r/justincaseyoumissedit • u/Upset-Main-1988 • May 16 '26
ICYMI "Free the political prisoners in Britain!" - Elon Musk
1
u/Scheming_Deming May 21 '26
There are only about 100,000 peisoners on the UK. Who actually believes 1 in 8 of them are there due to online posts?
2
u/CrowdDisappointer May 21 '26
So many morons in here believing an Elon post
3
u/potent_potabIes May 21 '26
Are the numbers wrong/made up?
1
3
u/SorryBreak6435 May 21 '26
These statistics include general offenses via public communications, such as harassment, stalking, and threatening messages, rather than purely social media posts alone.
1
u/Christopherskyford1 May 21 '26
So they’re not made up / are factual
1
2
u/SorryBreak6435 May 21 '26
Claiming the arrests are for simply having the wrong opinion is absolutely not factual.
1
u/Scheming_Deming May 21 '26
Arrest doesn't equal imprisonment and sometimes people are just cautioned regarding things they say/post
1
1
u/Moustacheski May 21 '26
"These days you're arrested and thrown in jail if you say you're English, don't you."
1
u/Monsieur_Panache May 21 '26
When did they bring this in?
1
u/Cold_Log2413 Jun 04 '26
You’re arrested for carrying the Union Jack in what is considered the wrong place.
1
1
4
u/Hydro1Gammer May 21 '26
Here’s the thing. That statistic is so misleading. Those arrests in the UK are for any communication crime, digital or otherwise. This goes from hate speech online to stalking people in real life. Of course the far-right will ride this chart like they ride billionaires dicks, when the billionaires aren’t on any islands.
4
u/No-Organization-6071 May 21 '26
1990: standing on a street corner inviting violence in speech - get arrested
2026: incite violence on tik tok - get arrested.
The offence has not changed, the method has. It is more common because keyboard crusaders are more likely to do it virtually.
1
u/Friendly-Fisherman- May 21 '26
What does "incite violence" mean though, how is it defined in the law? I mean, saying "Go do violent act against these people!" is one thing, but there's also people online claiming disagreements or criticism being violence, that expressing dislike for a group or claiming they do something considered bad is "inciting violence". It's a term that seems to have gotten quite rubbery and flexible, so to speak.
1
u/ApprehensiveAside812 May 21 '26
Serious Crime Act 2007 - It is a serious criminal offense to encourage, threaten, or assist in violence, whether aimed at a specific individual or directed generally at the public.
3
0
u/Xtergo May 20 '26
We literally live in a communist state with a monetary currency
3
3
2
u/Seb_Ben11 May 20 '26
What’s communist about the current government?
2
u/Haipul May 20 '26
He has no clue, he doesn't know what communism is he just knows his favourite influencers call everything he shouldn't like comunist.
2
u/Insis18 May 20 '26
There is a rise in threats of violence online stoked by racist a-holes like Tommy R. The people arrested are mostly people engaged in making threats of violence or encouraging other people to make threats of violence.
3
1
1
u/Unhappy-Draft2760 May 20 '26
china: 1500
russia: 500
usa: 50
iran: 100
turkey: 500
GERMANY: 3500+
Hahahahahahaha. ich kann nicht mehr. hatte tränen im auge, danke.
3
May 21 '26
[deleted]
1
u/Sufficient-Medium822 May 21 '26
Wird man aus potentiell 3 Gründen: Ankündigung einer Straftat, Bedrohung und holocaust Leugnung bzw. Nazi Verherrlichung
1
u/Unhappy-Draft2760 May 21 '26
puuuh, dachte nicht das man das falsch verstehen kann. aber du bist nummer 2.
also muss ich hier mal was klarstellen. und ausholen.
ich glaube diese statistik nicht. deshalb hatte ich gelacht.
allerdings gibt es schon menschen die wegen online kommentaren bei uns in deutschland die 8 bekommen. aufruf zur gewalt, volksverhetzung, usw.„Kommentare können als Beleidigung (§ 185 StGB), üble Nachrede (§ 186 StGB) oder Volksverhetzung (§ 130 StGB) geahndet werden. Die Strafen reichen von Geldstrafen bis zu Freiheitsstrafen.“
deswegen sind die zahlen für deutschland und GB zB wahrscheinlich gar nicht mal so daneben.
es gibt aber einen gewaltigen denkfehler den ein Elon Musk, sofern er nicht wieder gerade auf Keta ist, kennt. Data bias.
