Man Goes to Jail for Being an Internet Troll

[Grufflenark]

Going to jail for trolling? I don't mind people perma banning them or whatever from the forum, but jail?

 

[JDKJ]

The Westboro Baptist Church isn't the least bit interested in ending any wars and thereby preventing further funerals of fallen soldiers. Rather, they celebrate the deaths of those fallen soldiers because, according to them, God is using those deaths to demonstrate His disapproval of homosexuality. They aren't peace activists or war protesters. What they are though, in my opinion, is nothing more than half-baked homophobic zealots who have formed themselves into a hate group masquerading as a "church." And I can't see what's so "noble" in any of that. But I'll nevertheless respect and support their right to freely express their opinions. No matter how half-baked and homophobic those opinions may be. And regardless of the hurt and grief and anguish they cause others by virtue of that speech. Tough teats. That's just the price to be paid for free speech as far as I'm concerned. Freedom ain't free.

I was told by a conservative fellow on another site those were their aims when I'd used them as an example of right-wing insanity before. Of course the web site name leaves little for debate and I should have checked it. None the less the point remains, disgusting as they are they do posses a political agenda. That is the purpose of free speech, not the aggravation of your fellow citizens for it's own sake. If you can prove there was some social inequity or some burden he hoped to redress by saying he'd have sex with corpses I might accept your position. In any event, I don't really respect personal antagonism as an extension of free speech. And I doubt, were you being antagonized, you would either. It's fine and well to sit up on your high horse and say tough teats when it's not your kid. Saying such a thing doesn't display a wealth of understanding, but a lack of it.

For that matter you're arguing fairly relentlessly on the internet and you're telling me if someone insulted your dead child you'd shrug, turn around and walk away cause "them's just the breaks of free speech"? If you can't do it now over abstract philosophy it's hard to believe you'd do it then.

You cannot logically compare what you call my "arguing fairly relentlessly over an impersonal incident" and then extrapolate from your comparison that, if subjected to the same sort of speech as that made by Coss, I'd seek an outcome of the same sort as which obtained in the Coss case (i.e., the conviction and imprisonment of Mr. Coss). Your comparison doesn't contain any facts from which to reasonably make that extrapolation. At best, the only extrapolation you can reasonably make on the facts of your comparison is that I would counter Coss' speech with speech of my own and would do so relentlessly. And that's the more correct extrapolation to be made. I firmly believe that inherit to the freedom of speech is the freedom -- or perhaps, as some here have pointed out, the duty -- to counter disagreeable speech with more agreeable speech, not to childishly get your panties in a bunch and start demanding the arrest and imprisonment of speech makers with whom we may disagree. Such a demand, in my opinion, doesn't evidence a correct understanding or appreciation of the political and social purposes of free speech but, rather, evidences a complete lack of that understanding and appreciation and, indeed, takes a position in complete opposition to the political and social purposes of free speech.

And the line between expression made in furtherance of a political agenda and what you call the aggravation of your fellow citizens for it's own sake is a thin and blurry one. Why are you so confident that Coss was engaged in the latter and not the former? That conclusion doesn't appear to me to be abundantly clear and beyond all dispute. Were you privy to the innermost workings of Mr. Coss' mind? Are you a clairvoyant? I'm willing to bet a nickel to a dollar that the plaintiff-father in the lawsuit filed against Westboro that currently sits before the Supreme Court doesn't think, as you do, that Westboro was furthering any political agenda when they picketed his son's funeral. I'm willing to bet that he thinks they were about nothing more than aggravating their fellow citizens for it's own sake. And that difference in opinions isn't, I don't think, surprising. Oftentimes what we see depends on which side of the line we stand when we look.

 

[KBF007]

Typical stupid ignorant Yank response. The Queen is a figurehead she has no REAL power. I have to laugh hysterically at all the posts from Americans about your so called free speech and how brilliant your country is. The US is a country of illiterates who have no qualms dropping bombs on innocent women and children in order to keep the costs of petrol/gasoline down. So that your lazy fat arses can use a car to go 5 metres down the road. Colm Coss is an uber cu** I hope he was arse raped in prison. That is all, adieu dole scum.

 

[veloper]

Don't worry peoples, trolls on favourite political, religious and game boards are still untouchable.

There's just some lines bordering on harassment they can't cross and most trolls don't.

Personally I think 18 months is way out of proportion. You get less for beating someone up at a bar.