Tough on trolls: UK internet abusers may face up to 2 years in jail


B00Mer
+2
#1
Tough on trolls: UK internet abusers may face up to 2 years in jail



Internet trolls could face two years behind bars if new tough legislation “to combat cruelty” is adopted, according to UK Justice Secretary Chris Grayling.

That’s four times the current six-month prison term and would proove the government’s zeal to “take a stand against a baying cyber-mob,” Grayling told The Daily Mail.

"These internet trolls are cowards who are poisoning our national life. No one would permit such venom in person, so there should be no place for it on social media. That is why we are determined to quadruple the current six-month sentence,” Justice Secretary added.



It comes days after TV presenter Chloe Madeley was abused online, an action which Grayling described as "crude and degrading."

Madeley received threats on the internet after she defended her mother Judy Finnigan's statement on a rape by footballer Ched Evans, which she said didn’t cause "bodily harm" and was "non-violent."

The presenter’s father spoke out against the trolling, saying that “prosecution awaits” the people who sent “sick rape threats” to his daughter.

Madeley herself said, “it needs to be accepted that physical threats should not fall under the 'freedom of speech' umbrella.”

“It should be seen as online terrorism and it should be illegal,” she added.

Currently, magistrate courts deal with online offenses under the Malicious Communications Act, but under the new law, serious cases could be passed on to higher crown courts. It would be an amendment to the Criminal Justice and Courts Bill.

Also, police would have more time to collect evidence for successful prosecution and cases of so-called “revenge porn”, when ex-lovers post compromising material.

In a recent internet abuse case, in September, UK citizen Peter Nunn was jailed for only 18 weeks for retweeting rape threats to MP Stella Creasy.

source: http://rt.com/uk/197200-trolls-inter...ampaign=chrome
 
Sal
#2
excellent!
 
Liberalman
#3
Bring in anti-hate laws like the ones in Canada

Current Publications: Law, justice and rights: Canadian Anti-hate Laws and Freedom of Expression
 
SLM
+4
#4  Top Rated Post
Great, so Blackleaf will be here even more then.

Knew I shoulda built that moat!
 
taxslave
+1
#5
Quote: Originally Posted by SLM View Post

Great, so Blackleaf will be here even more then.

Knew I shoulda built that moat!

Just report him to the briddish authorities. I'm sure they have someone in custody that they would like to punish by making him share a cell with blackie.
 
MHz
#6
How many have been jailed for the 6 months thing before this change, they don't define what they consider trolling.
 
SLM
+1
#7
Quote: Originally Posted by taxslave View Post

Just report him to the briddish authorities. I'm sure they have someone in custody that they would like to punish by making him share a cell with blackie.



Solitary confinement, bread and water, anything but that! That's cruel and unusual punishment!
 
taxslave
+2
#8
Quote: Originally Posted by SLM View Post



Solitary confinement, bread and water, anything but that! That's cruel and unusual punishment!

Bet they would never get a repeat offender.
 
SLM
+1
#9
Quote: Originally Posted by taxslave View Post

Bet they would never get a repeat offender.

You could have a point there.
 
MHz
+2
#10
This place would look like a desert. lol
 
CDNBear
+1
#11
Quote: Originally Posted by MHz View Post

This place would look like a desert. lol

Only because you couldn't see it from your cell.
 
MHz
#12
Not a real fan of physics are you?
 
CDNBear
#13
Quote: Originally Posted by MHz View Post

Not a real fan of physics are you?

Not a real fan of getting the point are you?
 
Cannuck
+2
#14
Quote: Originally Posted by MHz View Post

This place would look like a desert. lol

Yes, the personal attacks are considerable here. There would be quite a few members that would no longer be here if such a law came into effect. For me, I don't say anything to anybody here that I wouldn't be willing to say to them if they were standing in front of me. I know the maturity level would increase tremendously if everybody behaved that way but from my perspective, the entertainment value would diminish.
 
lone wolf
+4
#15
Careful you don't step in that
 
CDNBear
+1
#16
Quote: Originally Posted by Cannuck View Post

Yes, the personal attacks are considerable here. There would be quite a few members that would no longer be here if such a law came into effect. For me, I don't say anything to anybody here that I wouldn't be willing to say to them if they were standing in front of me. I know the maturity level would increase tremendously if everybody behaved that way but from my perspective, the entertainment value would diminish.

That's some of your finest dishonesty, to date.
 
damngrumpy
+1
#17
I don't think the law is intended for a forum discussion board we all agree on what the rules are
and when it reaches a certain point there is a minimum standard acceptable so we in fact have
an acceptance rule to govern ourselves. The problem is we have a medium that is open in an
open society and we have a minimum number of people who don't share the ideals of common
decency and good manners. The internet is an all about ME to some people.Cyber Bullying is
not even considered as a no no to some. Verbal abuse of a magnitude of ten on the Richter Scale
for some is a natural thing. Threatening peoples lives is already an offense under the law.
Society has a flaw or two in recent years. One instead of punishing people with existing laws the
legislators have the urge to pass new laws to cover the ones they can't enforce just to look like
they are doing something. The other flaw is legislators and those in senior power positions want
to punish everyone instead of just punishing those who commit the misdeeds.
In the end we have a legal system that is crushed by the weight of its own laws and nothing
happens but everyone feels better. The other side of the coin is debate in an open society is stunted
and the problem goes under ground, the citizens become disgruntled and human progress never
evolves like it should. In a democracy even the ignorant are entitled to their say. In s society where
expression is supressed we even elect some people without knowing how ignorant they are until its
too late. That it the problem as well it gives some safe harbor until they are in a position to really
express their ignorance
 
Twila
#18
Quote:

No one would permit such venom in person, so there should be no place for it on social media.