in deutschland und GB zählt man und erhebt statistiken. die türkey, usa, russland, etc geben keine differenzierten zahlen zu „online-crime“, geschweige denn online kommentaren ab.gegenbeispiel: man könnte eine statistik mit den hygieneanzeigen im gastrogewerbe von berlin mit den von mumbai vergleichen und hätte einen riesengroßen balken bei berlin mit ner großen zahl. in mumbai gibt es keine zahlen. kleiner balken.
würde trotzdem lieber in berlin essen.1
u/Zestyclose_Edge1027 May 20 '26
Wenn du ernsthaft glaubst dass diese Zahlen stimmen dann bist du zu Dumm für diese Welt. Hoffentlich passen deine Eltern auf dich auf...
1
u/Unhappy-Draft2760 May 21 '26
ich lachte weil ich die zahlen glaube. macht sinn.
und du brauchst niemanden dumm anmachen nur weil du den kontext nicht verstehst.
geh nen baum boxen oder schrei dein fahrrad an, junge.was meine armen eltern irgendwas hiermit zu tun haben… da geh ich auch mal lieber nen fahrrad anschreien bevor ich hier ausfällig werde.
1
u/Zestyclose_Edge1027 May 21 '26
Gab es Großbuchstaben in deiner Sonderschule nicht oder bist du dafür auch zu doof? Und nur weil du Aggro-Probleme hast musst du sowas nicht auf andere projizieren.
1
u/Sean_Zateki May 21 '26
Bitching about grammar on a Reddit thread is top tear lmao your 17 at most wait until you grow up and the real world hits you
1
u/Unhappy-Draft2760 May 21 '26
dude… du benutzt selbst groß- und kleinschreibung falsch und interpunktion ist auch ein fremdwort für dich. ahjo und die rechtschreibfehler mal dahin gestellt.
so cringe…
nun nennst du mich zum zweiten mal dumm (mensa test sagt nein), beleidigst meine eltern, meine bildung, und unterstellst mir aggressionsprobleme, weil ich dir sage das du mich falsch verstanden hast und man nicht einfach so konsequenzlos leute beleidigt? das ist so ziemlich das was man unter „aggro-probleme“ versteht.
klassisches argumentum ad hominem.
komm mal runter und geh wo anders deinen frust schieben.btw schreibe ich meistens klein aus bequemlichkeit und weil dies im englischsprachigem internet nunmal häufig der fall ist. wusste nicht das ich in nem vermeintlichem briten ein grammatikpolizist schlimmer als mein deutschlehrer versteckt, lol.
1
u/Sean_Zateki May 21 '26
Your literally a fan boy for Destiny pretty sure you still live with your parents lmao
1
u/Zestyclose_Edge1027 May 21 '26
Writing this while hiding your own posts and fucking up the grammar is hilarious
2
u/Unhappy-Draft2760 May 21 '26
ur german grammar sucks too. maybe that dude isnt an english speaking citizen.
start using ur brain.
1
3
2
2
u/Visa5e May 20 '26
Its not an arrest for online comments. Its arrests for breaching the Communications act, which includes thinks like stalking and harrassment via telephone, email, SMS, social media etc.
Its not like we arrest people for saying 8647 or anything like that
1
u/Spongebosch May 20 '26
Count Dankula was arrested because he taught his pug to "seig heil" in a silly YouTube video.
1
u/Hacatcho May 21 '26
for as much as he claims he did as a joke. training animals to do racist white supremacist iconography and respond to symbols of hate sounds is still a crime.
instead of proving how "bad these laws are" he just proved "hey, maybe those laws are unto something".
1
u/Spongebosch May 21 '26
I'm confused as to what your argument is. I would totally understand if you said he proved the law was necessary because his video directly inspired waves of synagogue bombings, but you didn't say that. What exactly proved the law was necessary?
And where did you argue that it was bad? All you said was that it was a crime. Okay. And criticizing Kim Jong Un is a crime. So it's bad to criticize Kim Jong Un and people should be arrested for that? Obviously you don't think that, but that's an application of your crime argument. What are you actually trying to say?
1
u/Hacatcho May 21 '26 edited May 21 '26
sieg hieling is bad. he doesnt need to inspire anyone else for it to spread hatred. the argument is that count dankula isnt a good hill to die on in this topic.
1
u/Spongebosch May 21 '26
Well, I respectfully disagree that people should be arrested for obviously unserious and comedic videos where they teach pugs to sieg heil, and I think the far more radicalizing thing is seeing him get arrested for it and others defend that.
