Jump to content

Fine threat over T-shirt slogan


Recommended Posts

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/cambrid...ire/6943734.stm

 

 

 

Fine threat over T-shirt slogan

David Pratt

Mr Pratt said the slogan was intended to be humorous

A man spotted wearing a T-shirt bearing an "offensive" slogan in a city centre has been warned he risks an £80 fine if he is caught again.

 

Forklift driver David Pratt was told by street wardens in Peterborough he could cause offence or incite violence.

 

The slogan on the garment read: "Don't piss me off! I am running out of places to hide the bodies."

 

Peterborough City Council said using insulting or offensive language was an offence, even if it appeared in print.

 

Mr Pratt, from Peterborough, was approached by the wardens as he waited for a bus with his wife.

 

The couple are now demanding a written apology.

 

"I really don't see how the wording on my T-shirt could incite violence - it's humour, that's all it is," said Mr Pratt.

 

Offensive T-shirt

Mr Pratt faces an £80 fine if he wears the T-shirt again

 

In a statement Peterborough City Council said: "The incident is the subject of an official complaint to the council and is currently under investigation.

 

"However, using offensive, abusive, or insulting language is an offence under the Public Order Act, which also applies to such language appearing in print.

 

"In what was an amicable conversation, the street warden advised the gentleman concerned that his T-shirt could cause offence and if he was to wear it again he could run the risk of being issued an £80 on-the-spot fine from the police."

 

 

Ah community wardens, walking proof that giving a moron power = profit. :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites
You lost me with that one? Not really the same thing

 

Its the get-out clause for religion. "Causing offence" is applied in the main case in a very arbitrary way with no attempt to have a sense of humour which is obviously the intent of the message.

 

Of course the "Jesus is a cunt" case is a deliberate attempt to cause offence which even I would shy away from doing deliberately to that level but I do support the right to do it.

 

The Dispatches case involves the police wasting hours of time and no doubt money in the name of defending religion. It looks to me that there is a case that channel 4 did "embellish" some of the footage but the fact remains that the laws on incitement were in my view broken by some of the statements they recorded. There is no possible context that I can think of that negates the "We hate you" sentiments yet the "crime" seems to be the fact that it was recorded, not that it was said.

 

Imagine if they had recorded Nick Griffin saying "We hate the pakis" would the police have bent over backwards to put into context?

Link to post
Share on other sites
The Dispatches case involves the police wasting hours of time and no doubt money in the name of defending religion. It looks to me that there is a case that channel 4 did "embellish" some of the footage but the fact remains that the laws on incitement were in my view broken by some of the statements they recorded. There is no possible context that I can think of that negates the "We hate you" sentiments yet the "crime" seems to be the fact that it was recorded, not that it was said.

 

 

Having watched that program a couple of times, there is NO context that most of those comments could be put into which would be acceptable (whether it would be criminal is another issue - although I suspect the same sentiments in other context probably would be deemed as such).

 

The recent police outburst is police/CPS arse saving/blame shifting no more, no less.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't see why deliberate attempts to cause offence to religious people should be supported, but then again some people are a bit mixed up.

 

There is a big, HUGE difference between "support it" and "criminalise it" though.

 

Although admittedly under BLabour it does seem like there are only those two options.

 

 

No society that criminalises "Jesus is a cunt" on T-shirt is a "free" society........ never mind one that criminalises a fairly poor joke on a T-shirt.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Shouldn't be criminalised and really if i was religious then i wouldn't take offence since i'd patently think it was wrong and that Jesus wasn't a cnut at all! You'd have to be pretty weak in your faith to see a t-shirt slogan and think, sod it, he must be one after all, i've been wrong all these years. Its meant to wind people up and they should be bigger than to rise to it, but they never are.

 

As for a person wearing it, they shouldn't be criminalised, but they should be prepared to accept what comes their way in terms of peoples reactions because that t-shirt by and large is there to offend people, and get a reaction i'd imagine.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Shouldn't be criminalised and really if i was religious then i wouldn't take offence since i'd patently think it was wrong and that Jesus wasn't a cnut at all! You'd have to be pretty weak in your faith to see a t-shirt slogan and think, sod it, he must be one after all, i've been wrong all these years. Its meant to wind people up and they should be bigger than to rise to it, but they never are.

