Unbelievable

[Captain...]

7 minutes ago, Carl the Llama said:

How so?

For me it depends if they shared it publicly themselves or it got shared by someone they sent it to privately.

 

You film something like this to broadcast publicly then it is a crime. If you have a private, albeit completely sick, joke then it isn’t.

[urban.spaceman]

As far as I can see it the only actual law that has been broken is a breach of these ****’s privacy - a private video in a private WhatsApp group of a bunch of ***** acting like ***** in a private garden. People are *****. But they were being ***** privately and surely, people have a right to be a ****?

 

If they’d done this outside the actual tower then of course that would have been a criminal act as there is clear intent to insult. The whole alleged rise in supposed hate crime/hate speech troubles me that intent and context are becoming even less relevant and people’s supposed hurt feelings are being prioritised over actual criminal activity,

 

If we’re going to start criminalising people for being a twat then a lot of people on here will be in trouble. Naming no names.

[Carl the Llama]

26 minutes ago, urban.spaceman said:

As far as I can see it the only actual law that has been broken is a breach of these ****’s privacy - a private video in a private WhatsApp group of a bunch of ***** acting like ***** in a private garden. People are *****. But they were being ***** privately and surely, people have a right to be a ****?

 

If they’d done this outside the actual tower then of course that would have been a criminal act as there is clear intent to insult. The whole alleged rise in supposed hate crime/hate speech troubles me that intent and context are becoming even less relevant and people’s supposed hurt feelings are being prioritised over actual criminal activity,

 

If we’re going to start criminalising people for being a twat then a lot of people on here will be in trouble. Naming no names.

This is basically how I interpret it.

 

35 minutes ago, Captain... said:

For me it depends if they shared it publicly themselves or it got shared by someone they sent it to privately.

 

You film something like this to broadcast publicly then it is a crime. If you have a private, albeit completely sick, joke then it isn’t.

Tbh I'm not even convinced that airing it publicly should be prosecutable. For me people should be allowed to make whatever sick jokes they like and suffer the social consequences that come with them.  Speech should be free with the only exceptions being inciting violence or disclosing private information without consent.

[AKCJ]

1 hour ago, Carl the Llama said:

How so?

Burning a mock-up of the Grenfell Towers complete with people wearing hijabs goes beyond "being a dickhead".

 

An arrest under Section 4a of the Public Order is warranted. I suspect we'll see a fine.

 

Freedom of speech is a valuable asset, but it doesn't cover your arse when you've posted a clearly alarming and distressing video with the intent to cause insult on social media.

 

[AKCJ]

23 minutes ago, Carl the Llama said:

Tbh I'm not even convinced that airing it publicly should be prosecutable. For me people should be allowed to make whatever sick jokes they like and suffer the social consequences that come with them.  Speech should be free with the only exceptions being inciting violence or disclosing private information without consent.

Freedom of speech doesn't absolve you of the consequences of the law.

[oakman]

It was in incredibly bad taste but I think the clamouring for them to be arrested is over the top. Lewes Bonfire night burnt effigies of Theresa May & Boris Johnson and they were universally applauded for it.

[urban.spaceman]

35 minutes ago, AKCJ said:

Burning a mock-up of the Grenfell Towers complete with people wearing hijabs goes beyond "being a dickhead".

 

An arrest under Section 4a of the Public Order is warranted. I suspect we'll see a fine.

 

Freedom of speech is a valuable asset, but it doesn't cover your arse when you've posted a clearly alarming and distressing video with the intent to cause insult on social media.

 

Which only applies to the person who posted the video in the first place, not the people who made the effigy and burnt it. And the person who posted the video took it from a private WhatsApp group with the intent on causing an outrage. 

[Carl the Llama]

35 minutes ago, AKCJ said:

Freedom of speech doesn't absolve you of the consequences of the law.

Of course not, my argument is that there shouldn't be legal grounds for prosecution of this behaviour within our laws because I believe it restricts our free speech too much.  It's like the Nazi pug situation all over again where that unfunny Scottish edge lord got taken to court and fined over an obvious joke video.

[StanSP]

5 hours ago, lifted*fox said:

correct me if I'm wrong, which I may well be - but there still haven't been any arrests in connection with the fire itself; in terms of those responsible for the cost/corner-cutting that lead to the purposeful installation of insulation that isn't up to fire safety standards?

 

a little bit ironic that we're arresting people for what is a bit of a sick joke but we don't seem to be interested in arresting those responsible for the deaths of many people in the fire.

just because there are no arrests made (yet), doesnt' mean there's no interest in doing so or that no work has gone in to finding out who is ultimately responsible.

 

Isn't the official investigation still ongoing anyway?

[Guest Col city fan]

I genuinely believe that ‘society’ is becoming ever more bizarre and possibly ‘sick’.

Moral values are just disappearing in a country where social media is enabling those who wish to abuse it, to post whatever they want, video whatever they want and to carry out quite ridiculous acts in the name of ‘fun’

This is why the reaction to Vichai’s death was so heartwarming. It demonstrated that there is still warmth and altruism amongst people who genuinely wished to mourn the loss of a great man. 

