How did the riots spread to so many disparate areas? Copycat activity based on seeing riots occur on TV. So, sure, turn off Twitter and Facebook for a while, but be sure to turn off Sky News and BBC News at the same time, since that's where people are seeing the most sensational videos that encourage people to join in. Or.. perhaps just leave it as is, eh?
In wake of riots, British PM proposes social media ban
71–80 of 146 posts
Re: In wake of riots, British PM proposes social media ban
#72Makes about as much sense as groping millions of passengers before they fly and take away their water bottles because a dozen people managed to take over a plane.
Re: In wake of riots, British PM proposes social media ban
#73Earlier quoted context omitted.
in Libya they had protestors, in the UK they have rioters and mobs In Libya, they also had rioters and mobs, and in the UK, they also have protestors.
There is a distinction to be made here. Libya had a large proportion of protestors in comparison to rioters. More importantly, the motivation was solidly political. There was a clear goal and demand for greater freedom. In contrast, the UK rioters that spawned out of the initial protest was nothing more than an assortment of various criminal groups that used a political excuse to attack and rob ordinary citizens.
I don't know why you're being voted down. I'm in the UK and you're right. If the rioting was being spun as being somehow politically motivated in non British media, that's wrong. There were no political goals here. People wanted new trainers and TVs and a fun night out getting chased by the cops.
Re: In wake of riots, British PM proposes social media ban
#74> when people are using social media for violence, we need to stop them. Is this the same Cameron who criticized Libya when they shut off the Internet against what, in their view, were violent protesters?
Not that I agree with Cameron, but here are some differences.
- Protesting is legal in the UK and happens regularly without undue interference by the police.
- The riots in the UK mainly consisted of crimes committed against citizens so they were clearly a policing issue.
- They're not proposing shutting of the internet, just the principal vectors used to organise riots.
- The rioters were not subject to a violent response by the authorities. It would have been straight forward to use rubber bullets against rioters but the police were not keen to escalate things.
Re: In wake of riots, British PM proposes social media ban
#75Earlier quoted context omitted.
What was the root underlying cause for the riot? It wasn't plenty of jobs and a bright future. Edit: mibbit has deleted his comments.
[deleted]
I never said that criminals should be offered a bright future and a job.
Your reply sidesteps my question.
You talk about a crappy underclass, thugs and criminal gangs: Why is there a crappy underclass? Why are there thugs and criminal gangs? Why is there a group of people that thinks it's okay to loot? What is the reason that this group exists, what is the _underlying_cause_ for this?
Re: In wake of riots, British PM proposes social media ban
#76It won't make any difference. A lot of the rioters had PMRs as do the police. Even ground.
Re: In wake of riots, British PM proposes social media ban
#77"free flow of information can sometimes be a problem" — I never thought I'd hear these words from a British PM.
Yeah, wow, I'm dumbfounded.
If the British government follows through with this, the rioters will actually have a new reason to riot: freedom of speech.
Re: In wake of riots, British PM proposes social media ban
#78Earlier quoted context omitted.
[deleted]
I never said that criminals should be offered a bright future and a job. Your reply sidesteps my question. You talk about a crappy underclass, thugs and criminal gangs: Why is there a crappy underclass? Why are there thugs and criminal gangs? Why is there a group of people that thinks it's okay to loot? What is the reason that this group exists, what is the _underlying_cause_ for this?
[deleted]
Re: In wake of riots, British PM proposes social media ban
#79"Free speech is central to our democracy, but so is public safety and security,"
There is no other word for this than stupid. Free speech is not in opposition to security. You can have free speech and safety. Unless you're too stupid to figure out how.
Re: In wake of riots, British PM proposes social media ban
#80Earlier quoted context omitted.
I never said that criminals should be offered a bright future and a job. Your reply sidesteps my question. You talk about a crappy underclass, thugs and criminal gangs: Why is there a crappy underclass? Why are there thugs and criminal gangs? Why is there a group of people that thinks it's okay to loot? What is the reason that this group exists, what is the _underlying_cause_ for this?
[deleted]
I think that poor parenting is to blame, partly. We can argue how much it is to blame another time. Sticking with parenting:
I don't think saying "[bad parenting] will always exist" is constructive or helpful. What's important is that there is less bad parenting over time.
So if it would be a good thing to have better parenting the question becomes what would have to be done for this to happen?