Hillsborough; 35yrs on...

5 times ain't offensive, well not at this end of the east lancs road anyway.

 

Exactly. The worlds full of them. I pity them more than anything else. The same way I do people who share Britain first stuff on Facebook.

 

95%, approximately. Even higher on certain forums

 

I think there's a common point being missed here.

(Lets put the need for violence out of the equation for a second) Sweats is saying that this should not be treated as a criminal act bcos it's a law which can be abused against any one of us. Donga says it's best we ignore or ridicule such hatred for the ignorance it is.

Correct me if I'm wrong but arent they both saying the same thing? I think anything like this is best dealt with by giving these ppl the freedom to act like scum and expose themselves to society fot the ****s they are. We become more united and much stronger as a result. Much like we do with the BNP for example.

 

Without the law then there could have been a public order issue at that pub.

The fact that the law exists gave people the opportunity to let the authorities deal with this moron, as opposed to tackling him themselves.

 

I believe the manager is going to be given some LFC memorabilia
by a fans group for acting the way he did and barring the idiot in the T-shirt

please log in to view this image

 

They arrested him two days later as a result of a witch hunt. If it had kicked off at the pub then then he would have been dealt with by the law. It didn't he was asked to leave and did.

I just don't think it is right that someone can be arrested, potentially get locked up or have a criminal record for wearing an offensive t shirt. Take the content of the t shirt out of it.

We are turning into a police state where freedom of speech and civil liberty is being eroded slowly. That's my point. And people are applauding it without realising what the true consequences of this are as where will the line be drawn? I've given lots of examples of other offensive stuff which could in theory see people up in front of a judge.

It's been an interesting debate to be honest I've actually for the first time in ages enjoyed a debate on here and I'm glad none of you took it that I was trying to defend the idiot as I'm not .

 

I once got a load of grief from some butch Lesbians back in the day, for wearing a Millie Tant T shirt down the pub, with the slogan "Equal rights for fat ugly Wimen" on it. So I get where you're coming from here.

However, I think that censorship does exist and always had done, and the line is what's deemed to be completely beyond the pale, generally racism etc. But that line moves over time, as societies attitudes change. In this case he deserved what was coming, as it was extremely offensive.

 

Millie Tant was ****ing hilarious

 

There's loads of stuff done in bad taste. Pretty certain comedians have made jokes about dead babies etc. We are turning into a society of people eternally offended by stuff. My point re a police state is will we soon not be able to express an unpopular or incorrect opinion without reprisal of the law? Like the German comedian that the Turks are trying to get deported to stand trial for insulting their president.

 

In the eighties a mate of mine got a severe ear bashing from a woman in a pub for wearing a sweatshirt with the "Love is..." characters on it.

It showed the male character bonking the female whilst football was on the TV in the background. The slogan was

Love is...giving her one instead of watching Match of the Day"

 

At some point over the last decade I came to the conclusion that ppl should be allowed to express whatever opinion they want. Nothing is so offensive that the law needs to be involved. I think we're better as a society for it. The minute you try to curtail that you hand over a piece of your freedom. Some of the worst acts of legislation have come in to "protect" us from ourselves and we've already lost so many of our civil rights as a result.

The only exception is if it's libel or slander, but then that's against an individual and a matter for them specifically not for the powers in charge to decide.

 

really - one is inclined to think that you have never been in a minority group which has been targeted or your view may be different

 

You know absolutely nothing about me mate. You're inclined to believe whatever you want, but you'd be wrong.

 

i struggle to understand how someone who has been in a minority which has been a target feels any expression , no matter how dreadful said comment is , should be allowed to just be made with no legal comeback or else yo haven't felt as vulnerable as some of us

i should point out i put the bar quite high between just being a twat and being a vile twat but the vile twats need to realise their are consequences to their actions

 

Just a question trebs, hypothetical of course, if a family member of yours had sadly died at Hillsborough in 89 do you think you would you still hold the values of freedom of speech?
Not only the families and club have faced 27 years of heartache and heartbreak we as a city and as supporters of the club have faced attacks in the media, online, on holiday, at matches etc.