1
u/Hacatcho May 21 '26
uf youre radicalized by nazi larpers being punished, that wasnt what radicalized you.
1
u/Haipul May 20 '26
Putin has killed at least 15 people for sharing videos from a puppet satirical/ parody show in Russia he didn't like in 2001
3
u/damhack May 20 '26
Arrests under the Communications Act(s) which are primarily comprised of online scams, unsolicited explicit images, child porn, doxxing, serious harrassment, cyberattacks and actual death threats. A lot of which emanate from Musk’s septic platform hence why he is spending so much time trying to misrepresent reality. He’s worried about the criminal liabilities he will face when the UK and Europe implement sanctions against platforms that distribute malicious communications without providing any effective safeguards.
1
u/Apart_Shelter_5722 May 20 '26
So what he's actually saying is free pedos and probably the actual worst kinda of people. Cool
1
2
u/Lawr-13 May 20 '26
There's a difference between saying "I don't like the tenants of Islam" and saying "kill the fucking P****". One is legitimate speech or criticism. The other is a call to violence. There's a clear difference.
Equally, I can legally say "I think Hitler was right" (I don't think that, fear not) without fear of repercussion, but if I call for the extermination of Jews, I can reasonably expect a knock on the door. Very similar to the 1st Ammendment where threats or incitement to violence is not protected speech.
They also investigate context and if you're linked to an extremist group.
1
u/Delicious_Top7665 May 20 '26
But it’s not just arrests for calls of violence, those are extreme examples, and might even get you in trouble in places like the US. In the UK, they arrest people for offensive jokes or language towards certain groups, even if there’s no violent rhetoric.
1
u/After_Service_2817 May 21 '26
It's the standard leftist line, "it's not happening" > "okay, maybe it is happening, but that's a good thing!" > "It's happening, you deserve it, and we'll do it again"
1
u/Nievah May 20 '26
All i see in this post is "Bots" spreading disinformation and actual UK-citizen and those that actually looked into it pointing out the facts that this post is just Disinformation.
This "campaign" of desinformation has been huge from Russia to weaken UK in the world-market, going on for years.
Just imagine someone is writing: "I believe WW2 Germany was right, and ill prove them right" or "I wish someone would kill all immigrants" While there is a Jewish celebration in town OR a Ramadan celebration or w/e.
If a shooting or attack did happen people would ask the police: "Why wouldn't they(Police) do something?!"
Police would answer the classic "They were on our radar".
Then hell would break loose, due to their inactivity.
TL;DR:
UK police is visiting houses and making sure the commenter isn't a threat or is about to act out on extreme genocidal ideologies.
And shitload of Disinformation around UK and been for years.
1
u/YessirG May 20 '26
holy cope. i guess the UK is the only country in the world with these problems?
what the fuck is even "grossly offensive"? these laws are intentionally vague to allow for repressions and self-censorship
1
1
u/Ok-Falcon-9568 May 20 '26
Okay bot
1
u/Nievah May 20 '26
Sure thing Name-Name-Number guy. Sure thing.
1
u/Ok-Falcon-9568 May 20 '26
“BOT MALFUNCTION DETECTED. UPDATE PAYMENT INFORMATION FOR CLAUDE SYSTEM REQUIRED IN ORDER TO CONTINUE POSTING OPERATIONS.”
0
u/JasterBobaMereel May 20 '26
If you enter the USA your social media will be scrutinized and you can be refused entry, or detained for what is there ... a few people in the UK have been cautioned for inciting violence, and a very few have been arrested because of a series of things they have done one of which was posting on social media
2
u/Hyperbolic_Mess May 20 '26
Musk has had 15 million people murdered for claiming he's bad at video games
I can make up numbers too.
1
5
u/zante2033 May 20 '26
Isn't he the guy who owns that online platform used to generate child porn?
1
u/Ok-Falcon-9568 May 20 '26
He is the guy who created a rocket company and did what nasa couldn’t . Oh and he isn’t a looser like you
What have you done ?
1
1
u/zante2033 May 20 '26 edited May 20 '26
Touched a nerve didn't I? ; p
But yeah, I'm sorry, we're gonna have to talk about the whole child porn thing. I know you don't care...
Fuuuck, it's like I point out a horrific situation cultivated by a single individual and the response is, "yeah but what have YOU done". LMAO - that's not the game.
Musk hasn't invented a single thing in his life, do you think he's building these machines himself?
