretty sure I wouldn’t like him or choose to be near him.

But I will always defend the right of people to offend and for others to be offended.

I don’t think words should ever be a crime as I don’t know how you decide that

I'm minded to agree with this. Nobody is arguing with the fact that the shirt is twattish and the message truly horrendous. It's offensive and disgusting.

But to be arrested in a situation where the message doesn't incite an act of violence or physical harm?? Seems a bit much.

 

[werthersoriginal]

I'm minded to agree with this. Nobody is arguing with the fact that the shirt is twattish and the message truly horrendous. It's offensive and disgusting.

But to be arrested in a situation where the message doesn't incite an act of violence or physical harm?? Seems a bit much.

He was a Man U fan from Warwickshire, surely that’s enough?

 

[dickwalton1964]

You disagree with his arrest?

The fan deserves punishment, a very unwise and crass thing to do.

I find it offensive. It’s an abhorrent view.

I’m pretty sure I wouldn’t like him or choose to be near him.

But I will always defend the right of people to offend and for others to be offended.

I don’t think words should ever be a crime as I don’t know how you decide that

An unwise and crass move by that fan to wear that shirt. Don’t forget though that Liverpudlian’s were cheering the death of the Queen and in the past celebrated the death of Thatcher. Equally as disturbing, a life is a life no matter what your affiliation, footballing or politically. No one life should be judged on that basis. If they are going to cheer the death of someone then, I’m sorry, they don’t have any manoeuvrability if someone ‘celebrates’ the death of one of their own - however wrong it is.

 

[Essexyellows]

I find it offensive. It’s an abhorrent view.

I’m pretty sure I wouldn’t like him or choose to be near him.

But I will always defend the right of people to offend and for others to be offended.

I don’t think words should ever be a crime as I don’t know how you decide that

Exactly this.

Sticks & stones and all that...

 

[boogaloo]

What an insult to Blackburn

Blackburn is not technically part of Manchester. It's 21 mi (34 km) north-northwest of Manchester according to Wikipedia, hence why I didn't include them.

List of football clubs in Greater Manchester - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[MarkG]

Its very simple.

He was arrested for a public order offence for DISPLAYING threatening or abusive writing likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress.

If it wasn't DISPLAYING then there is no offence.

It has nothing to do with Thought Police, he and anyone can think what they like. But verbalise, or present those thoughts in writing, in public, and you are liable for arrest.

Reminds me of the Grenfell Tower "bonfire party".

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/grenfell-tower-effigy-burning-video-bonfire-paul-bussetti-b995177.html

I don't know if it's the same offence, but that was grossly offensive.

That's part of being a civilised society.

 

[Golden Dr Otto]

Blackburn is not technically part of Manchester. It's 21 mi (34 km) north-northwest of Manchester according to Wikipedia, hence why I didn't include them.

List of football clubs in Greater Manchester - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Is it a town or a village though ?

 

[Golden Dr Otto]

Its very simple.

He was arrested for a public order offence for DISPLAYING threatening or abusive writing likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress.

If it wasn't DISPLAYING then there is no offence.

It has nothing to do with Thought Police, he and anyone can think what they like. But verbalise, or present those thoughts in writing, in public, and you are liable for arrest.

I wouldn’t say it is very simple though. You can’t just write “it’s very simple” and think that makes it very simple.

The definition of threatening is a little easier but isn’t really relevant in this case. The definition of abusive appears to be incredibly loose and has in recent years incorporated offensiveness . Ultimately everything is offensive to someone. So then it’s arbitrary and in the eyes of the beholder.

But how much damage is done? One person has their feelings hurt. The consequence often is that the other person becomes more likely to be ostracized and alienated by others. Society has factors beyond the law to help resolve such matters.

I’ve seen you / others write things that would happily be deemed offensive by some kidlington residents or fosb affiliated members

Does it constitute abuse though ? Not in my eyes.

 

[werthersoriginal]

I wouldn’t say it is very simple though. You can’t just write “it’s very simple” and think that makes it very simple.