To be honest had or if I ever come across someone wearing a T-shirt like the **** in Worcestershire I'll gladly do him physical damage, ok you can make somekind of flawed judgement of me based on that comment, like just as we supporters as the families(red or blue because being scouse made us guilty in the eyes of many people around the country), but sometimes enough is enough.


Point being is, if I fight for almost 30 years to prove my innocence and have finally been admonished what right have you or anyone else got to continue accusing me of the opposite?

If someone has the right to disregard the legal systems verdict shouldn't I have the right to kick the ****s atrse?

 

It's a personal view. You don't have to be from a minority either, what about someone who has an affliction or disability or something in their personal life which somebody could belittle through general commentary. I'm not saying you don't challenge bigotry or prejudices, either individually or as a society but it's usually a battle of ideas, tackling ignorance and giving the idiots enough rope to hang themselves. I'm confident we live in a society where if someone spouts contemptable crap, there are enough good folk to show the person they're a complete ****wit. Which, btw is what happened to the **** with the tshirt.

I think it was far more powerful for him to have that reaction by the people in that pub, than it is from him being arrested. There's a far greater chance he'll go home and re-evaluate his life after the reaction from the pub, than by some detached copper arresting him.

But more importantly, what worries me is the repurcussions of such laws. Ricky Gervais for example is very close to the mark with some of his jokes. Billy Connoly and Frankie Boyle have definitely crossed the line to the point their remarks could be considered as vile twats. Where and when do we decide one person is a vile twat and deserves to be arrested while another doesn't? I think that is where such laws become either unworkable or very left-wing (or right wing don't know which lol) in curtailing free speech. So my only conclusion was, **** it lets have free speech and give the vile twats enough rope to hang themselves.

 

I'm not so bloody liberal as to think that I wouldn't deck the ****er either. In fact, I have no real problem with human emotion. What happened in the pub was the perfect scenario and I hope every person who saw his tshirt on the way home told him what a prick he was. But if someone had decked him, I'd say that's human nature and wouldn't be a sanctimonious arse about it. But I'd like to think (and without being in that position Page I can only say, 'I'd like to think') that while being disgusted, angry, hurt and feeling a whole host of emotions, I wouldn't want the person being arrested for holding those views. In fact I'd feel some comfort from the actions of the pub. And trust me, while I've not been in any situation comparable to Hillsborough, I know from experience that there's a far greater feeling of empowerment when those around you (or society) has your back, when it comes to answering ****ing ignorant pricks. No greater feeling imo.

 

couple of points
1. most of my points are general not specifically regarding this case
2. err disabled people are a minority and one which is targeted by scum and when the government have finished painting us all as benefit scroungers the scum in the general population target them
3. the give em enough rope (underated album by the way) is confusing as are you saying the general public should start acting like vigilantes

Trebs i think i will leave it there we have different views on this but i accept it is just a honestly held opinion and i do understand where you are coming from even if i think you are misguided

 

Couldn't agree more with this.

I think the subject matter is curtailing people's opinion on the actual fundamental arguement.

I'd wager no one would bat an eyelid if the tshirt said I hate gingers. It would be deemed as funny. Though perhaps not to all ginger people.

Glen hoddle being the born again twat that he is said disability was gods way of punishing someone for a previous life or something equally twatty. Not really dissimilar to said tshirt really. People are entitled to an opinion and to express it. Whether it's right or wrong. We then have the right to admonish said idiot for his opinion.

End of the day I get why people were rightly upset about it. What I don't get is the blind applause for interpretations of a law to lock someone up for it as it's merely a matter of time before we can't say we hate the Royals, call Cameron a pig ****er. Generally protest against something we don't agree with.