 

As for a person wearing it, they shouldn't be criminalised, but they should be prepared to accept what comes their way in terms of peoples reactions because that t-shirt by and large is there to offend people, and get a reaction i'd imagine.

I agree with you that it's meaningless and shouldn't be criminalised however I don't see why people are getting all fussed at the issue as they probably wouldn't be if another t-shirt had a slogan in an attempt to cause offence but without anything to do with religion. I don't get all the uproar - do people feel threatened by religion?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Shouldn't be criminalised and really if i was religious then i wouldn't take offence since i'd patently think it was wrong and that Jesus wasn't a cnut at all! You'd have to be pretty weak in your faith to see a t-shirt slogan and think, sod it, he must be one after all, i've been wrong all these years. Its meant to wind people up and they should be bigger than to rise to it, but they never are.

 

As for a person wearing it, they shouldn't be criminalised, but they should be prepared to accept what comes their way in terms of peoples reactions because that t-shirt by and large is there to offend people, and get a reaction i'd imagine.

I agree with you that it's meaningless and shouldn't be criminalised however I don't see why people are getting all fussed at the issue as they probably wouldn't be if another t-shirt had a slogan in an attempt to cause offence but without anything to do with religion. I don't get all the uproar - do people feel threatened by religion?

 

I think its censorship involving religion that gets some people annoyed, because its something that is totally unproven and shouldn't be allowed to govern the lives or choices of individuals who don't believe any of it, yet it does. It wouldn't be accepted for anything else, for example you couldn't get things banned on tv/film/theater/t-shirts etc. because it offended people who believe in ufo's or who believe like David Ike that we're being ruled by giant lizard creatures in the guise of humans! :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't get all the uproar - do people feel threatened by religion?

 

On different levels yes.

 

I'm not threatened by a person's individual beliefs but I do feel threatened by the gang forming and the demand for power that often comes from it.

 

I think provoking offence in the sense of challenging belief is a good thing - I don't agree with the old cliche of not mentioning religion as I think talking about it and asking questions is the only way forward. However as I said above I think "Jesus is a cunt" is going too far - I'd rather someone quoted some of his nastier alleged sayings like the ones about serving him by abandoning your family or him destroying non-believers.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm no expert on the scriptures but I don't think Jesus necessarily said to abandon your family, I think it was more a case of putting your faith above everything, including self and family, similarly he didn't literally want you to turn the offer your other cheek should someone hit you.

 

And when did Jesus advocate destroying non-believers?

Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm no expert on the scriptures but I don't think Jesus necessarily said to abandon your family, I think it was more a case of putting your faith above everything, including self and family, similarly he didn't literally want you to turn the offer your other cheek should someone hit you.

 

And when did Jesus advocate destroying non-believers?

 

 

John: 14:26 If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children,and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple.

 

Luke 19:27 But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.

 

 

Cue replies about context or that I'm not expert enough to understand it - it's a book and I can read.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm no expert on the scriptures but I don't think Jesus necessarily said to abandon your family, I think it was more a case of putting your faith above everything, including self and family, similarly he didn't literally want you to turn the offer your other cheek should someone hit you.

 

And when did Jesus advocate destroying non-believers?

 

 

John: 14:26 If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children,and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple.

 

Luke 19:27 But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.

 

 

Cue replies about context or that I'm not expert enough to understand it - it's a book and I can read.

Jesus is a cunt after all then? :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites
Luke 19:27 But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.

 

 

Cue replies about context or that I'm not expert enough to understand it - it's a book and I can read.

 

You mean as in the context of a parable? But clearly you can read and are clever enough to see what's really going on with your amazing powers of interpretation. How about quoting the hundreds of other examples where he preaches about love, respect and tolerance?

 

Tbh I'm not even getting involved in this debate with you because a. I don't know enough about the bible and b. I can see the defensive stand you're already taking so I'm guessing it's going to be like debating with a brick wall and c. I really dislike your avatar.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...