UK Lawmakers Seeking Harsher Sentences For The Crime Of Being A Jerk Online

from the the-law-wasn't-BAD,-we-just-weren't-doing-it-HARD-enough! dept

The UK’s Malicious Communications Act has served the country well in its aim to turn being a jerk into a criminal act. The Act debuted in 1988, in time to catch the internet in its developing period and criminalize behavior that was already covered by existing laws. (Except for the whole “on the internet” thing that makes lawmakers bust out their favorite markup pens.)

As it stands now, trolling (for lack of a better, shorter word) is punishable by up to 6 months in prison. For many of those on the receiving end of internet-delivered abuse, this apparently seems like it’s too short to be effective. The Register notes that many of the act’s proponents felt two particular individuals got off too lightly.

Perhaps the most notorious example was the one involving feminist campaigner Caroline Criado-Perez. Two people were later found guilty of sending menacing communications after Criado-Perez made a formal statement to police in July 2013 about being harassed online.

But the accused ended up only with short stays behind bars.

One received 8 weeks in prison and the other 12 weeks, both of which clearly fit under the six-month maximum sentence, but seemingly offered no satisfaction to the victim of their online activities. So, British lawmakers have decided to “fix” this broken law, but not by disassembling it and allowing existing laws to do their jobs. Instead, they’ve decided to push for longer sentences in hopes of deterring future bad behavior and to prevent others from taking 8-12 week “vacations” at the local lockup.

Ms Bray’s plan would give magistrates the ability to send such cases for trial at crown court, where the jail term given could be four times longer and there is more time to bring a case. The change will be discussed by a committee of MPs on Thursday and if approved will be added to laws to be voted on later this year.

This law isn’t specifically a reaction to Criado-Perez’s treatment, but rather an amalgamation of all those who have been wronged and, apparently, contacted their representatives about it. MP Angie Bray is being motivated by a constituent’s statement that her daughter was “verbally raped” by an older man who sent thousands of obscene texts. Education Secretary Michael Gove spoke about several deaths attributed to cyberbullying in his support of the change.

The law’s aim is, of course, noble: to stamp out abusive behavior online. Unfortunately, even the noblest laws have unintended consequences, like the punishment of the merely controversial, rather than true abuse. The law also seeks to exact proxy revenge for those who have been harmed, punishing people whose only crime was mere stupidity.

Lot of people say lots of things online, and not all of it is pleasant. Those championing these laws are seeking to guarantee their constituents the “right” to not be offended. But life’s often an ugly place, populated by jerks. But being a jerk “on the internet” shouldn’t be a criminal offense. The low bar of a communication possibly “causing distress” isn’t high enough to prevent the law from being misused.

If the activities exceed simply being a jerk and move into something more dangerous, existing laws applying to stalking, harassment and making threats should be used rather than adding another layer of legislation over the top. The court of public opinion often weighs in heavily during outbursts of lousy online behavior, something that moves much faster than any court proceeding.

Addressing noxious behavior is fine, but applying a broadly-written law isn’t. And expanding the length of imprisonment doesn’t fix what’s truly wrong with it — it just makes the law worse.

Filed Under: , , , ,

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “UK Lawmakers Seeking Harsher Sentences For The Crime Of Being A Jerk Online”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
28 Comments
Anonymoussays:

Re: What about my rights?

You know, that’s a good point. I find religion (in any and all of its forms) extremely offensive — yet I’m subjected to it on a daily basis, thanks to the inferior primates who’ve failed to evolve into thinking human beings. Should I be able to use this law to have everyone who proselytizes at me thrown in prison?

Anonymoussays:

Re: Re: What about my rights?

“inferior primates who’ve failed to evolve into thinking human beings”

Go directly to jail.

You have just offended a beellion inferior primates (oh, I am truly sorry – I mean fine upstanding humans at the peak of evolution errm creation).

You can discuss it in jail with your cellmates, the inferior primates. Oh-oh, now I’ve done it.

I know, let’s put everyone in jail and we can settle it there.

John Fendersonsays:

Re: Re: What about my rights?

