Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

Chief_Beef_ATL t1_iy3ubrq wrote

Weird title of the article that's better stated in the 1st sentence. "The encouragement of self-harm will be criminalised..."

I thought people were supporting making a law that criminalized self-harm. I haven't had coffee yet but is it just me or is this weird?

And I see no difference between encouraging someone to hurt their neighbor, or hurt themselves. So yeah, put it on the books.

14

ww_crimson t1_iy3zc76 wrote

This is in the UK. Seems like a strange policy based on a quick glance at the article. They're not sure how it will be enforced or what would constitute encouraging self harm. They mention that posting picture of self harm scars could be considered romanticizing self harm. Seems like a well intentioned but poorly thought out legislation.

151

Azar002 t1_iy40152 wrote

Saying "go fuck yourself" counts, unless they are into that sorta thing.

41

cybercuzco t1_iy404i1 wrote

What about "Russian Warship go fuck yourself"

24

KanadainKanada t1_iy455uu wrote

Voting for conservative and neoliberal parties is self-harm. Thus they are forbidden to put up ads.

3

KanadainKanada t1_iy45o99 wrote

Replying to Chief_Beef_ATL (#733,838)

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

Space_Ranger-420 t1_iy4dt4u wrote

England should just kill itself. Death is better than what they are headed for which seems like it’s going to be close to the V-vendetta world. Not everything has to be taxed. Not everything you don’t like has to be declared with laws. They are the worst at infantilization of their people

7

Chief_Beef_ATL t1_iy4eu0o wrote

Replying to KanadainKanada (#735,959)

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

Superjuden t1_iy4fb2l wrote

Replying to ww_crimson (#734,706)

It's probably mostly going to be used in cases of cyberbullying. Cases where people contact others under fake names and just tell them to kill themselves for example aren't that uncommon. Then there's people like O9A who has had a few of their adherents contacting people, often minors, online and getting them to commit acts of self harm and send images and videos as proof which the O9A people use as personal trophies. O9A is fairly active in the UK and do a variety insane shit.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Order_of_Nine_Angles

26

truth_hurtsm8ey t1_iy4g8ki wrote

I mean, I get it but this seems like a pretty silly way of going about preventing people from self harming.

Like ‘oh you’re depressed and are actively harming yourself? Well we’re gonna make your life a whole lot worse and, potentially, fuck up your entire life and any future opportunities that you may have. No need to thank us!’

1

Desperate-King-2428 t1_iy4l2de wrote

Replying to truth_hurtsm8ey (#737,838)

I think you're misinterpreting the title of the article, which is poorly worded. The encouragement of self-harm is the thing being criminalized here, not the act itself.

It's pretty vague though; it seems to include things like posting self-harm scars, which seems odd. At that point, there's nuance. That's not the same as trolls making "kys" comments (or worse).

8

greezyo t1_iy4naib wrote

British lawmakers are dystopian

45

J_T_Reezy t1_iy4ohf0 wrote

Why not, worked for the war on drugs, right? /s

16

hoehater t1_iy4ojrk wrote

So when somebody tells you to “break a leg” it’s gonna be a crime?

3

Ancalimei t1_iy4pxhj wrote

Replying to Superjuden (#737,677)

This. I had lots of bullies telling me to kill myself or cut myself or drink bleach when I was in high school and even afterwards. I’m all kinds of fucked up now. I wish the people who tortured me for years could get some kind of recompense for the harm they did to me.

14

Joeyjackhammer t1_iy4qqd0 wrote

Meanwhile, in Canada, social workers are promoting self harm.

3

ImportanceLarge4837 t1_iy4rhq8 wrote

Replying to [deleted] (#739,149)

Wrong legislation, not even the same country. Try reading the posted article or just the source before you try to tell people what it’s about. KOSA is an insidious bill in America that forces internet companies to violate the privacy of minors, this bill is a genuine attempt to reduce cyber bullying being passed in England. You might have figured this out simply by noticing that it was published by the BBC but if that wasn’t a clear enough the article is categorized as UK news on the article site.

Edit: to clarify I’ve not fully read the OSB itself so it may be very poorly thought out in implementation but it is intended to address a very real problem by criminalizing an extremely harmful behavior.

2

KanadainKanada t1_iy4s1sh wrote

Replying to Chief_Beef_ATL (#737,586)

> 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

KanadainKanada t1_iy4socj wrote

Replying to anti-torque (#737,278)

> 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

KanadainKanada t1_iy4tlnp wrote

Replying to Chief_Beef_ATL (#737,586)

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

meelawsh t1_iy4vrgq wrote

There needs to be an exception for "follow your leader"

1

Grostleton t1_iy4x703 wrote

Replying to ShowBoobsPls (#740,846)

It's not that surprising if you don't subscribe to simplistic ideas like Reddit being a "hivemind" and acknowledge that any community is going to have segmented groups of people, sometimes with drastically different opinions on any given subject.

