Options

Sharing James Foley video terrorist offence?

179111213

Comments

  • Options
    [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 25,366
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Just like everybody who watched the 2 girls 1 cup video is into eating poo.

    These arguments are ridiculous.

    Yep and me watching cricket means I want to be a cricketer, right? Of course, it doesn't mean this at all. But, there is a MASSIVE difference between circulating and/or knowingly watching the brutal DEATH of a person and watching Coprophagia...
  • Options
    [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 1,249
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Odd Socks wrote: »
    They know it's being watched which is why they're asking people to not watch.

    I can see that people can shrug off any guilt or responsibility because the Internet is faceless. It doesn't however change the impact on the family.

    Nobody has any responsibility not to watch the video, and watching it is not a reason to feel guilty. The idea that people are watching the video might be upsetting to them, but that is not a reason for anonymous old me, sitting here in my living room with no connection whatsoever to the family, to not watch it.
  • Options
    [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 1,249
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Odd Socks wrote: »
    You also say that child abuse videos encourage direct child abuse. Does the same happen with those who watch violent videos?

    I did not say that. I said there is a market for child pornography that encourages child abuse, via supply and demand. Paedophiles pay for that stuff, so other paedophiles create the videos for them. Graphic videos of car crashes or summary executions are not subject to the same market-driven forces.
  • Options
    [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 11,313
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Red John wrote: »
    Nobody has any responsibility not to watch the video, and watching it is not a reason to feel guilty. The idea that people are watching the video might be upsetting to them, but that is not a reason for anonymous old me, sitting here in my living room with no connection whatsoever to the family, to not watch it.

    So is this on the same level as for instance, people can steal from large corporations but not another person? Because it's faceless we can remove ourselves from the moral responsibility?

    The family don't need to know who you are to deal with the fact that people are watching their son murdered in a horrific and painful way.

    Everyone who watches the video is jointly responsible for their pain. You don't get to share the responsibility out making each person only a fraction guilty, each and every person has chosen to ignore the wishes and feelings of the family. That is cold.
  • Options
    [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 1,249
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Gilbertoo wrote: »
    As per Odd Socks' label, psychopath seems to fit.

    You're making the mistake of thinking the symptoms of psychopathy are required to watch graphic content.
  • Options
    [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 11,313
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Red John wrote: »
    I did not say that. I said there is a market for child pornography that encourages child abuse, via supply and demand. Paedophiles pay for that stuff, so other paedophiles create the videos for them. Graphic videos of car crashes or summary executions are not subject to the same market-driven forces.

    There's a market for this violent stuff too. I'm sure as anything the dead don't mind what you see, but the idea of families knowing their loved one's pain is being viewed for entertainment is dodgy at least.

    Do you not think then that watching these videos and becoming numb to their impact doesn't cause some people to mimic violent behaviour or feel a need to go further than to watch?

    See, I don't think you have to be a psychopath to watch these things, all kinds of people do for lots of different reasons. It was your comparison that begged the question of how these videos impact the viewers and victims.
  • Options
    [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 1,249
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Odd Socks wrote: »
    So is this on the same level as for instance, people can steal from large corporations but not another person? Because it's faceless we can remove ourselves from the moral responsibility?

    The family don't need to know who you are to deal with the fact that people are watching their son murdered in a horrific and painful way.

    Everyone who watches the video is jointly responsible for their pain. You don't get to share the responsibility out making each person only a fraction guilty, each and every person has chosen to ignore the wishes and feelings of the family. That is cold.

    No, there is no equivalence there whatsoever.

    The family has no idea whether or not individuals who they don't know are watching the video. If I were to watch it right now they would never know, there would be no effect on them whatsoever.

    The only people responsible for their pain are ISIS, or whatever they're calling themselves today.

    Anyway, i've got stuff to do :p
  • Options
    [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 11,313
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Red John wrote: »
    No, there is no equivalence there whatsoever.

    The family has no idea whether or not individuals who they don't know are watching the video. If I were to watch it right now they would never know, there would be no effect on them whatsoever.

    The only people responsible for their pain are ISIS, or whatever they're calling themselves today.

    So the family know the video is being watched. It impacts them greatly enough to go to the media to ask people to not watch it. Yet, because they don't know every viewer personally, it makes no difference?

    Really?
  • Options
    [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 1,837
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Odd Socks, you really are quite the idiot for that extremist opinion. You're beyond irrational and I don't want to talk to you about anything again, ever.
  • Options
    [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 11,313
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Odd Socks, you really are quite the idiot for that extremist opinion. You're beyond rational and I don't want to talk to you about anything again, ever.

    You and I have never talked about anything. Not once. :confused:

    But ok!
  • Options
    anne_666anne_666 Posts: 72,891
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Odd Socks wrote: »
    So the family know the video is being watched. It impacts them greatly enough to go to the media to ask people to not watch it. Yet, because they don't know every viewer personally, it makes no difference?

    Really?

    I agree. This is their son. It's obscene and it's barbaric terrorist propaganda being used in the most hideous way. Why anyone would choose to support it is beyond me.
  • Options
    Babe RainbowBabe Rainbow Posts: 34,349
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Odd Socks wrote: »
    You and I have never talked about anything. Not once. :confused:

    But ok!

    Haha...you're not gonna lose too much sleep then :)
  • Options
    [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 11,313
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Haha...you're not gonna lose too much sleep then :)

    I might shed a few tears ;)

    Funny thing is, he seems to have completely misunderstood my stance, I think. I'm not sure. But now I'll never know what I'm missing out on.

    It reads like the notes the kids used to leave me when they'd been told off :D
  • Options
    [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 1,249
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Odd Socks wrote: »
    So the family know the video is being watched. It impacts them greatly enough to go to the media to ask people to not watch it. Yet, because they don't know every viewer personally, it makes no difference?