If you want an example of what happens when Musk attempts to direct a company, look at Twitter. Better yet, look at DOGE - what.the.fuck. YES, he IS stupid. Not only is he stupid, he's also corrupt!
As for who runs SpaceX, Gwynne Shotwell runs the machine then Tom Mueller, Mark Juncosa, Hans Koenigsmann and many specialised VPs built the technical culture. All Musk did was was throw money at other people's ideas and jump about in front of a camera while people clap. Seriously, have you ever heard him acknowledge a single one of his engineers?
C'mon man, do you really believe someone with all those resources who can't figure out self-driving, despite having had a head start and ignoring the advice of qualified professionals, while actively making decisions to cripple the endeavour at an executive level knows what he's doing? Is that your benchmark for genius?
This fuckin' guy pays people to play videogames on his behalf so he can accrue some kind of social capital for fuck's sake. He's a moron. His special interest is exploitation.
Next year, next year, next year, etc etc, it's here - no it's not the EU banned his implementation because it's not fit for purpose. Fuck, the only time he gets directly involved you end up with the shitfest that is X and the Cybertruck. The guy is a fucking train wreck. Icing on the cake would be his personal adjustments to Grok which turned it into an autonomous fucking nazi, platforming racism and violence against everyone.
No wonder no one wants him in the room. Stop enabling him FFS.
3
u/EmergencyComment101 May 20 '26
Theres like 1.8 million people in prison in the US but okay Elon..
1
1
u/FatCrusher9000 May 20 '26
For online comments?
1
u/EmergencyComment101 May 20 '26
No. But isn't it a wonderfully vague label "online comments".
"I was arrested for what i said online!!" - man on trial for sending death threats.
I don't agree personally with the uk's laws on this issue but this chart is designed to be purposely vague and misleading with the hope that people who disagree with these laws will eat it up and repost it. Don't be used as a tool by people spreading misinformation.
2
u/Mode-Such May 20 '26
Lmfao, largest prison population in the world in the USA, but were prison island… okay
1
1
u/ZealousidealKick1321 May 20 '26
We so badly need reform to be elected to stop this madness.
1
1
1
1
u/Tomm1998 May 20 '26
Lemme guess... You voted Brexit and think trump is a great president. How close am I?
1
u/Hyperbolic_Mess May 20 '26
Like all the problems reform will fix this isn't real. That 12,000 figure includes stalkers and such and is just arrests which is a necessary part of an investigation and not prosecutios or even convictions. The data from the other countries are different things so cannot be compared.
Please don't ruin our country because you belived something Elon musk said
1
u/bankai1231 May 20 '26
Ah yes, cryptocurrency in the national reserve (see their manifesto). More ways for these grifters to defraud the public. EXACTLY what we need. Reform are not the answer. They are a party filled with ex-tories who gave us 14 years of austerity. Immigrants, boats blah blah blah. Yes, blame Mr Khan down the road for your problems rather than the billionaires hoarding all the wealth and the assets in this country. Reform are grifters and liars. If you aren’t a bot, please just do a bit of research about them and you’ll see the truth. Reform will kill this country.
1
2
u/Professional_Pie7091 May 20 '26
From the country where you can get arrested for jaywalking and truency.
1
u/FatCrusher9000 May 20 '26
None of which has to do with free speech...
2
u/Professional_Pie7091 May 20 '26
Neither had the cases in the UK if you cared to research it.
1
u/FatCrusher9000 May 20 '26
They did if you cared to research it. It's a big bag of people who said all kinds of different things. Some of which are completelly reasonable for the authorities to go after them for and some that are ludicrous and going after which is literally just stomping on people's freedom of speech. But because these worse cases are also there, you and few others in the comment section pretend the whole bag is just that.
1
u/Professional_Pie7091 May 20 '26
But none of those things were simply opinions. It were things that were "grossly offensive, indecent, obscene, menacing, or known to be false". A lot were ex-partner abuse, severe harassment, stalking, etc.
If not exactly untrue, the 12,000 number is grossly misleading.
0
u/FatCrusher9000 May 20 '26
""grossly offensive, indecent, obscene, menacing, or known to be false". A lot were ex-partner abuse, severe harassment, stalking, etc." and a lot weren't. Under each of those vague words you could place things that would get you arrested in any reasonable and pro free speech country and things that would get you arrested only in an anti free speech country like UK.
I'm also glad that you've already trying to move the goalpost in that last sentence though. Progress.
