While I agree this would be a breach of human rights, IMO the people who are using social networks to incite violence don't deserve to be allowed to use them.
If you have a problem with something the Government has done, there are far better ways to get your point across that don't involve innocent people getting seriously hurt.
This is a good point.
Statistics: Posted by Phantomrose — August 15th, 2011, 10:04 am
]]>
If you have a problem with something the Government has done, there are far better ways to get your point across that don't involve innocent people getting seriously hurt.
Statistics: Posted by Nate — August 13th, 2011, 1:09 pm
]]>
People could riot about banning media for the rioters... kinda redundant in my opinion...
Dakota.
Statistics: Posted by Dakota Lesmercy — August 13th, 2011, 12:43 pm
]]>
bluecoat wrote:
Just a cursory glance, but the post master was allowed to go through mail to see if anyone had anything bad to say about the government in them. Sounds eerily similar to what the article was suggesting twitter, facebook, and blackberry do.
Similar, yes, but Twitter, Facebook, Blackberry, etc. are private companies. It would be breaching more than just mail privacy in this case.
Anyway, from what the villagers that actually live in the UK are saying, the riots and looting are just people looting. It surprises me, though, that it's lasting this long and being (supposedly) as widespread as it is without it being more than that. Are these really just gangs of troublemakers, or is there actually protesting going on?
Well compared to say the Rodney King riots in Los Angeles (1992) this is a cakewalk, I can confirm that absolutely no protesting is going on.
Statistics: Posted by Aragorn Ix — August 12th, 2011, 3:33 pm
]]>
Are these really just gangs of troublemakers, or is there actually protesting going on?
Troublemakers. We call them chavs.
Statistics: Posted by Simons Pure — August 12th, 2011, 11:22 am
]]>
"Cameron said that government officials are working with authorities "to look at whether it would be right to stop people communicating via these websites and services when we know they are plotting violence, disorder and criminality.""
social media ban?
I copied the title that was on CNN, but it appears the title of the article has since changed.
bartoron Statistics: Posted by bartoron — August 12th, 2011, 10:38 am
]]>
Just a cursory glance, but the post master was allowed to go through mail to see if anyone had anything bad to say about the government in them. Sounds eerily similar to what the article was suggesting twitter, facebook, and blackberry do.
Similar, yes, but Twitter, Facebook, Blackberry, etc. are private companies. It would be breaching more than just mail privacy in this case.
Anyway, from what the villagers that actually live in the UK are saying, the riots and looting are just people looting. It surprises me, though, that it's lasting this long and being (supposedly) as widespread as it is without it being more than that. Are these really just gangs of troublemakers, or is there actually protesting going on?
Statistics: Posted by Snake1235 — August 12th, 2011, 9:35 am
]]>
]]>
EDIT: Found it!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sedition_Act_of_1918Just a cursory glance, but the post master was allowed to go through mail to see if anyone had anything bad to say about the government in them. Sounds eerily similar to what the article was suggesting twitter, facebook, and blackberry do.
Statistics: Posted by bluecoat — August 12th, 2011, 5:05 am
]]>
]]>
social media ban?
Statistics: Posted by Sarah — August 11th, 2011, 11:10 pm
]]>
I think I might just go on holiday until the inevitable explosion of political stupidity from recent events in this country subsides.
Statistics: Posted by Eadwulf — August 11th, 2011, 8:12 pm
]]>
]]>
That's definitely not going to help.
bartoron Statistics: Posted by bartoron — August 11th, 2011, 7:45 pm
]]>