Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Twitter user sentenced to 150 hours of community service in UK

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

411–420 of 443 posts

Re: Twitter user sentenced to 150 hours of community service in UK

#411

Post by ibejoeb »

standardUser wrote: post #264
Traster wrote: post #208

There's something I find loathesome about this "Send a message" sentencing. What the judge has done is send a clear message, that he won't sentence you on the merits of the case but will sentence you to serve his own agenda. The only message this sends is that justice has failed. It's always completely transparent who exactly gets made an example of, and who gets off with a slap on the wrist. We'll spend months hunti…

The entire concept of "setting an example" seems like a bit of fascism that has snuck its way into liberal democracy.

I'd argue that "setting an example," or specific deterrence, has lessened in severity with the rise of liberal democracies. The notion is about as old as law itself. There was some pretty brutal stuff way back. Still have some big contemporary outliers like electrocution in some states in the US, but that's going away steadily.

Anyway, the notion of deterrence, in the United States, if you consider this a modern liberal democracy, is codified in the federal sentencing guidelines: https://www.ussc.gov/guidelines/2021-guidelines-manual/annot...

irrelevant technicality: I suppose setting an example could also be construed as general deterrence based on a instance of specific deterrence.

Re: Twitter user sentenced to 150 hours of community service in UK

#412

Post by siruncledrew »

The tweet is certainly bad taste and something that would be appalling if said out loud, however, this seems like a bit over-the-top judicial response to tweets.

Isn’t stuff like this why the ‘report’ function exists? Or couldn’t the gov just request a takedown / account suspension? Or the social pressure of responses to the tweet would create enough backlash…?

This just seems like an archaic way to patrol social media, which is basically a nebulous void.

On the other hand, I guess if you really need a lot more free public involvement in community service and picking up litter, then this law is the answer…

Re: Twitter user sentenced to 150 hours of community service in UK

#413

Post by hackernewsblows »

travisgriggs wrote: post #274
Traster wrote: post #208

There's something I find loathesome about this "Send a message" sentencing. What the judge has done is send a clear message, that he won't sentence you on the merits of the case but will sentence you to serve his own agenda. The only message this sends is that justice has failed. It's always completely transparent who exactly gets made an example of, and who gets off with a slap on the wrist. We'll spend months hunti…

There’s something I find holistically loathesome that a) other people read twitter at all, leading to b) it actually matters and has to fall under legal jurisdiction. If people moved on and quit reading twitter, this just wouldn’t matter.

No post body was provided.

Re: Twitter user sentenced to 150 hours of community service in UK

#414

Post by hackernewsblows »

Beldin wrote: post #272
rglover wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is exactly why "hate speech" laws are so dangerous. It gives carte blanche to the government to go after anyone who says anything any one person (or the government itself) might find offensive.

> This is exactly why "hate speech" laws are so dangerous. If you think any single example of a law being applied in a manner that is technically defensible but (arguably) morally wrong should rule out an entire category of laws - you'd have no laws left. My guess is that most laws are occasionally abused. The trick is to distinguish between those laws that invite it and those that don't.

No post body was provided.

Re: Twitter user sentenced to 150 hours of community service in UK

#415

Post by 2OEH8eoCRo0 »

encryptluks2 wrote: post #398
2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote: post #350

A bit steep but I like the idea of toxic individuals getting some fresh air and working with the community.

Funny, cause both political sides thinks the other base is toxic and so I guess when you are forced to take a train to a camp and do some outside work you won't mind so much.

No. I just think there might be a nugget of merit to this idea.

Re: Twitter user sentenced to 150 hours of community service in UK

#416

Post by xeromal »

jackweirdy wrote: post #16

The history of this law dates back to 1935, when it was designed to protect post office staff who ran telephone switchboards from being harassed by the public, and it that context, it makes sense. Of course in 21st century the law doesn't make sense as it isn't humans transmitting our messages any more Some legal commentary about its previous use: http://barristerblogger.com/2018/03/24/its-time-to-change-th... While…

Is it legislative debt if it is actively being used in a modern setting?

Not walking around with an ice cream cone in your back pocket is more what I think about when I think of legislative debt.

Re: Twitter user sentenced to 150 hours of community service in UK

#417

Post by thethimble »

bruhvinston wrote: post #329
standardUser wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The entire concept of "setting an example" seems like a bit of fascism that has snuck its way into liberal democracy.

I wouldn't attribute it to fascism, because the concept works in any social group and was used throughout history. Even Mao said something like "Punish one, educate millions." I think the true conflict is about the dignity of the individual. Is it permissible to do a disproportionate amount of harm to one person to bring about consequences that further the goal? I'd say no. And that also includes bringing less than a…

I think the whole purpose of punishment is to discourage others from committing the same crime - not to punish an individual for the sake of retribution.

If you think about it, retribution is pretty petty. It doesn’t accomplish anything and a civilized society should do away with it.

The only reasonable basis for punishment then is the “educate millions” rationale above. To the extent that it is effective in establishing rails for a stable society, I think it’s morally acceptable to do so.

You accurately summarized the crux of the argument: it’s all about your views on the dignity of the individual.

Re: Twitter user sentenced to 150 hours of community service in UK

#418

Post by endominus »

evocatus wrote: post #399
mlindner wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well "white privledge" IS racist. So that's already the case. Just some people don't consider it that way.

It can't be racist if you have no power [1]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prejudice_plus_power

This is just blatantly untrue. Some piss-poor unemployed KKK member yelling racial slurs at the TV during the 2012 election is still a racist, despite having infinitesmal power - especially institutional power! - compared to the person he is being racist towards. I doubt there's a single person who would doubt that. Would you?

Re: Twitter user sentenced to 150 hours of community service in UK

#419

Post by endominus »

refurb wrote: post #396
Pyramus wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, but it doesn't strengthen the argument. If society A says the speed limit is X and society B it's Y and society C it's infinite. What's the point that speed is objectively measurable?

You’re missing the point. Society A and society B won’t disagree on whether something is moving at 150km/hr.

Well, they might if a physicist gets involved and starts complaining that no one has defined their point of reference.

Re: Twitter user sentenced to 150 hours of community service in UK

#420

Post by voidr »

basisword wrote: post #13

I’m generally in favour of some limits on speech. I don’t think you should be able to tweet racist messages for example. It’s obviously very complicated and something people are going to argue a lot about. BUT this case has made me change my opinion. Things much worse than this are tweeted every day and this is the one that gets prosecuted. It’s blatantly politically motivated (‘national hero’, British soldier etc) a…

If you believe that people should be punished for being offensive, like making racist remarks, then I don't understand your issue here.

Just imagine if the deceased guy was your grandpa or someone you care about a lot, would you not feel hurt by that tweet?

Post reply on HN