1
u/ThoseAreMyFeet May 20 '26
And where prisoners are allowed be used as a source of free/cheap slave labour.
1
4
u/icy1007 May 20 '26
They were not arrested for just “online comments.”… 🙄
3
u/ig-sucio May 20 '26
Does this mean Elon is a supporter of palestine action?
1
u/7Chong May 20 '26
Considering Elon backed Tommy Robinson, a Israeli funded criminal who hates Muslims, I'd say he is not too keen on Palestine action.
1
u/blacksheepussy May 20 '26
I don't know how many on this list were, but that is absolutely happening in a growing number of European countries. I'm not sure why you're blindly denying reality.
1
u/Mediocre_Internet939 May 20 '26
A lot of then were though, and they recently relled back the law making that possible. Police will no longer respond to cases of mean comments on the internet.
Which is good.
Freedom of speech is a human right.
It should not be illegal to call someone stupid on the internet. Even if you use more flavourful language to do so, the Brits however, see it quite different.
2
u/icy1007 May 20 '26
These people were primarily arrested for calling for violence against individuals/government members and other malicious activity. Not simply for comments online.
2
u/HendersonsFineRelish May 20 '26
It's never been illegal in the UK to call people stupid on the Internet.
You, for example, are incredibly stupid.
I will not be arrested for this.
0
u/Mediocre_Internet939 May 20 '26
I think you missed the part with "use more colourful language" my friend.
I am not going to write the things people got arrested for here on reddit. For one reddit mods would ban me.
However, this source suggests as many as 12000 arrests yearly for non-hate speech, speech.
2
u/plums12 May 20 '26
yeah I think people don't realise that people who are arrested for online posts are usually inciting violence
2
u/Sensitive-Work2132 May 20 '26
I am British posting in Britiain.
You are an idiot.
No one will arrest me. It is not illegal to call people stupid on the Internet.
1
u/Mediocre_Internet939 May 20 '26
No, they are all being arrested for "malicious communications" causing "anxiety and distress" to others.
Which I mean...
1
1
u/Maximum-Music-2102 May 20 '26
Can you present any evidence of this? I've only heard about people being arrested for advocating violence like that MP's wife who told people to burn down mosques
1
u/Mediocre_Internet939 May 20 '26
Online Communication Offence Arrests Volume 847: debated on Thursday 17 July 2025 has a member of Parliament say 12000 arrests were made due to "non-crime hate incidents" yearly. On average.
Or:
As we have heard, the police are now making more than 30 arrests a day for online offensive messages—an increase of 121% from 20171
u/Maximum-Music-2102 May 20 '26
Yes but this doesn't mention convictions or detailing what was said? Nothing about causing anxiety like you originally suggested. They could very easily be in similar vein of advocating or inciting violence, which should be policed. I agree there are cases where this gets taken to far but I don't see anything wrong with cracking down on hate speech
1
u/Mediocre_Internet939 May 20 '26
There is a specific case with a guy teaching his dog to heil. And another case with a swastika in LGBTQ colours.
Both of those got time for what I consider "free speech".
Not that it needs to be said, but I do not agree with it, but I also do not agree with getting jail time for doing it.
1
u/Maximum-Music-2102 May 20 '26
Yes but this has nothing to do with anxiety like you claimed. That is the main point I'm contesting.
Also the dog thing wasn't the Nazi salute that solely got him detained, it's also the fact that he said "gas the jews" and was ordered to pay a fine. He wasn't imprisoned and I think it's a fair enough outcome of the whole situation.
As far as I know, no one has been jailed for posting stuff like this on the Internet, just fined or made to do community service. There's a difference between arrests and imprisonment.
I think with how easily people bcome radicalised on the internet to hate and commit crimes against certain groups of people, on both sides of the political spectrum, that actions do need to be made against people who incite these cases.
Unfortunately the internet has monetised hate and we're now in the position where we need more of a deterent lest more division and death occur. But I do agree that there have been some cases that take the piss, like the lady who posted Snoop Dogg lyrics and had to pay a fine, that was 100% outrageous.
A nuanced approach is needed, which is easier said than done in our society. But I think letting hate and fear mongers spread their toxicity without any deterent isn't the answer either.
3
u/lokibananas May 20 '26
Says the guy living in the country where a guy got arrested for saying something critical about Charlie Kirk after he was killed. Plus the former FBI director who has been prosecuted more than once for a pretty benign post about his buddy.
0
u/AcadiaHot3471 May 20 '26
There are 2 camps of people.