[lifted*fox]

Just now, StanSP said:

just because there are no arrests made (yet), doesnt' mean there's no interest in doing so or that no work has gone in to finding out who is ultimately responsible.

 

 Isn't the official investigation still ongoing anyway?

 

if by ongoing you mean being quietly swept under the carpet made up of other abhorrent stuff this government is currently doing then yes, it's still ongoing. 

[lifted*fox]

and I'm sorry, but it's been what, a day or some shit and they've already found and arrested people for burning a cardboard-****ing-box that looks like the Grenfell Tower.

 

we're now... what? 18 months down the line and they haven't found anyone responsible for the actual Grenfell Tower fire? fvcking, as if. 

 

if 10 Downing Street burnt down due to arson / negligence you can bet your ****ing bottom dollar that someone would be caught within days. 

 

nobody has been charged - for arson, for negligence, for ANYTHING for Grenfell Tower and mark my words - they won't be. why? because it was a building full of mostly poor, ethnic people and this government just does not care enough for justice to potentially put white, privileged council members, construction managers, etc. in jail for that.

 

I'd imagine people high-up are only up in arms about this bonfire video because it's bringing Grenfell back to the forefront of people's minds and they probably worry someone will be like 'hang on a second, did anything happen with that?!'

[Benguin]

Sick joke but joke nonetheless, witch hunt society does my head in.

[Claridge]

4 minutes ago, Benguin said:

Sick joke but joke nonetheless, witch hunt society does my head in.

I agree,but these people are that stupid that I can't find much sympathy for them.

[lifted*fox]

stupid people have always existed. 

 

people always did stupid shit like this.

 

unfortunately social media has given stupid people a platform.

 

in the past we never had to see this dumb shit because stupid people hung about in stupid circles - the only way you came across such bullshit was if you witnessed it first hand - and you were most likely a stupid person as well. 

 

same with racism, homophobia, etc. it's always been there but none of the rest of us had to suffer it because there wasn't a platform. 

 

for all the good it's done, social media will be the downfall of society. 

[urban.spaceman]

 

[Captain...]

4 hours ago, Carl the Llama said:

This is basically how I interpret it.

 

Tbh I'm not even convinced that airing it publicly should be prosecutable. For me people should be allowed to make whatever sick jokes they like and suffer the social consequences that come with them.  Speech should be free with the only exceptions being inciting violence or disclosing private information without consent.

Ok if it had been filmed and posted on a Grenfell survivors Facebook page, then I would say it is crime as it is deliberately intending to provoke. If it had been posted somewhere where it could reasonably assumed it would be seen by relatives of victims or survivors then also a crime. If they shared it in a private group and as I believe happened here someone else shared it and n Twitter then no making the video is not a crime but arguably sharing it publicly was as it was doing no harm to anyone and now it is front page news causing distress to many.

[DANGEROUS TIGER]

It was a disgusting thing to do. How very callous of those responsible

[Fox92]

People doing stuff for attention on social media. Place is full of them.

[Wymsey]

If any of their family/friends etc were caught in a fire situation in their own lives and it affected them badly, no doubt these people would never have done such a thing.

 

Quite obviously a sheer lack of remorse to the victims and empathy to those that had also been caught in the tradegy but actually survived.

[Voll Blau]

5 hours ago, oakman said:

It was in incredibly bad taste but I think the clamouring for them to be arrested is over the top. Lewes Bonfire night burnt effigies of Theresa May & Boris Johnson and they were universally applauded for it.

The two people you mention are public figures who know what they're getting into when they sign up for the job - having the piss taken out of you like that comes with the territory. Plus, neither of them have actually burned to death in a fire.

 

Agree that getting the law involved id a bit much though. Would imagine the divs will become complete social pariahs, which is punishment enough.

[oakman]

18 minutes ago, Voll Blau said:

The two people you mention are public figures who know what they're getting into when they sign up for the job - having the piss taken out of you like that comes with the territory. Plus, neither of them have actually burned to death in a fire.

 

Agree that getting the law involved id a bit much though. Would imagine the divs will become complete social pariahs, which is punishment enough.

I dislike both of them intensely but I don't think any MP thinks having effigies of them burnt is part of the job they sign up for. My comment was more about the police response to the video rather than the Grenfell fire itself.

[Trav Le Bleu]

7 hours ago, Carl the Llama said:

This is basically how I interpret it.

 

Tbh I'm not even convinced that airing it publicly should be prosecutable. For me people should be allowed to make whatever sick jokes they like and suffer the social consequences that come with them.  Speech should be free with the only exceptions being inciting violence or disclosing private information without consent.

Like Lord Hain did about Phillip Green?

[Carl the Llama]

1 minute ago, Trav Le Bleu said:

Like Lord Hain did about Phillip Green?

Tbf it would have been illegal if he wasn't a Lord so technically yeah, I guess.

[Trav Le Bleu]

15 minutes ago, Carl the Llama said:

Tbf it would have been illegal if he wasn't a Lord so technically yeah, I guess.

Nah, it shouldn't be illegal to speculate about someone, just cos they have money.