Like all trolls and keyboard warriors, they feel so safe tweeting from the comfort of their bedrooms, basements, dungeons, bridges, big houses in her case, probably,whatever....she's nothing different; just got a media profile, mainly for being a mean-spirited, snobby, vaguely nauseating but very savvy ar*e. I think a visit to Glasgow city centre to give her sophisticated opinions face to face would be a good idea.
I'll pay for the ticket.
i dont see the problem here. you're just whining like a little baby about it :kitty:
Katie Hopkins is a detestable tool and her comments were bang out of order, but arresting someone for posting crap on Twitter has got to be a waste of police time.
Words are starting to loose their meaning with each word taking on meanings because of incorrect usage. When each word means anything - no word means anything .
Seems, to me, that some people expect the police to act like internet moderators these days.
"Bwahhh! Somebody hurt my feelings! Ban them from teh internetz!!!!"
I would generally agree with you on that, although I think that - with cyber-bullying being a relatively new thing (in the larger scheme of things) - there are yet to be clearly defined parameters as to what constitutes bullying as opposed to a person just being nasty, at the moment it's all a bit blurred around the edges.
We all want the right and freedom to pretty much say whatever we want online, but obviously there comes a point where rules are needed and monitoring has to happen, because we all know that not all people are moderate, not all are able to shrug off certain things that are done or said online, and so on, and because it's all rather new and shiny in the world of 'crime', there's going to be a massive learning curve as to what should and shouldn't be allowed.
Of course we want people to express their views, we want the freedom to do so - and in KH's case she's expressing her views and those who read and react are expressing their reactions to whatever drivel she types, and yes it really shouldn't be a matter for the police just because somebody found offence within her stupidity. Write something less stupid back, would be my response
I think that it is dreadful that very very limited police resources are being diverted to this shite. Whilst this is going on somewhere in some chat room some dangerous child abuser is grooming his next victim, I'd much rather the police were in there.
We just need people to stop posting shite on the internet first.
The internet is going to be a very quiet place if everything that somebody can take offence to is stopped.
In fact, at the risk of being accused of baseless speculation, I suspect that some people will claim to be offended by anything published by certain people, regardless of how innocuous that thing actually is, simply because it'd be a terrific way to censor people they don't approve of.
Katie Hopkins is a detestable tool and her comments were bang out of order, but arresting someone for posting crap on Twitter has got to be a waste of police time.
More disgraceful racist anti Glasgow bile from Hopkins.
Police are examining complaints about Ebola comments tweeted by controversial TV personality Katie Hopkins.
Following news that a Scots nurse was being treated for the virus, she wrote: "Sending us Ebola bombs in the form of sweaty Glaswegians just isn't cricket."
Another tweet said: "Glaswegian ebola patient moved to London's Royal Free Hospital. Not so independent when it matters most are we jocksville?"
good, hopefully they will lock the vile troll up and forget about her
What is a race then if its not a collective group of people? let the lawmakers decide on exact definitions. All I know is I feel abused and offended by it, and I want something done about these posh nobs running down working class cities.
I would generally agree with you on that, although I think that - with cyber-bullying being a relatively new thing (in the larger scheme of things) - there are yet to be clearly defined parameters as to what constitutes bullying as opposed to a person just being nasty, at the moment it's all a bit blurred around the edges.
We all want the right and freedom to pretty much say whatever we want online, but obviously there comes a point where rules are needed and monitoring has to happen, because we all know that not all people are moderate, not all are able to shrug off certain things that are done or said online, and so on, and because it's all rather new and shiny in the world of 'crime', there's going to be a massive learning curve as to what should and shouldn't be allowed.
Of course we want people to express their views, we want the freedom to do so - and in KH's case she's expressing her views and those who read and react are expressing their reactions to whatever drivel she types, and yes it really shouldn't be a matter for the police just because somebody found offence within her stupidity. Write something less stupid back, would be my response
See, I'm not sure it all needs to be "blurred around the edges" at all.
If I'm posting nasty stuff on the internet about a specific individual then I could be accused of harassment regardless of the medium in use.
That covers cyber-bullying perfectly well.
If somebody's just making general comments about "sweaty socks" or "wops" or "spics" or whatever then, distasteful as it might be to some people, I don't see how there's cause for complaint unless those comments do stray onto ground covered by other laws which, again, should mean the medium isn't important.
See, I'm not sure it all needs to be "blurred around the edges" at all.
If I'm posting nasty stuff on the internet about a specific individual then I could be accused of harassment regardless of the medium in use.
That covers cyber-bullying perfectly well.
If somebody's just making general comments about "sweaty socks" or "wops" or "spics" or whatever then, distasteful as it might be to some people, I don't see how there's cause for complaint unless those comments do stray onto ground covered by other laws which, again, should mean the medium isn't important.
Yeah, I'm with you on this one.
Sure, I find the idea of her getting arrested pretty funny, but not funny enough to justify what's essentially increased policing of the bits of the internet that aren't already doing illegal stuff.
Comments
See my post above. Maybe they are?
http://forums.digitalspy.co.uk/showpost.php?p=76236893&postcount=43
We just need people to stop posting shite on the internet first.
In the first one, common sense has prevailed.
In the second, social justice warriors and their bullshit prevails.
Do you think that's likely?
i dont see the problem here. you're just whining like a little baby about it :kitty:
I'll stick out for real meanings
Heh. Tbh, couldn't care less, but on the main forum page I could just see "Police probe Katie Hopkins....." so thought I'd have a shufty.
I'm right though.
We all want the right and freedom to pretty much say whatever we want online, but obviously there comes a point where rules are needed and monitoring has to happen, because we all know that not all people are moderate, not all are able to shrug off certain things that are done or said online, and so on, and because it's all rather new and shiny in the world of 'crime', there's going to be a massive learning curve as to what should and shouldn't be allowed.
Of course we want people to express their views, we want the freedom to do so - and in KH's case she's expressing her views and those who read and react are expressing their reactions to whatever drivel she types, and yes it really shouldn't be a matter for the police just because somebody found offence within her stupidity. Write something less stupid back, would be my response
The internet is going to be a very quiet place if everything that somebody can take offence to is stopped.
In fact, at the risk of being accused of baseless speculation, I suspect that some people will claim to be offended by anything published by certain people, regardless of how innocuous that thing actually is, simply because it'd be a terrific way to censor people they don't approve of.
good, hopefully they will lock the vile troll up and forget about her
you took it well
Ignore her and she'll go away.
yeah.. thats so true..
See, I'm not sure it all needs to be "blurred around the edges" at all.
If I'm posting nasty stuff on the internet about a specific individual then I could be accused of harassment regardless of the medium in use.
That covers cyber-bullying perfectly well.
If somebody's just making general comments about "sweaty socks" or "wops" or "spics" or whatever then, distasteful as it might be to some people, I don't see how there's cause for complaint unless those comments do stray onto ground covered by other laws which, again, should mean the medium isn't important.
Yeah, I'm with you on this one.
Sure, I find the idea of her getting arrested pretty funny, but not funny enough to justify what's essentially increased policing of the bits of the internet that aren't already doing illegal stuff.
No Idlewilde it was an unsupported "idle" assumption, to denigrate Glaswegians, if we have to be correct.
How does it denigrate Glaswegians to refer to them as "hardy folk"?