“I find religion (in any and all of its forms) extremely offensive”

You find what people believe to be offensive? That’s a little crimethinky, and ironically it puts you in the same camp as most religious people. It would be better to reserve your offense for what people do rather than what they think.

art guerrillasays:

Re: Re: What about my rights?

THANK YOU, anon @7:38, exactly…
as i’ve called it numerous times in the past (and no doubt will in the future):

you have the RIGHT to NOT be assaulted;
you do NOT have the RIGHT to NOT be insulted…

the thing is, i KNOW as sure as dog made little green apples, that there are a MILLION times worse that goes on ALL THE TIME, only, it isn’t ‘recorded’ as far as an email, or text message, or whatever that can become a black and white printout of what someone ‘said’…

otherwise, THERE WOULD BE LITTLE TO NO ‘case’ when it was simply joe blow mouthing off at the bar and calling you names and there was no ‘recording’ of it…

the thing is, when i hear about shit like this, I want to insult the butt-hurt ‘victim’, AND the idiot politicians (oh, am i being redundant?) even more so…
stupid shits

art guerrillasays:

Re:

yeppers…
i can’t stand the stupidheads who are trying to childproof the inertnet… not only CAN’T be (practically) done and maintain ANY semblance of free speech; BUT, I DON’T WANT IT DONE: this is an ADULT world (well, supposed to be), children have to GROW UP to live in it, the rest of us don’t have to grown down to the lowest common denominator…

one point in relation to people calling/texting whatever harassing crap, while i have a stupid cellular telephonic transportable computing machine thingy, i really don’t mess with them much, so a question to phonephreaks:
does the 69 block work on cellyphones ? ? ?

if so, WHY is someone/anyone receiving ‘thousands’ of calls/texts from someone they don’t want to communicate with if they can simply 69 them ? ? ?

(yes, of course, the harasser can use other lines/numbers, but -really- how many even hard core jerks are going to go to the trouble to do that ? …thousands of times ? )

Vsays:

Re: Re:

if so, WHY is someone/anyone receiving ‘thousands’ of calls/texts from someone they don’t want to communicate with if they can simply *69 them ? ? ?

A quick google search shows that blocking texts is somewhat difficult at the service provider level unless you want to cut off ALL text messaging from everyone. There are a few apps out there that do it apparently though. However, a simple solution would be to get a new phone number. I can change mine myself online through the service providers website, without any fees.

Anonymoussays:

Said on Street - Arrested

“On Saturday night (3-17-14), political police in Liverpool arrested BNP Head of Security Martin Reynolds after a woman called Merseyside police and complained that “a man had made a derogatory comment” to her outside the North West’s BNP regional fundraising event.”
http://www.bnp.org.uk/news/national/desperate-political-police-arrest-another-bnp-campaigner

Go to a sporting event – “Football” in the UK is a filth laden, cursing fest that rivals no other…

Groakersays:

re: No right to be offense free

English and American common law started to diverge at the time of the revolution. What is a “right” in the US (such as freedom of speech) may not be a “right” in England or GB.

Unfortunately, the rights of self expression within the US are being eroded, and started onto the same downward slide present in other parts of the world. We now have laws that add additional penalties for the use of certain expletives, or even claiming of same, in the commission of crimes. These are in essence thought crimes.

There should be no right to being protected against being offended, but unfortunately there are. And more and more are being formulated as the police states in various nations seek to expand their purview to controlling the entirety of behavior in life.

Zonkersays:

The problem with criminalizing the act of offending someone is that being offended by something is a choice made by the one offended. For example, you can choose to be offended by “yo mama” insults, or you can brush it off and return the banter. You can choose take offense to an negative opinion of soldiers/police/religion/government/etc., or you can choose to ignore/debate/explore/accept/reject their opinion.

It is an uncivilized and unjust society that reacts with violence or incarceration those who speak contrary to their beliefs or sensibilities. When what constitutes a criminal act is determined by what people in power choose to be offended by then punishment will be arbitrary and capricious.

GEMontsays:

Nothing up my sleeve....