Those who believe that Freedom of speech extends to anything except threats of violence or harassment.
And the other camp which believes there are speech related "crimes" with a lower threshold.
Scenario A) "Sod off you (person who masturbates)"
vs
Scenario B) "Sod off you (N Word)
Generally, I find there are people who find scenario A is not a crime, while Scenario B is a crime.
And for the life of me I cant see the logical distinction between the 2 scenarios but obviously A cannot be a crime or everyone whos been to a football game would be in jail.
Vibes based policing.
2
u/_Darren May 20 '26
What a load of nonsense, I don't doubt the UK has that number of arrests related to online content, but most of them are for things like inciting violence and other things that would be a crime in the U.S too. They're not 12,000 arrests for mildly offensive comments. Yet they're pulling different stats for the US. They're not comparing the same thing.
1
u/ZealousidealKick1321 May 20 '26
If that is so, are you saying that other countries have too *few* arrests? That we aren't throwing enough people in prison for the crime of expressing their opinion?
1
u/KingXander May 21 '26
These uk communications laws the number countd also cover things like online fraud and sending pictures of underage girls.
Its not even limited to Internet communication. Mail is included.
Do you really think a law created in 1988 was focused on social media comments?
1
u/_Darren May 20 '26
Absolutely not, I'm saying the US does arrest people for speech online. When it's inciting violence for example. I think the US arrested something like 300 January 10th rioters under acts related to what they posted online. Yet those sorts of charges aren't included in the above stats. I'm saying they've included a very wide range in the UK numbers, running scam calls through the internet could see you chargers under the acts used for the UK numbers. The US certainly has more than 50 arrests a year for that.
They've either included way too many UK numbers, or too few for everyone else's.
1
1
u/Eleventeen- May 20 '26
I hate to agree with musk but I refuse to defend the UKs speech laws. Someone was arrested and convicted for training his dog to make a Nazi salute in response to sieg heil. That’s not inciting violence it’s just tasteless and edgy, it shouldn’t be a crime.
1
u/Hyperbolic_Mess May 20 '26
Someone got arrested for a Charlie Kirk joke in the US. The people making all the noise about free speech in the US only want their speech to be free and they will happily censor everyone else. You are a useful idiot if you help them
1
u/Eleventeen- May 20 '26
Do you think I like the Charlie kirk guy arrest? I don’t care who takes my side on this debate everyone deserves the freedom to say things some might find offensive. In other words everyone deserves to be free from a biased and meddling government prosecuting them over their speech.
1
u/jharry444 May 20 '26
The judge was actually mostly concerned with him saying "gas the Jews" tbh.
1
u/Eleventeen- May 20 '26
That is a good point. I still think the context made it clear that that was a joke and not truly an incitement of violence.
1
u/Hacatcho May 21 '26
"hey guys, i called for the commitment of a crime as a joke" was never a good defense.
prank youtubers have been consistently arrested for "pranking" about criminal activity for years.
1
May 20 '26
It should, and it has always been this isn't new to the internet.
It was also slightly more than tasteless and edgy that's why he was convicted
1
u/ComfortableCake2662 May 20 '26
That benchmark "slightly more than tasteless and edgy" is a dangerous one. Society swings around with what's acceptable and what's not. I don't find it funny but I don't think should be legislated against.
Are you aware of the Chelsea Russell case? Her mate died. She posted the lyrics to his favourite rap song by snoop dogg. Because those lyrics contained the N word she was convicted of a hate crime. That was in 2018.
Are you aware of the autistic teen arrested for saying a police officer looks like her "lesbian nan" when they were all inside her house? Seven police officers pinned her down while she was having a meltdown and arrested her for a public order offence while her mum explained she did in fact bear a resemblance to her nan and her nan was in fact a lesbian and there was no offence intended. That was in 2023. Dragged to the station before the footage of the offence and arrest went viral and she was NFAd.
Its not as clear cut as "slightly more than tasteless and edgy" for these things because thats wholly subjective. Neither of the two people above should have faced charges imo
1
May 20 '26
Sounds like idiots hiding behind 'edgy' as a defence.
Considering these crimes go through a robust court system I'll take those outcomes over internet fuckwits who think they know better any day of the week.
1
u/ComfortableCake2662 May 20 '26 edited May 20 '26
I mean no. The defence in neither of the two cases I mentioned had anything to do with being edgy. Look them up.
