a tad ott but the guy sounds like a ***** so glad he got what he deserved.

Thats completely different and you know it

Erm, you made initial comparisons :

This is a ridiculous sentence considering all the chav scum who get away with terrorising estates for years on end with a slap on the wrist.

Pathetic, it's not even an IRL crime.

Why in the Hell are the police wasting valuable time on crap like this?

Because they are obliged to :

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england...ester-11650593

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/21/section/127

I don't think 18 weeks is long enough for that ******!

I'm not saying he shouldn't have been prosecuted. Just that a custodial sentence is harsh to say the least when people like this... get away with a suspended sentence.

Well, the "thug" should have been banged up for several years with some hairy-backed knuckle-draggers serving life - no remission, no remorse ..... :mad:

I didn't make no such comparisons. Rape doesn't necessarily mean paedophillia, and paedophillia is slightly different to being a keyboard warrior, do you not think?

Yes, you did ..... ;)

AFAIK, rape is not, and presumably cannot be, an internet crime, but paedophilic behaviour may well be, i.e. child pornography exhange/chatroom grooming ..... :eek:

Nope, you're just reading into what I wrote. Highlight where I wrote the direct comparison, not one you've twisted

here :

yeah, I understood that bit. But where did I compare it to paedophiles on the internet?

You didn't and I didn't say you did - you accused me of making comparisons, which I had not - you had suggested that prosecuting for internet "crime" is pointless while I queried whether, in your opinion, paedophiles should therefore be "left to it" - you then made a legal comparison between rape and an internet troll .....

Yeah you might wanna read the thread again, I get a completely different account to that

You suggested that internet paedophiles should be left to it based on what my post said, but I did go on to say its completely different, besides internet trolling doesn't affect lives in the way that internet paedophilia does. And internet trolling tends to stay on the internet, the other doesn't. In fairness you can imply it from my post it you're being picky but realistically its 2 completely different matters and its like comparing death by dangerous driving with driving without insurance.

You went on to say I made initial comparisons (assuming its about trolling vs paedophillia beacuse of the post you quoted) and I didn't make any comparison at all and then said about the unrelaetd one. Thats what I'm asking you to find, otherwise you need to be clearer when you put your points across or just admit you were wrong to save you having to buy a new shovel

I beg to differ ..... we appear to have irreconcilable perceptions ..... ;)

That different that you quote the entirely wrong post :)

No, I didn't ..... :nono:

Once of you must be trolling. Now behave before I call the coppers.

dont forget these 3 evil ******s as well
those sick bastards should get tortured every day for the rest of their lives:mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad:

Yeah I heard about this too. I assumed it happened in America at first with how corrupt their legal system is. 80 hours community service and 12 months probation for torturing and sexually assaulting a minor?

Incomprehensible. Thankfully a petition is underway to change the decision. I hope there are serious consequences for the judge and defence barrister responsible for this. :mad:

Great Britain does not guarantee Freedom of Speech. That is America. So no, Brits do not have Freedom of Speech.