On Human Behaviour, Morality and Criminality

[OxfordBloo]

  I am interested in the view of posters on the rights of citizens against other citizens and against the state. These concepts inform all the debate on this board.

What behaviour should be banned and what allowed.

What does social disapprobation mean. What are the limits to its expression.

What rights do ordinary citizens have.

69

[OxfordBloo]

So, what are the reasonable limits of human behaviour.

Is it justified to bully and harass people?

[Brietta]

So, what are the reasonable limits of human behaviour.

Is it justified to bully and harass people?

It is never justified to bully and harass people no matter who they are or what they might have done.  Society needs to operate to certain standards and ripping people to shreds whether in word or deed is unacceptable in a just society.

[G-Unit]

It depends what you define as bullying and harassing.
The Met say;

No matter how bad bullying can seem, many incidents of bullying are not actually crimes, and therefore might not be a matter for the police. The best people to deal with them are parents, teachers or other responsible adults.

But some types of bullying are illegal and should be reported to us. This includes bullying that involves:

harassment and intimidation over a period of time including calling someone names or threatening them, making abusive phone calls, and sending abusive emails or texts (one incident is not normally enough to get a conviction)
anything involving hate crimes (you can find out more about hate crimes here)

What is hate crime?
A hate crime is any incident that is perceived by the victim, or any other person to be:

racist
homophobic
transphobic (discrimination against transsexual or transgender people)
Or due to a person’s:

religion
beliefs
gender identity
disability

http://safe.met.police.uk/hate_crimes/get_the_facts.html

[OxfordBloo]

That is why I specified Morality and Criminality.

[OxfordBloo]

What are the moral and legal limits on discussing the personal lives in public of people with whom you have no relationship.

How would you feel if people were openly critical about you in public merely be a use they did not like you?

[Brietta]

It depends what you define as bullying and harassing.
The Met say;

No matter how bad bullying can seem, many incidents of bullying are not actually crimes, and therefore might not be a matter for the police. The best people to deal with them are parents, teachers or other responsible adults.

But some types of bullying are illegal and should be reported to us. This includes bullying that involves:

harassment and intimidation over a period of time including calling someone names or threatening them, making abusive phone calls, and sending abusive emails or texts (one incident is not normally enough to get a conviction)
anything involving hate crimes (you can find out more about hate crimes here)

What is hate crime?
A hate crime is any incident that is perceived by the victim, or any other person to be:

racist
homophobic
transphobic (discrimination against transsexual or transgender people)
Or due to a person’s:

religion
beliefs
gender identity
disability

http://safe.met.police.uk/hate_crimes/get_the_facts.html

No one should require a definition to differentiate right from wrong; it is something which should be innate due to the conditioning of education and example.


On the first question asked ~ "What behaviour should be banned and what allowed."

Behaviour which considers the rights of others and is not injurious to others sounds OK to me.

[Brietta]

What are the moral and legal limits on discussing the personal lives in public of people with whom you have no relationship.

How would you feel if people were openly critical about you in public merely be a use they did not like you?

Unfortunately society tolerates and seems to be fascinated by the 'reality show celebrities' and so many aspire to become one that all the normal boundaries have been pushed back.

'Celebrities' who court followings on twitter etc have also blurred the line between what is and what is not acceptable.

For those whose 'celebrity' is gained inadvertently the 'old' rules of empathy and decency should still apply. 

[Alice Purjorick]

No one should require a definition to differentiate right from wrong; it is something which should be innate due to the conditioning of education and example.


On the first question asked ~ "What behaviour should be banned and what allowed."

Behaviour which considers the rights of others and is not injurious to others sounds OK to me.

If it is innate it is not learned.
The interesting thing is the case of two siblings brought up with the same values but take different moral routes as young adults. Is that due to influence outside the family or merely genetic?

[Brietta]

If it is innate it is not learned.
The interesting thing is the case of two siblings brought up with the same values but take different moral routes as young adults. Is that due to influence outside the family or merely genetic?

Thank you for the English lesson.  As to nature or nurture I really have no opinion, in the example you have used who is to know what differing life experiences the siblings may have had. As individuals, they make their own choices based on instilled values which they may interpret in different ways.

[mercury]

Unfortunately society tolerates and seems to be fascinated by the 'reality show celebrities' and so many aspire to become one that all the normal boundaries have been pushed back.

'Celebrities' who court followings on twitter etc have also blurred the line between what is and what is not acceptable.

For those whose 'celebrity' is gained inadvertently the 'old' rules of empathy and decency should still apply.

Take more water with with it, whats that to do with you or i or the discussion...by the way, still  awaiting your lnk on the fag ash you claimed portuguese police flicked all over 5a and destroyed evidence, in your own time though

[mercury]

  I am interested in the view of posters on the rights of citizens against other citizens and against the state. These concepts inform all the debate on this board.

What behaviour should be banned and what allowed.

What does social disapprobation mean. What are the limits to its expression.

What rights do ordinary citizens have.

I will be short and simple and probably won't give you the answers youare looking for
..which are about criminality, lets cut to the chase
vast majority of people honestly commenting on this case are neither immoral  or criminal for doing so...are you of the ed the expunger (thats one of the mccanns lawyers by the way) school that wants no one to have a single suspicious thought?
Are you for real?
Your beef is with the internet, take it out with them!! Its 2015, grow up
ps perhaps you should factor in that the mccanns also have responsibility about morality and behaviour....they make alot of people frightened to speak out...why are THEY bullies???..and are also connected to a woman  committing suicide after being aoproached by sky about her conments online....we also have gerry mccann wanting many people to be prosecuted..,,you go to admit the mccanns stink in this regard, no sorrys either for brenda from them! not a single comment, says it all for me, good day

[Jean-Pierre]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/madeleinemccann/9226205/Madeleine-McCann-unanswered-questions.html

[G-Unit]

What are the moral and legal limits on discussing the personal lives in public of people with whom you have no relationship.

How would you feel if people were openly critical about you in public merely be a use they did not like you?

Who is discussing people's personal lives? Who doesn't like who?

[Jean-Pierre]

I will be short and simple and probably won't give you the answers youare looking for
..which are about criminality, lets cut to the chase
vast majority of people honestly commenting on this case are neither immoral  or criminal for doing so...are you of the ed the expunger (thats one of the mccanns lawyers by the way) school that wants no one to have a single suspicious thought?
Are you for real?
Your beef is with the internet, take it out with them!! Its 2015, grow up
ps perhaps you should factor in that the mccanns also have responsibility about morality and behaviour....they make alot of people frightened to speak out...why are THEY bullies???..and are also connected to a woman  committing suicide after being aoproached by sky about her conments online....we also have gerry mccann wanting many people to be prosecuted..,,you go to admit the mccanns stink in this regard, no sorrys either for brenda from them! not a single comment, says it all for me, good day

Can you point me in the direction of any comments of any kind from either of the McCanns in connection with the "dossier" or Brenda Leyland?