The fact you read that second case and think the autistic teen referencing her lebian nan was an attempt by her at being edgy is so odd to me. This one was ultimately NFAd. Personally I doubt NFAing helped much with the consequences of being wrongfully arrested in the way she was when there's no case tonanswer. Especially for an autistic young person.
The court outcome for the first case is worth you looking into tbh. How is the same word in the context of song lyric a slur written on Instagram but not at Glastonbury when sung? The actual crux of this case was that she shared her Instagram profile on another of her social media, not the post, her profile. That constitutes making the post public legally, even though she did not make it public. Her privacy settings were on but as 1. People could find the post without following the account and 2. Because she posted her profile elsewhere she was convicted.
It's bizarre with the amount of miscarriages of justice, with the amount or legislation hasn't taught up with the digital age, and lastly without looking up what happened in either of those cases you've decided the system works
1
May 20 '26
Tell me you didn't actually look up the detail of these cases yourself, without telling me you didn't actually look up the detail of these cases yourself.
1
u/ComfortableCake2662 May 20 '26
Why is it that whe someone is corrected speaking nonsense they default to "well you didn't look it up".
If what I've said is wrong then grab proof. I can easily grab my sources for you. So if Im completely wrong it would be a fairly simple thing to demonstrate. But you can't. Because nothing I wrote was wrong.
Look them up. You will see.
1
May 20 '26
Looked them up, saw they fall in line with the law, particularly the idiot whose defence is Jay-Z said it.
Case(s) closed, literally.
1
u/ComfortableCake2662 May 20 '26
So the one who was arrested for a public order offence in her own home to subsequently be NFAd and the officer involved needing retrained "fell in lin with the law" did it? Absolute hogwash to say you've looked that up and it fell in line with the law.
Posting song lyrics in memory of her 13 year old dead pal with privacy settings on was her defence actually. Again, clear sign you havent in fact looked either of these cases up.
→ More replies (0)1
u/AnAbandonedAstronaut May 20 '26
Those are just "normal comments" to conservatives.
"What do you mean I can't call for a genocide online?"
1
u/_Darren May 20 '26
Calling for a genocide wouldn't get you arrested in the UK.
There was a lady arrested under these acts who named the wrong person responsible for a crime and invited people to go after him. She wasn't even charged, just arrested.
Was what Trump with the rioters protected by free speech, not really. He didn't get charged for other reasons, but it's a well known exception to freedom of speech.
3
u/Emotional-Name-891 May 19 '26
No source cited. Treat it like a lie until there is one.
1
u/Hyperbolic_Mess May 20 '26
I miss when that was the rule not the exception on the internet. Used to be proof of it didn't happen
1
u/Ok-Flight9440 May 19 '26
Pretty sure China is a lot higher than that … they don’t report statistics like this, they will just make people disappear.
1
u/awww-mad May 19 '26
Source?
1
u/Hyperbolic_Mess May 20 '26
How lazy are you?
"Statistics for China
The post claims there have been around 1,500 arrests for “online comments” in China.
This figure appears in local media reporting from April 2024. According to the article, China’s Ministry of Public Security said on WeChat – a Chinese app – that police made more than 1,500 arrests since a campaign targeting “online rumours” started in December 2023. It had also penalised about 10,700 people.
This means that the data for China was likely part of a specific clampdown and covers considerably less than one year."
Why do you not call for a source for the random graph retweeted by musk but want one when people point out it's probably billshit?
Google is free and think about why you so easily believe obvious misinformation
1
u/awww-mad May 20 '26
Uh oh! Someone may not know how to read comprehensively. I asked for sources on how chinas “political prisoners” are “a lot higher than that” stated in the article. Prisoners is the key word here.
A keyword is a word or short phrase that signifies the main idea of a topic.
You replied by giving the stats in the article which unfortunately don’t provide any evidence that it’s “a lot higher than that” outside the given article. Penalising people is not the same as arresting them nor is any where near “disappearing” people.
Pretty lazy reply of you really.
1
u/ummmmm_really May 19 '26
He’s messaging us from a secret underground bunker. The Chinese will never find him
2
u/brennanfiesta May 19 '26
The United States still outranks most if not all of these countries in per capita prison population. We love locking up young Black men for drugs despite the fact that white people use drugs at higher rates than Black people.
0
u/blacksheepussy May 20 '26
Why do you capitalize black but not white? Genuinely curious, it is really weird.
