To see reasonable people debating whether the Hillsborough t-shirt bloke

[Monty92]

I was instinctively sure. I have a policy on this sort of thing, you see. But you are right that freedom is severely degraded when many can consider that such an arrest might be ok.

It is fun to play with a few scenarios though. And at what point, do you think, behaviour should fall under the constraints of law?

I think we both agree that t-shirt bloke shouldn’t be arrested even if he’d rocked up at a memorial service for a Hillsborough victim.
But what about if his actions were verbal? What about if he confronted a Scouser in the street and aggressively told him he’s glad the 96 died?

Why would this be incitement to hatred or cause fear, panic or distress but a t-shirt wouldn’t?

[Fast Eddie]

So the moral of the story is you can be anti-Semitic or racist so long as you don't speak the words but have them on a t-shirt.

Gotcha.

Must type the words I have on my many, many t-shirts.

[Ash]

Matthew 27:22-25
John 11:47-50
John 11:53

If I put that on a t-shirt is that a loophole?

Why are you quoting the Bible at me? Are you proselytising?

[Monty92]

But these values came from a world where no-one would ever have dreamt of going out in public with a deliberately offensive message plastered all over their shirt. Surely it is in that societal change that the values have become degraded? The point at which society ceased to police its own behaviour and starting regarding the right to free speech as representing carte blanche to behave egregiously and to deliberately upset people is where things started to go tits up.

Which world was that in which no-one was deliberately offensive in public?

[Fast Eddie]

Why are you quoting the Bible at me? Are you proselytising? Which brand of backward superstition are you trying to sell here?

I'm wearing a t-shirt that says:

"It wasn't the Romans who lead Jesus Christ to the slaughter"

[Burney]

It is, I suppose, the logical conclusion to the cult of political correctness promulgated with such remarkable fervour by the bien pensant chatterers of the BBC.

It's an issue of thoughtcrime, more than anything.

Actually, I disagree. The problem derives from the advent of a more permissive society (for want of a better phrase) that opened the floodgates and made it OK or - God help us - 'cool to do things like wear t-shirts that said unpleasant things. This problem was then exacerbated by the advent of a less casually violent society that meant that you were more likely to get away with behaving offensively without getting your head kicked in.

[Sir C]

But these values came from a world where no-one would ever have dreamt of going out in public with a deliberately offensive message plastered all over their shirt. Surely it is in that societal change that the values have become degraded? The point at which society ceased to police its own behaviour and starting regarding the right to free speech as representing carte blanche to behave egregiously and to deliberately upset people is where things started to go tits up.

I had some words with a little scrote on a train wearing a Jesus is a **** t-shirt years ago. YEARS ago, I tell you. No one arrested the little ****, though.

[Sir C]

Actually, I disagree. The problem derives from the advent of a more permissive society (for want of a better phrase) that opened the floodgates and made it OK or - God help us - 'cool to do things like wear t-shirts that said unpleasant things. This problem was then exacerbated by the advent of a less casually violent society that meant that you were more likely to get away with behaving offensively without getting your head kicked in.

You're not wrong, but what you term a more 'premissive' society is only permissive of approved thoughts and ideas; talk of dnacing on Thatcher's grave, of course, is acceptable under the new permissiveness, because she is an approved target, and therefore laughing at her death cannot cause 'offence'.

In the same way, it is perfectly acceptable to be racist towards jews because jews are an approved target, but persons of colour are allowed to be offended.

The Left can't help being authoritarian hypocrites; it's written into their souls.

[Ash]

It is fun to play with a few scenarios though. And at what point, do you think, behaviour should fall under the constraints of law?

I think we both agree that t-shirt bloke shouldn’t be arrested even if he’d rocked up at a memorial service for a Hillsborough victim.
But what about if his actions were verbal? What about if he confronted a Scouser in the street and aggressively told him he’s glad the 96 died?

Why would this be incitement to hatred or cause fear, panic or distress but a t-shirt wouldn’t?

There are many ways to be a prick, and many people who will gladly extrapolate from this the need to not tolerate any prickness by enforcing draconion intolerance to anything offensive. The important thing is to always start from a robust policy of liberty and then procede from there.

[Ash]

I'm wearing a t-shirt that says:

"It wasn't the Romans who lead Jesus Christ to the slaughter"

Looks like we'll have to disagree on this, then.