Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

KanadainKanada t1_iy45o99 wrote

Reply to comment by Chief_Beef_ATL in Encouraging self-harm to be criminalised in Online Safety Bill by speckz

Is self-harm a criminal act? Can you be punished for self-harm?

If not - then how can encouraging you to do something legal be illegal?

I can encourage you to smoke and offer you something to smoke and it would be totally legal - as long as you're not a minor that is.

So, will tobacco companies be dissolved, disowned and their wealth redistributed towards the NHS? Because their ads but also their products are absolutely promoting self-harm, even addiction.

This idea of criminalizing self-harm is a)legally stupid, b)creates legal precedent for much worse laws, c)covers up the real culprits.

If you think kids start self-harm or suicide because of some online posts - no, the base for that behavior is laid at home by the parents, then by the school environment. But hey, if someone else is responsible you ain't gonna need to change anything at home!

Self-harm didn't come into existence with internet or Tiktok. It was always around, and it was even more severe in the past.

12

Red-Dwarf69 t1_iy4bg8b wrote

Get outta here with your rationality. Laws against bad things = good. Full stop, no need for any thinking beyond what can fit on a bumper sticker. Get with the program.

11

YoungPatrickBateman t1_iy58i6r wrote

>> Is self-harm a criminal act? Can you be punished for self-harm?

No, it isn’t and you wouldn’t be punished for harming yourself. I feel like you’re being deliberately ignorant to what is being proposed.

The law isn’t looking to criminalise self-harm - it’s looking to eliminate encouragement of self-harm.

If you torment someone for such a length of time and continuously tell them to kill themselves there is (very likely) going to be a point that they break and try to kill themselves. Providing them with images of self-harm is further encouragement.

If you’re the primary source of antagonism in that persons life then you should be held accountable.

You encouraging someone to smoke is not the same as encouraging someone to kill themselves. One cigarette isn’t going to kill a person (immediately) but one attempt at suicide very well could.

8

KanadainKanada t1_iy99ex0 wrote

> it’s looking to eliminate encouragement of self-harm.

So, is advertising unhealthy food encouraging self-harm? Is selling a car that is hard to control, has much HP, encouraging self-harm?

So if we talk about dementia, dignity and a self-controlled life and death, if we talk about assisted suicide. That's self-harm, right?

See, in Germany there was a law making it illegal to advertise abortions. Which resulted in "It was illegal to say that your doctors office was conducting abortions".

Your primary source of antagonism? You really believe that a persons primary source of antagonism is some shit in the internet? It's the last drop in the bucket - the real cause is a)parents and b)direct personal contacts/authorities in your life - in that order.

1

YoungPatrickBateman t1_iy9kz6b wrote

Again, I feel like you’re being deliberately ignorant to what is being proposed.

No, advertising unhealthy food and fast cars wouldn’t be seen as encouraging self-harm.

Assisted suicide is not self-harm. That’s assisted dying at the choice of the person. Now if you were sitting there actively encouraging a person to kill themselves who has previously expressed no desire to di by assisted suicide then that could be seen as encouraging self-harm.

The law is often nuisances in the way it is applied. A judge often looks at a scenario and asks “would a reasonable person think advertising McDonalds is encouraging self-harm?”

In the case of this proposed law, it is clearly targeted at bullying and people who encourage others to harm themselves and to take their own life. In many cases when a child takes their own life it often because of a single group of people at school who are making their lives absolute hell.

My niece has a very happy and healthy home life but for a 6 month period a few years ago she was being tormented by a group of girls at her school. It was a relentless and never-ending stream of abuse 24 hours a day.

She would often be in tears at dinner because of the things these awful girls would say. I saw some of the messages she would receive on Instagram or Snapchat. Things like “you’re a disgusting pig. Nobody will ever love you. I don’t know why your parents didn’t abort you. You should abort yourself now” and “everybody at school hates you. You’re so dumb you should be in the slow class. You don’t even count as person” having shit like that constantly thrown at you will wear any person down over time. These girls were the only source of discontent in my nieces life.

My niece had, on more than one occasion, through heavy tears and discomfort expressed a desire to die to my sister and brother-in-law. Thankfully she didn’t go through with it and is much happy now that school is finished. But had she killed herself I would want those shitty girls to be held accountable for the words they said.

