Jump to content
Sturgeon's House

The UK Brave Space For Shitposting and Other Opinions Thread


Recommended Posts

I love how some judge in the tin-horn, Third World shithole of Great Britain thought that he could disappear a British subject and then force the media to not report the fact that he was personally ordering a British subject to be disappeared. I guess he forgot he didn't live in East Germany. Yet. 

 

I love how the British legal system is more concerned about the "rights" of 49 Islamic fundamentalists who are being tried for grooming and raping 700 women and children than the freedom of the press. 

 

And in any FREE country, you have the right to stand in a public street and film what is going on outside of a court house. And if that includes filming 49 accused rapists who are walking on a public street to that court house, then so be it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

& I love how the British judicial system doesn't let racist morons prejudice a trial, thus offering an easy route to appeal (at not inconsiderable expense to the taxpayer) for 49 Islamic fundamentalists, who are being tried for grooming and raping 700 women and children.

 

Why not try refusing an improper order from one of your law enforcement officers and then tell me all about how fucking free you are.....Assuming you survive the experience of course.  :)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Donward said:

I love how some judge in the tin-horn, Third World shithole of Great Britain

 

Coming from a septic that is priceless.....Your cities are in ruins and you are the slaves of your police & corporations, to quote George Carlin, 'They own you!':

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:

Why not try refusing an improper order from one of your law enforcement officers and then tell me all about how fucking free you are.....Assuming you survive the experience of course.  :)

 

 

 

You do understand that there is a difference between a law enforcement officer giving an improper order and a law enforcement officer giving an improper order, the media being ordered to not report it and your fellow subjects telling you that you deserved it for stepping out of line.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, not being allowed to report on the identities of persons standing trial until after the verdict is actually pretty common. You know, in case it turns out that the accused is not, in fact, a rapist or whatever and you've just spend the last year publically vilifying an innocent person.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Toxn said:

Yeah, not being allowed to report on the identities of persons standing trial until after the verdict is actually pretty common. You know, in case it turns out that the accused is not, in fact, a rapist or whatever and you've just spend the last year publically vilifying an innocent person.

Here in Norway we have a famous case of a woman going on a nacht (after party, party) with 2-3 other guys and getting high on MDMA.  They had intercourse, and the woman later accused them of rape. This case got huge media coverage. The media and the people siding with the woman.  The court found the men not guilty however. The woman did not like the verdict and doxed the men. This caused them to receive a massive wave of harassment and being forced to isolate themselves. They got their life ruined. 

Which is why the identity of the person is protected. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Xoon said:

Here in Norway we have a famous case of a woman going on a nacht (after party, party) with 2-3 other guys and getting high on MDMA.  They had intercourse, and the woman later accused them of rape. This case got huge media coverage. The media and the people siding with the woman.  The court found the men not guilty however. The woman did not like the verdict and doxed the men. This caused them to receive a massive wave of harassment and being forced to isolate themselves. They got their life ruined. 

Which is why the identity of the person is protected. 

 

Except if they're muslim of course :rolleyes:.

 

For serious though; the principle is broadly applicable enough that I can't imagine that the US doesn't have something similar. People from the US who actually know something about the law can weigh in on that front.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quick clarification of why Robinson was arrested & charged (swiped from the Beeb, but it is accurate):

 

The law on contempt is set out in case law and the 1981 Contempt of Court Act.

 

 

It sets out the key areas and broad principles of what will amount to contempt. They include:

  • Publishing anything that creates a substantial risk of seriously prejudicing "active" criminal proceedings. Proceedings are 'active' when a suspect is arrested
  • Bringing into a court building a device for recording sound
  • Breaching the confidentiality of the jury's deliberations

Taking photographs or film in a court building is capable of being a contempt of court, as Tommy Robinson found out.

And breaching a court order or undertakings given to the court can also amount to contempt.

 

10 hours ago, Sturgeon said:

oh my god squarehead, your country is covered in cctv cameras and you need a license to own a tv don't even pretend like you're free

 

What percentage do you think are actually functional & monitored.....You might be surprised?  ;)

 

Frankly CCTV doesn't bother me in the slightest, simply because they have had no negative effect on my life whatsoever. One of my mates makes his living in that field though, so there's definitely some up-sides on that front.  I've recently discussed with my neighbours the idea of installing a low-light motion-tracking TV with a shared feed, to over-watch the area between our properties.  Since the police asked to mount one of their CCTV systems on one of our office buildings the sort of petty vandalism we suffered on a regular basis has declined massively.  I just feel so oppressed.  :rolleyes:

 

The TV license is a subsidy to the BBC and TBH it is one I object to rather strongly.

 

9 hours ago, Ramlaen said:

 

You do understand that there is a difference between a law enforcement officer giving an improper order and a law enforcement officer giving an improper order, the media being ordered to not report it and your fellow subjects telling you that you deserved it for stepping out of line.

 

There's a much bigger difference IMHO.....In the US you will very likely end up dead, in the UK not so much.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Toxn said:

Except if they're muslim of course :rolleyes:.