The definition of threatening is a little easier but isn’t really relevant in this case. The definition of abusive appears to be incredibly loose and has in recent years incorporated offensiveness . Ultimately everything is offensive to someone. So then it’s arbitrary and in the eyes of the beholder.

But how much damage is done? One person has their feelings hurt. The consequence often is that the other person becomes more likely to be ostracized and alienated by others. Society has factors beyond the law to help resolve such matters.

I’ve seen you / others write things that would happily be deemed offensive by some kidlington residents or fosb affiliated members

Does it constitute abuse though ? Not in my eyes.

I suspect arrests of this kind rather depend on who sees you, whether they complain, and whether there's a police officer around, but whether he's charged should depend on the sorts of things people have been charged for before - it's not arbitrary, but based on precedent. Childish insults aren't the same as 'offensive' things like this that celebrate death or constitute hate speech.

 

[Scotchegg]

I wouldn’t say it is very simple though. You can’t just write “it’s very simple” and think that makes it very simple.

The definition of threatening is a little easier but isn’t really relevant in this case. The definition of abusive appears to be incredibly loose and has in recent years incorporated offensiveness . Ultimately everything is offensive to someone. So then it’s arbitrary and in the eyes of the beholder.

But how much damage is done? One person has their feelings hurt. The consequence often is that the other person becomes more likely to be ostracized and alienated by others. Society has factors beyond the law to help resolve such matters.

I’ve seen you / others write things that would happily be deemed offensive by some kidlington residents or fosb affiliated members

Does it constitute abuse though ? Not in my eyes.

The simple reference was in direct response to Essex asking whether he would have been arrested if he had a jacket over the shirt.

In order for this offence to be valid then the writing in question needs to be displayed, and that was the point being made.

As for whether something is deemed as threatening or abusive is subjective. There is the caveat that this also be likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress. So it's not just about being offensive, it's about doing so in a way that could cause someone to be seriously affected as a result of what you have said or written. And that is why any charge needs to be tested in court to see if it exceeds these thresholds.

I do feel that many people are too easily offended, especially about things that have absolutely no impact on their lives or the lives of people they know. But equally there are also some who look to provoke a response by being offensive beyond all normal social boundaries. And there is a lot of grey in trying to police that.

But mocking the death of innocent football fans, including many children, is on a very different level to calling an environmental lobby group members Nimbies etc. So I'm not entirely sure what point you're looking to make.

 

[arthurturner]

It's not about regimes at all though, although that is a side effect. It would apply equally to someone from the UK bankrolling a team.

Or billionaires from Indonesia?

 

[arthurturner]

Would he have been arrested if it was raining and he had a coat on so nobody saw it? Still been made, still existed.......

If social media didn`t exist would anyone likely to be offended have even seen it?

Worlds gone to pot.

Ah, if social media didn’t exist. Bliss.

 

[Marked Ox]

Is it a town or a village though ?

Whatever it is, it's a shithole:


The guide said: “If you live here, I’m sorry for you – and if you haven’t ever been here, then stay away.


“[The] estates make Syria look calm, you can guarantee if you dare to walk down these downtrodden dogshit ridden estates (mind the needles), you will almost certainly spot the inhabitants walking freely in dressing gowns, fluffy slippers, undoubtedly pregnant, with a fag in their gob going to pick up another free prescription from the overly used clap clinic.


“Drug dealers, dole wasters, bums, guttersnipes, fallen women, young slappers and their steroid pumped teenage boyfriends. It’s a f*cking nightmare! A cross between ‘Shameless’ and the Star Wars canteen at best.”



And yes I have been there a number of times.


From:

England's top 10 'crap towns' according to poll - Fan Banter

The new season is very close and with fans planning which away days to go on, we’ve checked out the annual ‘crap towns’ poll which was voted on recently. At football matches, you will no doubt hear the shithole chant, and it seems some of these might fit that very statement… not according to us […]

fanbanter.co.uk

(And no I'm not being serious as it is lovely countryside around it)

 

[tonyw]

The simple reference was in direct response to Essex asking whether he would have been arrested if he had a jacket over the shirt.

In order for this offence to be valid then the writing in question needs to be displayed, and that was the point being made.