Permit...such a polite word. In the real world they'd be knocked about the head for spewing.
 
Cannuck
+2
#19
Quote: Originally Posted by damngrumpy View Post

I don't think the law is intended for a forum discussion board we all agree on what the rules are
.....

But I don't think we all agree on what the rules are. Granted, the forum does have a list but it is selectively enforced so I would hardly call them rules if such a law ever came into effect here.
 
MHz
#20
Quote: Originally Posted by Cannuck View Post

Yes, the personal attacks are considerable here. There would be quite a few members that would no longer be here if such a law came into effect. For me, I don't say anything to anybody here that I wouldn't be willing to say to them if they were standing in front of me. I know the maturity level would increase tremendously if everybody behaved that way but from my perspective, the entertainment value would diminish.

That is sensible, the message is the same but the delivery is toned down. Perhaps there should be a thread for one liners but then most of the threads would have big holes in them
 
CDNBear
#21
Quote: Originally Posted by Cannuck View Post

But I don't think we all agree on what the rules are. Granted, the forum does have a list but it is selectively enforced so I would hardly call them rules if such a law ever came into effect here.

They're selectively enforced?

When was the last time you were selectively enforced upon for trolling everyone?

Last I heard, you were warned about spam.

So who's getting away with spam these day?
 
Cannuck
+2
#22
Quote: Originally Posted by MHz View Post

That is sensible, the message is the same but the delivery is toned down. Perhaps there should be a thread for one liners but then most of the threads would have big holes in them

I think the big difference is in attacking an individual as opposed to attacking an idea or a behaviour.

For example, one member here made a statement that was clearly false and was proven false. That member has followed me from thread to thread calling me names. I don't know the member personally. He may be an immature individual, he may not be. There is no question that his actions are immature. I think you can condemn the action and not the individual. At some point, if the actions continue, the individual defines him/herself.
 
CDNBear
#23
Quote: Originally Posted by Cannuck View Post

I think the big difference is in attacking an individual as opposed to attacking an idea or a behaviour.

For example, one member here made a statement that was clearly false and was proven false. That member has followed me from thread to thread calling me names. I don't know the member personally. He may be an immature individual, he may not be. There is no question that his actions are immature. I think you can condemn the action and not the individual. At some point, if the actions continue, the individual defines him/herself.

More of your patented dishonesty, lolz.

The only people that buy it, are people who are as dishonest as you.
 
MHz
+2
#24
The following from thread to thread with the same topic is a dead giveaway.
 
CDNBear
#25
Quote: Originally Posted by MHz View Post

The following from thread to thread with the same topic is a dead giveaway.

I bet the fact that you just described yourself is lost on you.

And will be sycophantically adored by equally dishonest members.

The irony is palpable.
 
Twila
+4
#26
I wonder if some members would be willing to take their disagreements to the steel cage?

it's getting so that many threads are dipping into the same arguements between the same members. It's making it hard to avoid.
 
CDNBear
#27
Quote: Originally Posted by Twila View Post

I wonder if some members would be willing to take their disagreements to the steel cage?

it's getting so that many threads are dipping into the same arguements between the same members. It's making it hard to avoid.

I stand guilty of such things. But then again, I'm actually honest and bright enough to know my part.

The dishonest posts above by others, and the equally dishonest that praise it, only betray themselves. They're transparent to most.

Case in point

Case in point
Last edited by CDNBear; Oct 19th, 2014 at 11:38 AM..
 
MHz
#28
You could help me out by putting anything to do with God or the Mid-East in there as that is where it would end up eventually, even without the troll posts. Not a word of a lie, on one Christian themed site my views (already posted here) were so against the pre-trib rapture that I had one section that I could post in and that was it. The owner didn't want me to 'contaminate' the rest of the board so it was basically the two of use chatting for about two years in all. Yes I eventually got banned when I asked a mod when the last time she read anything in the Bible that caused her to have an emotion. I don't object to the ban and most parts had been well gone over by then anyway but I always was 'puzzled' why forum bans are always 'for life'.
 
Cannuck
+1
#29
Quote: Originally Posted by CDNBear View Post

I stand guilty of such things.

I think most of us are guilty of it at times. There difference is with some folks, that's all they have.
 
CDNBear
#30
Quote: Originally Posted by Cannuck View Post

I think most of us are guilty of it at times. There difference is with some folks, that's all they have.

I'm well aware that, that is all you have.