Quote:
Originally Posted by peanut
What happened could have happened to anyone. It wasn't because of his neuro problems it was because the others were just ****. Why can't you understand that.
On here it is very moderated, speaking your mind will probably offend others and you're not really allowed to say exactly what you're thinking either. But in real life, I value those that do speak their mind, be direct and are honest. It has nothing to do with Neuro bollocks, so please give it a rest.
|
If he hadn't of been neuro diverse, he would probably have worded the remarks differently or not made them at all.
The murderers are indeed **** for not taking his disability into account and reacting in the way that they did.
The social media murder is now available online:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m0018kg6
---------- Post added at 17:58 ---------- Previous post was at 17:54 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY
Richard, how would the new legislation have stopped this boy from offending someone?It wouldn’t, and if the people who were upset couldn’t post their responses, they would have confronted him physically.
The Bill would create a raft of unforeseen consequences and it needs to be ditched.
If people are easily offended, maybe they should be discouraged from using social media.
|
They did confront him physically- they murdered him!
How it's believed that the Online Harms Bill would have helped is included in the programme, which is now available on the iPlayer:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m0018kg6