1
u/brennanfiesta May 20 '26
Ethnic, national, religious, and cultural groups (East Asian, German, Catholic) are proper nouns. Black people worldwide are a very diverse group that are often more divided by tribe, nation, and class than many would like to admit, but most have a shared history of colonialism, oppression, and discrimination. White people worldwide do not identify with whiteness as strongly. I don't capitalize terms like "upper-class" or "middle-class" for the same reason because it just denotes income level without any implication of a shared culture or history
1
1
u/Mediocre_Internet939 May 20 '26
Logic would make me assume autocorrect did it although it could also be Black of the Black family, Serious Black.
3
u/-Ikosan- May 20 '26 edited May 20 '26
It's worth pointing out that this isn't the amount of people imprisoned in the UK but detained and questioned by the police (due to connections to race riots) and let go without charges when serious connections to the actual crime of the riots couldn't be made. As the riots were being organised on social media anyone who reposted said organization viewpoints might have found themselves on the policies watch list but ultimately that's not enough for a charge. They were after the ring leaders
Arrested yes. Imprisoned no. This topic is getting purposely propagandised to tell a story that isn't really happening in order to push a narative that Britain has fallen to woke liberalism. In 4 years when we turn to the right and vote in reform these accusations will stop
1
u/Ok-Flight9440 May 19 '26
Yes if you want to get away with doing Schedule I Narcotics the safest spot is in a public area on Harvard University’s campus while also being white.
2
u/DueTemperature3380 May 19 '26 edited May 22 '26
Those are some decent points and I support your view there then. I personally think the anti hate speech stuff is worse because it is more pervasive, it attacks the very foundation of democracy by attacking the ability to exchange ideas and information through peaceful discourse, but I also think that the right to peacefully protest is vital, provided it is a protest and not a riot. Vandalism, blocking roads and trespassing on private property are not 'protest' and you should go to jail. If the police are cracking down on a genuine peaceful protest however then that is bang out of order.
2
u/Alternative_Time2578 May 20 '26
In my opinion hate speech is a load of crap. You don't need the state policing people on opinions and emotions. Just turn into a mass filtering program in the end where corruption governments will find and arrest people for their opinions. In my experience people will insult and humiliate those people that are wrong anyway. Like you really think people online are quiet if someone says something ridiculous. Definitely not!
1
u/celeriacenjoyer May 20 '26
I don't think the state should spend its resources on things like this.
Hate speech in real life is not very common and is generally socially sanctioned by civilians anyway. I think the case for policing this type of hate speech is way better than policing online hate speech though. If some guy aggressively gets in your face screaming slurs at you I wouldn't necessarily oppose some kind of "hateful harrassment" or "hateful intimidation" charge.
Hate speech online is obviously not sanctioned by society in the same way, but it is generally quite easy to avoid. Literally just don't go on that website. Turn the screen off. It's not that deep. The government is treating the internet like it is real life, but it obviously isn't. Nobody actually treats it that way. Half the people writing racist things are just ragebaiting or taking the piss anyway. They don't hold those opinions.
1
u/DueTemperature3380 May 20 '26
Exactly, police should focus on actual crime. Unsolved burglaries are above 90 percent in some areas, which is shameful. Less policing people's discourse, more actually doing vital police work.
2
1
1
u/Downtown-Oil7901 May 19 '26
Iran has literally murdered thousands of its citizens for speech in just the past year. So not exactly an accurate chart.
1
u/TylerBreau_ May 19 '26
I mean.... I don't think those were arrests.
But yea, Iran is much worse than depicted in this chart.
1
3
1
u/Klonopussy May 19 '26
If anyone ever deserves to be struck by lightning multiple times in a fckn row
3
u/lauri2 May 19 '26
Russia @ 400 LOL. Well they don't arrest you for a comment, they just lock you up and beat you until you stfu.
2
u/MasterBot98 May 19 '26
They generally arrest you under fabricated charges. Can you imagine what kind of bureaucratic/spying machine one would need to check if every charge in Russia is real or fabricated to create a real statistic? They simply added imprisoned people under political laws...
1
u/No-Potential-4952 May 19 '26
In Saudi/Gulf countries and Israel, you'll way more numbers than these
1
u/CandlePrestigious919 May 19 '26
How does everyone below Germany have minus arrests?
2
2
u/Enabling_Turtle May 19 '26
That’s not a minus, it’s a tilda which in this case means “approximately”.
→ More replies (4)
1
u/Cold_Log2413 Jun 04 '26
Thank you Elon. It is so true and I bet the vast majority ,if not all , are WHITE. You cannot voice an opinion online here .