 

For serious though; the principle is broadly applicable enough that I can't imagine that the US doesn't have something similar. People from the US who actually know something about the law can weigh in on that front.

 

Doxxing in the general sense is legal in the US, unless the intent is to harass or harm.

 

https://securityaffairs.co/wordpress/56841/laws-and-regulations/trolling-doxing-cyberstalking-cybercrime-law.html



Posting personal information publicly with the intent to shame, defame, harass or endanger is illegal. It places the doxed individual in a potentially dangerous situation. The federal law often utilized to address doxing is 18 U.S.C. § 2261A:

“Title 18, United States Code, Section 2261A is the federal stalking statute. Section

2261A(1) covers in-person stalking and Section 2261A(2) covers cyberstalking— stalking that occurs using Internet or telephones—as well as stalking that occurs using the mail. Section 2261(2), originally enacted as part of the Violence Against Women Act of 2005, has two main provisions—Subsections (A) and (B):
  • Both provisions require that the defendant act with the intent to kill, injure, harass, intimidate, or place under surveillance with intent to kill, injure, harass, or intimidate another person.
  • Both provisions also require the use of the mail, any interactive computer service or electronic communication service or electronic communication system of interstate commerce, or any other facility of interstate or foreign commerce. Usually, this element is met with the use of the Internet.
  • Both provisions also require that the defendant engaged in a course of conduct, meaning more than one act. Subsection (A) further requires that the course of conduct places the victim in reasonable fear of the death of, or serious bodily injury to, the victim, the victim’s spouse or intimate partner, or to an immediate family member of the victim. Subsection (B) requires instead that the course of conduct causes, attempts to cause, or would be reasonably expected to cause substantial emotional distress to the victim or the victim’s immediate family.”

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had presumed that was what we were about here, stating our respective opinions?

 

I'd love to give you mine on the blunt knife thing, but I can't quite find adequate words at the moment.  ;)

 

PS - Actually, I don't need to, Meplat nailed it exactly:

 

15 minutes ago, Meplat said:

So it seems, this judge has someone else doing his cooking. Or he really likes microwave meals.

 

It's the former.

 

Rich pricks and their total social-disconnect are as big a problem for us as they are for you.....Mao had the answer IMHO (But Alabama 3 express it better):

 

 

Of course, you guys are rather better equipped on that front than we are.....Maybe you should lead by example?  It's my belief that this is exactly why your founding fathers enshrined the right to bear arms (and why our government restricts it).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Sturgeon said:

squarehead's depth of denial is reaching marianas trench levels

Or he's reacting like anyone would react when some other tribe drags him out of his tent to hoot at him about how his tribe is evil and dumb.

 

This is a prickish thread started specifically to bait people from the UK, whose participants are overwhelmingly people from the US sucking their own dicks about how Squarehead's homeland is a giant funny-accented prison.

 

Any sociologist would tell you that Squarehead being defensive is the normal and expected reaction a human being would have to this sort of thing. Hell, it's your collective reaction any time one of us outsiders dares to make fun of your country's manifold ridiculousnesses.

 

So ease off maybe, if you want to actually convince the man of anything. Or, if the intent is just to rub his face in things, don't expect him to thank you for it and come around to your point of view.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Toxn said:

Or he's reacting like anyone would react when some other tribe drags him out of his tent to hoot at him about how his tribe is evil and dumb.

 

This is a prickish thread started specifically to bait people from the UK, whose participants are overwhelmingly people from the US sucking their own dicks about how Squarehead's homeland is a giant funny-accented prison.

 

Any sociologist would tell you that Squarehead being defensive is the normal and expected reaction a human being would have to this sort of thing. Hell, it's your collective reaction any time one of us outsiders dares to make fun of your country's manifold ridiculousnesses.

 

So ease off maybe, if you want to actually convince the man of anything. Or, if the intent is just to rub his face in things, don't expect him to thank you for it and come around to your point of view.

 

From what I can see, Squarehead is perfectly capable of giving as good as he gets.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Toxn said:

This is a prickish thread started specifically to bait people from the UK, whose participants are overwhelmingly people from the US sucking their own dicks about how Squarehead's homeland is a giant funny-accented prison.

 

Also, let's get real here: The UK government is acting absolutely insane on a regular basis. The thing with Tommy Robinson is a blatant example of an abuse of a rule that is intended to keep trials unbiased and fair. Things like this are happening all the time in the UK, and it's worth having a thread for that. This thread should not be for mocking individuals (excluding public figures) from the UK - but what any government or person in a government does is fair game. If Squarehead or anyone else wants to change people's minds about some of these things, explain why they are reasonable in a way we can understand, that's fine. He's welcome to try. But if his arguments are "lol our gov't is shit at maintaining their public surveillance, so we're totes free mate" then yeah, we're gonna laugh a bit at that. Because having government surveillance cameras everywhere is the definition of a police state. Blatant gag orders on the press issued by fiat of tinpot judges is the definition of abuse of power. That's the way it looks from the outside.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...