Merely a continuation the Corporate Fed’s plans of putting an end to public dissent on the internet, by the usual tried and true process.

Make a law that says one thing the public is ok with (for the children), and then slowly reinterpret that law’s wording to include the things that the law was really designed to stop.

I’m pretty sure that by now, we could publish a book filled with such legislative slight of hand.

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...
Loading...
Older Stuff
13:40 It's Great That Winnie The Pooh Is In The Public Domain; But He Should Have Been Free In 1982 (Or Earlier) (35)
12:06 Norton 360 Now Comes With Crypto Mining Capabilities And Sketchy Removal Process (28)
10:45 Chinese Government Dragnet Now Folding In American Social Media Platforms To Silence Dissent (14)
10:40 Daily Deal: The 2022 Ultimate Cybersecurity Analyst Preparation Bundle (0)
09:29 A Fight Between Facebook And The British Medical Journal Highlights The Difficulty Of Moderating 'Medical Misinformation' (9)
06:29 Court Ruling Paves The Way For Better, More Reliable Wi-Fi (4)
20:12 Eighth Circuit (Again) Says There's Nothing Wrong With Detaining Innocent Minors At Gunpoint (15)
15:48 China's Regulatory War On Its Gaming Industry Racks Up 14k Casualties (10)
13:31 Chinese Government Fines Local Car Dealerships For Surveilling While Not Being The Government (5)
12:08 Eric Clapton Pretends To Regret The Decision To Sue Random German Woman Who Listed A Bootleg Of One Of His CDs On Ebay (29)
10:44 ICE Is So Toxic That The DHS's Investigative Wing Is Asking To Be Completely Separated From It (29)
10:39 Daily Deal: The 2022 Complete Raspberry Pi And Arduino Developer Bundle (0)
09:31 Google Blocked An Article About Police From The Intercept... Because The Title Included A Phrase That Was Also A Movie Title (24)
06:22 Wireless Carriers Balk At FAA Demand For 5G Deployment Delays Amid Shaky Safety Concerns (16)
19:53 Tenth Circuit Denies Qualified Immunity To Social Worker Who Fabricated A Mother's Confession Of Child Abuse (35)
15:39 Sci-Hub's Creator Thinks Academic Publishers, Not Her Site, Are The Real Threat To Science, And Says: 'Any Law Against Knowledge Is Fundamentally Unjust' (34)
13:32 Federal Court Tells Proud Boys Defendants That Raiding The Capitol Building Isn't Covered By The First Amendment (25)
12:14 US Courts Realizing They Have A Judge Alan Albright Sized Problem In Waco (17)
10:44 Boston Police Department Used Forfeiture Funds To Hide Purchase Of Surveillance Tech From City Reps (16)
10:39 Daily Deal: The Ultimate Microsoft Excel Training Bundle (0)
09:20 NY Senator Proposes Ridiculously Unconstitutional Social Media Law That Is The Mirror Opposite Of Equally Unconstitutional Laws In Florida & Texas (25)
06:12 Telecom Monopolies Are Exploiting Crappy U.S. Broadband Maps To Block Community Broadband Grant Requests (7)
12:00 Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of 2021 At Techdirt (17)
10:00 Gaming Like It's 1926: Join The Fourth Annual Public Domain Game Jam (6)
09:00 New Year's Message: The Arc Of The Moral Universe Is A Twisty Path (33)
19:39 DHS, ICE Begin Body Camera Pilot Program With Surprisingly Good Policies In Place (7)
15:29 Remembering Techdirt Contributors Sherwin And Elliot (1)
13:32 DC Metro PD's Powerful Review Panel Keeps Giving Bad Cops Their Jobs Back (6)
12:11 Missouri Governor Still Expects Journalists To Be Prosecuted For Showing How His Admin Leaked Teacher Social Security Numbers (39)
10:48 Oversight Board Overturning Instagram Takedown Of Ayahuasca Post Demonstrates The Impossibility Of Content Moderation (10)
More arrow
This site, like most other sites on the web, uses cookies. For more information, see our privacy policy. Got it