http://www.petersfieldpost.co.uk/news/twitter_users_slam_airport_message_ruling_1_1615202
Am I just getting worked up over nothing here or do others feel that in this case the judge is/was right not to have overturned his conviction?
What angers me most though is the level of support that this guy is getting…with a particular celebrity figure going so far as to say “Genuine threats are serious but no one could EVER have thought Chambers’ tweet a genuine threat. He’s being punished for levity.”
At the end of the day, as frustrating as the closure of the airport must have been, making threats like that are still a serious matter and should be dealt with accordingly. This guy should have thought twice before saying what he said, and I am glad that the judge chose not to overturn his conviction as it makes an example of him and his actions.
Whilst I embrace Twitter and all other social networking tools for the things they have done in terms of communication and marketing, but the need for thought before simply “tweeting” whatever comes into your head is a must, otherwise you should be prepared to face the consequences!
Anyone else got a thought on the issue?
By: inkworm - 15th November 2010 at 21:16
Sorry, really wasn’t thinking in that last post when using the term. :rolleyes:
By: Sky High - 15th November 2010 at 20:34
The “state” and “commonsense” are mutually exclusive.
By: inkworm - 15th November 2010 at 20:14
It’s commonsense, and our protagonist acted stupidly.
I do agree that common sense should prevail, but it should be applicable to both the state and the individual neither of which have shown a huge amount in this scenario.
By: kev35 - 15th November 2010 at 19:26
I AM Spartacus.
Regards,
kev35
By: Sky High - 15th November 2010 at 19:20
You are right inkworm. But we are where we are, as they say, however much it appals us. So, within that context, we all have to be careful. It’s commonsense, and our protagonist acted stupidly.
By: inkworm - 15th November 2010 at 19:08
Slowly our freedom and liberties are being eroded, where is the line drawn, a sarcastic joke (even if it isn’t considered funny) today, what next?
I am sure that everyone has said something in frustration that could be construed as a threat to someone at some point.
Technology and communication methods are changing at a very rapid pace and the governments of the world cannot control it but through foolish attempts via the law they attempt to stamp some form of authoritarian control over it by using fear and threats
By: Moggy C - 15th November 2010 at 17:10
If ever Twitter is used to issue ‘for real’ bomb or assassination threats it is far better if they stand out as something worth taking notice of.
If the fate of this hapless individual gives others pause to think before littering that channel with hoax / spurious / light-hearted threats of mass murder then he has served a useful purpose for once.
Moggy
By: inkworm - 15th November 2010 at 16:59
Whilst serious threats are an issue many a time someone has made a flippant remark about something in jest such as this and that is all it is.
If social media had been around over a decade ago then a remark like this would have been taken at face value, instead as a result of the state we now live in where everything is monitored and big brother is watching to protect us from the unseen enemy nothing can be said now without a fear of persecution.
Plus those who would be likely to consider a serious attack would not use such open source methods of communication or shout about it for the world to see, add to this a full background check on the individual (which is easily possible now we are all being watched) would no doubt show up his political views and if there has been in the past any indication of terrorist association or sympathy.
I see it as an overreaction and a reflection of the state we live in.
By: Sky High - 15th November 2010 at 16:51
I agree with the first two. I do not have sufficient history of the forum to know whether or not posts of a threatening nature have been made in reaction to an incident.
However it has to be said that in an era of ultra sensitive security, especially where civil airfields are concerned, anyone who either thinks that such a threat would not be taken seriously or fails to engage the brain before twittering, has to accept the consequences. Maybe twitter serves a useful purpose, maybe not, but perhaps this case will teach users to think first and not risk being twits later.
By: Grey Area - 15th November 2010 at 16:39
Presumably you’d both be happy to see users of this site prosecuted for some of the more – ahem – forthright postings we’ve seen in here over the years?
If not, then what’s the difference?
(By the way… I’ve moved this to GD as the issue is broader than just commercial aviation.)
By: Moggy C - 15th November 2010 at 16:29
I have.
And it is identical to yours.
Moggy
Sign In
November 15, 2010 at 4:13 pm