So yes, one person or a group of people can be the primary and only source of antagonism in a persons life. Plenty of kids with happy home lives kill themselves because of external pressures.

0

KanadainKanada t1_iy9ltb7 wrote

> encouraging a person to kill themselves who has previously expressed no desire

So lets say someone starts to look around for talks about suicide & self-harm & depression that would imply definitely desire. Someone looking at 2500 posts about suicide (not getting messaged 2500 private mails!) is pretty sure is expression of a desire.

And the bill is fucking not about person a trying to actively encourage person b. It's about

> Content that encourages someone to harm themselves will be targeted in a new offence, making it illegal.

So a page, a group, a subreddit, a forum talking about self-harm could easily be seen as 'encouraging'.

You are not seeing the forest for the trees. This is not a law about someone gaslighting someone else to suicide.

Edit: Additionally you haven't apparently read the article. Because the case is nothing about things like you claim your niece faced. Even more - there are already laws to act against persons that directly attack, stalk or insult you (or your niece). It's already illegal what those girls did. So - you want another law that you can 'ignore'? Because you could have just called and used the existing laws.

1

anti-torque t1_iy4d5p9 wrote

You're not naive to think the enforcement won't match the crime, given this is in line with incitement laws.

But it isn't about self-harm, per se. That was a lot of wasted time.

4

KanadainKanada t1_iy4socj wrote

> given this is in line with incitement laws.

Incitement is "In criminal law, incitement is the encouragement of another person to commit a crime."

Is suicide a crime? No. So inciting someone (adult to adult) to suicide is not a crime.

−2

anti-torque t1_iy51itm wrote

Whoa!

Your very narrow view of the legal system is... um... unsurprising.

4

KanadainKanada t1_iy9a2dj wrote

You seem to like pretty arbitrary interpretation of legal language. No surprise.

1

anti-torque t1_iydf2nj wrote

If by arbitrary you mean read as written and supported by precedent, you would be correct.

0

Chief_Beef_ATL t1_iy4eu0o wrote

It was always around and more severe in the past? In the 80's assholes you've never met could harass you anonymously and en mass? Pre-internet, only assholes from your area could be assholes to you IRL. Sorry but your comment doesn't hold water.

And again, the article isnt about criminalizing self harm. Youre right that self harm isnt illegal. It's illegal to tell someone to kill someone. It should be illegal to encourage someone to kill themselves as well. You dont have to criminalize self harm to make this happen.

And if you are confused about the definition of self harm, just look it up.

−2

KanadainKanada t1_iy4tlnp wrote

Additionally - suicide had and still has a strong stigma. Because people in the past fucking knew that it was a failure of parents, teachers and community. Depending on religion it was a mortal sin. Or still is even. That totally fudges the numbers. Happy little accidents to bury the dead kids instead of you know... outside the graveyard due to sin.

You lack to see how brutal the past generations were. Read up on black (poisonous) pedagogy. And even in media - behavior that was common in schools. Sure it was less "words" and more actual sticks and stones - but hey, it is of course totally impossible to evade anonymous online terror by going anonymous yourself then evade the gang living in the same village than you.

2

KanadainKanada t1_iy4s1sh wrote

> It's illegal to tell someone to kill someone.

Wrong. It is illegal to incite someone to commit a crime.

Is it a crime to commit suicide? No. So, is inciting someone to suicide a crime? Of course not. At least as long as we talk about sane adults. As soon as you step into people that aren't legally competent, need a guardian etc. that's something else.

0

Chief_Beef_ATL t1_iy580s9 wrote

People that need a guardian is something else? Like young people aka children? Thankfully no young children use the internet. Young people are always kind and thoughtful and never do or say bad things, right? They are immune from depression as well as the effects of bullying. And they certainly have never committed suicide as a result of online bullying. Harrassment until someone kills themselves is still harassment, adult or no.

So murder for hire is legal in your book? Go kill them is fine to say? But INCITING someone, oh that's different. That's a nay-no.

2

KanadainKanada t1_iy99sk5 wrote

> Thankfully no young children use the internet.

Too bad there is no one, like literally no one assigned as the guardian of that person that I don't know regularly checks on the shit that child does. I mean - no one is checking the shit you post online, right?

You do not understand language, do you? Incitement to commit a crime is illegal. Incitement to go fuck yourself is not a crime since fucking yourself is not illegal. You get it now?

0