As for whether something is deemed as threatening or abusive is subjective. There is the caveat that this also be likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress. So it's not just about being offensive, it's about doing so in a way that could cause someone to be seriously affected as a result of what you have said or written. And that is why any charge needs to be tested in court to see if it exceeds these thresholds.

I do feel that many people are too easily offended, especially about things that have absolutely no impact on their lives or the lives of people they know. But equally there are also some who look to provoke a response by being offensive beyond all normal social boundaries. And there is a lot of grey in trying to police that.

But mocking the death of innocent football fans, including many children, is on a very different level to calling an environmental lobby group members Nimbies etc. So I'm not entirely sure what point you're looking to make.

I think you've just made the point yourself.

This guy has been arrested, charged and could be convicted and sentenced to up to six months in prison for an offense that you acknowledge is subjective and a grey area for policing.

Now, he's clearly a colossal t**t so hard to feel too much sympathy for him. But when you start arresting and potentially putting people in prison for saying or displaying offensive (but not threatening) words and/or slogans, it seems to me like you're starting down a very dark path.

Gives me a chance to roll out one of my all-time favourite quotes.....from Rowan Atkinson of all people:

It all points to the promotion of the idea that there should be a right not to be offended. But in my view the right to offend is far more important than any right not to be offended. The right to ridicule is far more important to society than any right not to be ridiculed because one in my view represents openness - and the other represents oppression”​

 

[werthersoriginal]

I think you've just made the point yourself.

This guy has been arrested, charged and could be convicted and sentenced to up to six months in prison for an offense that you acknowledge is subjective and a grey area for policing.

Now, he's clearly a colossal t**t so hard to feel too much sympathy for him. But when you start arresting and potentially putting people in prison for saying or displaying offensive (but not threatening) words and/or slogans, it seems to me like you're starting down a very dark path.

Gives me a chance to roll out one of my all-time favourite quotes.....from Rowan Atkinson of all people:

It all points to the promotion of the idea that there should be a right not to be offended. But in my view the right to offend is far more important than any right not to be offended. The right to ridicule is far more important to society than any right not to be ridiculed because one in my view represents openness - and the other represents oppression”​

I don’t think that’s right in this case. We have specific laws on hate speech , after all. I’m not sure this falls into that category but mocking the deaths of people who just happened to have come from a different town is a very different order of magnitude from a mere ‘edgy take’ or ‘banter’.

 

[tonyw]

I don’t think that’s right in this case. We have specific laws on hate speech , after all. I’m not sure this falls into that category but mocking the deaths of people who just happened to have come from a different town is a very different order of magnitude from a mere ‘edgy take’ or ‘banter’.

And my answer is where do you draw the line? And more importantly, who gets to draw it? Who gets to decide what speech is a little edgy but just about OK, and what is so offensive that the perpetrator needs to be locked up?

I guess the answer is the government, and that's pretty terrifying.

I would much rather live in a society that didn't attempt to criminally regulate offensive speech at all.

 

[werthersoriginal]

And my answer is where do you draw the line? And more importantly, who gets to draw it? Who gets to decide what speech is a little edgy but just about OK, and what is so offensive that the perpetrator needs to be locked up?

I guess the answer is the government, and that's pretty terrifying.

I would much rather live in a society that didn't attempt to criminally regulate offensive speech at all.

It's regulated by the legal system, on the basis of laws passed by the government, interpreted on the basis of what the notional 'reasonable person' would find acceptable. I suspect you wouldn't be so laissez faire in some situations - for example someone wearing a shirt saying 'Six million, not enough' in a Jewish area.

 

[Marked Ox]

It's regulated by the legal system, on the basis of laws passed by the government, interpreted on the basis of what the notional 'reasonable person' would find acceptable. I suspect you wouldn't be so laissez faire in some situations - for example someone wearing a shirt saying 'Six million, not enough' in a Jewish area.

Tbf, that legal system is currently involved in arresting people because they might do something like want to put up some placards tie themselves to something or give out rape alarms to stop sexual assaults to scare horses trained for load noises.