    Really?

    Okay. Say I choose to watch it right now without telling anyone. How does it affect them?
  • Options
    [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 11,313
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Red John wrote: »
    Okay. Say I choose to watch it right now without telling anyone. How does it affect them?

    It's the cumulative effect isn't it? It's the knowing it's out there being watched. I honestly don't know how they sleep knowing that yeah, you can choose to watch that right now. That's their child.

    The less people watch it, the harder it is to find. The harder it is to find, the less IS get their terrorist crap out there.
  • Options
    What name??What name?? Posts: 26,623
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    duffsdad wrote: »
    We shouldnt need a law. Stop giving these medieval bampots the publicity they seek. Complete blackout. Tell the news, the story but starve them of an audience.

    How exactly can we have news without any actual news on it?
  • Options
    Babe RainbowBabe Rainbow Posts: 34,349
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Red John wrote: »
    Okay. Say I choose to watch it right now without telling anyone. How does it affect them ?

    Can you really not imagine how YOU would feel if your child - or your wife/mother/father/sister or whoever - had been horribly murdered and the video of it was being passed around all over the internet ? Knowing that people all over the world were watching it for no legitimate reason.

    Are you really saying that knowing that would have no effect on you whatsoever ? You really wouldn't care ?
  • Options
    What name??What name?? Posts: 26,623
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Odd Socks wrote: »
    So the family know the video is being watched. It impacts them greatly enough to go to the media to ask people to not watch it. Yet, because they don't know every viewer personally, it makes no difference?

    Really?

    Yes. Because it was a daft thing to ask. It's a major news story and they can't stop that so they should learn to live with it.
  • Options
    What name??What name?? Posts: 26,623
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Can you really not imagine how YOU would feel if your child - or your wife/mother/father/sister or whoever - had been horribly murdered and the video of it was being passed around all over the internet ? Knowing that people all over the world were watching it for no legitimate reason.

    Are you really saying that knowing that would have no effect on you whatsoever ? You really wouldn't care ?

    Is be rather more preoccupied by the fact that they were murdered, how and by whom to worry about the viewing habits of others. Not wanting it on mainstream news is reasonable. Trying to control and censor the internet is stupid and a waste of time.
  • Options
    primerprimer Posts: 6,370
    Forum Member
    Red John wrote: »
    The rest of your post is hyperbolic nonsense.

    i guess thats your way of confirming that no-one's feelings are real to you except your own. there's a term for that...
  • Options
    [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 11,313
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Yes. Because it was a daft thing to ask. It's a major news story and they can't stop that so they should learn to live with it.

    Nobody is suggesting that it's not reported. Only that surely we can empathise with their knowing their son's horrific death is being played out as a propoganda tool or entertainment. I can't begin to imagine that.

    But they should learn to live with it? Wow.
  • Options
    [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 11,313
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Is be rather more preoccupied by the fact that they were murdered, how and by whom to worry about the viewing habits of others. Not wanting it on mainstream news is reasonable. Trying to control and censor the internet is stupid and a waste of time.

    People not viewing the video does not mean that the murder didn't occur or that efforts to catch the bastards no longer exist.

    There is absolutely no relation to those points at all.
  • Options
    Miss XYZMiss XYZ Posts: 14,023
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Odd Socks, you really are quite the idiot for that extremist opinion. You're beyond irrational and I don't want to talk to you about anything again, ever.


    I feel so wrong for saying this on such a serious thread but this post really made me laugh out loud! :blush:
  • Options
    JurassicMarkJurassicMark Posts: 12,871
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Odd Socks wrote: »
    They know it's being watched which is why they're asking people to not watch.

    I can see that people can shrug off any guilt or responsibility because the Internet is faceless. It doesn't however change the impact on the family.

    How do they know it's being watched? Do they have some kind of psychic ability to detect when someone clicks on that video?

    This video is out there and that's something the family will have to deal with, but it makes no difference to the impact on the family whether it's being watched by a million people or zero people.
    Odd Socks wrote: »
    Everyone who watches the video is jointly responsible for their pain. You don't get to share the responsibility out making each person only a fraction guilty, each and every person has chosen to ignore the wishes and feelings of the family. That is cold.

    Absolute bollocks. The Islamic State is solely responsible for their pain.

    Surely the main reason the family are feeling pain is that their loved one has been murdered. The fact that a video of this gruesome murder exists may be a concern for them, it's a minor side issue in comparison.
    Odd Socks wrote: »
    There's a market for this violent stuff too. I'm sure as anything the dead don't mind what you see, but the idea of families knowing their loved one's pain is being viewed for entertainment is dodgy at least.

    It's not being viewed for 'entertainment'. Do you watch the news for entertainment? There are all sorts of TV programmes, such as Panorama, Crimewatch, Horizon and many others which are watched in order to inform, educate, etc.
    Do you not think then that watching these videos and becoming numb to their impact doesn't cause some people to mimic violent behaviour or feel a need to go further than to watch?

    Have seen this argument used ad infinitum, with people claiming that violent films/video games etc. causes people to become violent and there is no evidence to back this up.

    I personally feel that occasionally watching gruesome things like this has no negative effect. I hate violence and have absolutely no desire to mimic anything I've seen in graphic footage. However, some people who are averse to watching seem to have an hysterical overreaction by calling it "gore porn" and claiming that people who do watch are somehow responsible for or approve of its content.
  • Options
    Babe RainbowBabe Rainbow Posts: 34,349
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Is be rather more preoccupied by the fact that they were murdered, how and by whom to worry about the viewing habits of others. Not wanting it on mainstream news is reasonable. Trying to control and censor the internet is stupid and a waste of time.

    So we should stop even trying ?
Sign In or Register to comment.