Well you could but that would make zero sense.Could literally ask you the same question
Well you could but that would make zero sense.Could literally ask you the same question
You’re the one bringing up the nonce allegations. Not me. Not sure why you’re asking me about thatWell you could but that would make zero sense.
For real? That’s the point of the last few pages of this thread and then you just randomly had a go at someone because they are a cyclist. Did you read the preceding few pages at all?You’re the one bringing up the nonce allegations. Not me. Not sure why you’re asking me about that
Didn’t need to. Was trying to figure out who Vine was and why Barton had put tweets about himFor real? That’s the point of the last few pages of this thread and then you just randomly had a go at someone because they are a cyclist. Did you read the preceding few pages at all?
I’m not whinging mate.Didn’t need to. Was trying to figure out who Vine was and why Barton had put tweets about him
I don’t understand why you’re whinging
For someone with major psychological issues and anger management issues, being active on social media is such a bad idea.
Joey got done in court for comments he made about Jeremy Vine
Doesn't he have a brother that went to jail for a racist murder or summit?Is there a single human being who would piss on him if he was on fire? That's the core of his resentment I think. His own family probably despise him.
Good.Has been charged over his comments to Aluko.
Yeah that'll stop himHe’s a thundercnut on a par with Piers Morgan…but should that be illegal? Just don’t follow him if what he says bothers you.
Is stopping him supposed to be the aim? Let him have his twitter meltdown if he wants, nobody has to listen to it. You don’t need to ban him from speaking, just ignore him.Yeah that'll stop him
Is stopping him supposed to be the aim? Let him have his twitter meltdown if he wants, nobody has to listen to it. You don’t need to ban him from speaking, just ignore him.
Does this apply to hate speech too?Is stopping him supposed to be the aim? Let him have his twitter meltdown if he wants, nobody has to listen to it. You don’t need to ban him from speaking, just ignore him.
Is stopping him supposed to be the aim? Let him have his twitter meltdown if he wants, nobody has to listen to it. You don’t need to ban him from speaking, just ignore him.
You’re missing my point. I’m not saying he should do it, I’m asking why is doing it a criminal offence. Why shouldn’t he be allowed to chat absolute fecking rhubarb if he wants to? Just ignore him if it annoys you.I mean, yes? Why would you not want to stop people saying malicious things about others?
They’re feckwits just as he is then, but again, that shouldn’t be against the lawThe problem is his ~3m followers and plenty others do listen to it.
No - hate speech, inciting violence etc aren’t included under free speech. You don’t get to just say whatever you want without consequence of course, but why is this specifically a matter for the state?Does this apply to hate speech too?
They’re feckwits just as he is then, but again, that shouldn’t be against the law.
This.You said: ”Let him have his twitter meltdown if he wants, nobody has to listen to it. You don’t need to ban him from speaking, just ignore him.”
The problem is that he is not ignored. He has a huge platform and he uses it to spout misogyny, homophobia etc.
So it/he won’t go away by civilized people ignoring him.
You’re missing my point. I’m not saying he should do it, I’m asking why is doing it a criminal offence. Why shouldn’t he be allowed to chat absolute fecking rhubarb if he wants to? Just ignore him if it annoys you.