−2

Sa404 t1_iy4yulo wrote

Of course it’s the UK..

7

TriSamples t1_iy4z4kp wrote

So many good put downs lost due to this madness.

Where does fun and comedy end and criminalisation of words start.

There’s no consideration for context here. It will be abused like all laws more than enforced for good.

5

kkehoe5 t1_iy56hk4 wrote

But what is considered self harm? The bill is obviously designed to punish those that tell or suggest someone to commit suicide.

What if conservatives declare that trans kids taking HRT or get a Mastectomy as self harm? Would the support groups be in violation of the new law? I hope there is clear language in the bill that says what is and what isn’t considered self harm.

11

YoungPatrickBateman t1_iy575rb wrote

Replying to Nekaz (#736,455)

I think a single angry “fuck you, go kill yourself” because someone killed you in COD would be treated differently to a consistent, targeted attack of “you’re worthless, nobody would miss you, go kill yourself”

The law isn’t black and white. There are nuances that would be considered when prosecuting a case.

Given this is a law for the UK I would expect it to be more sensibly applied than the typically heavy handed approach of US laws

6

Chief_Beef_ATL t1_iy580s9 wrote

Replying to KanadainKanada (#740,293)

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

YoungPatrickBateman t1_iy58i6r wrote

Replying to KanadainKanada (#735,959)

>> 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

FTTPOHK_ILWT t1_iy59ce6 wrote

All these angry comments not even reading the article. Its criminalizing the encouragement of self harm. Which i say, go right ahead. It should be criminal to encourage others to harm themselves. No different than encouraging someone to harm a stranger.

−5

ShrekJohnson27 t1_iy5a86f wrote

Replying to Chief_Beef_ATL (#743,385)

Misinterpretation by those enforcing it is what I meant, it’s too slippery of a slope besides allowing them to legally be even more invasive on people and in this case children online. Large set of issues

0

Chief_Beef_ATL t1_iy5bdh0 wrote

Basically they want to criminalize harassment leading to death or self-harm... and people here have problems with that on this thread.

−3

Chief_Beef_ATL t1_iy5c0p9 wrote

Replying to kkehoe5 (#742,975)

Some people will always try to twist or redefine words to accomplish their goals, regardless of what the other side does. Might as well try to make good laws like : make it illegal to harass someone until they kill themselves.

2

dkran t1_iy5gway wrote

I was in school when columbine happened. Before columbine, it was very common for my friends on the playground to scream “I’ll kill you if I catch you” or “I’ll kill you all” whatever in a joking manor before that happened. I remember us saying it all the time.

Then Columbine happened.

It’s sad, but this is the reality we live in.

I’m not saying joking about killing people when you’re kids is right, however I never shot up a school despite being bullied in elementary school and playing many hours of Wolfenstein, Doom, and Quake, and even listening to lots of punk and NIN / Marilyn Manson back then as well.

I think the world is getting less educated and more divided and it sucks.

1

coreyman317 t1_iy5hxhb wrote

How isn’t it already somehow? I feel like I could argue it clearly falls under some kind of manslaughter charge

−2

Gekokapowco t1_iy5hzo7 wrote

Replying to ShowBoobsPls (#740,846)

calling people slurs and encouraging hate based on racial or sexual identity is not the same thing, and it seems like you're equating the two, which is terribly inaccurate

−4

Salt-Artichoke5347 t1_iy5iz1i wrote

great jokes are being criminalized look I have bpd self harm jokes are all about it

0

PieUp t1_iy5jigt wrote

Why is this only happening now?

−2

Old_comfy_shoes t1_iy5ownk wrote

Replying to ww_crimson (#734,706)

The romanticizing part is stupid. I understand they mean well. And I really get that. But if people feel shy to come clean with their struggles, they might not get the help they need.

I'm fine with criminalizing encouraging people to harm themselves. But posting pictures of your own self harm, I don't think ought to be criminalized.

7

Sea-Profession-3312 t1_iy5z6vy wrote

I hope this is retroactive so encouraging the jab gets politicians thrown in jail.

3

Chief_Beef_ATL t1_iy5ztx2 wrote

Replying to Joeyjackhammer (#745,756)

So 1 person at Veterans Affairs Canada did this, is being investigated and appears to be an isolated incident equates to "social workers in Canada are promoting self harm"?

I dont think those are the same things.

−1

CaptainC0medy t1_iy60e1n wrote

From my experience, it's all kids in video games unable to control themselves.

No ramifications for the parents letting them do it.

The government is taking a nuclear response to a problem that can't be fixed like that.

Parents need to take accountability and until they do, there will always be a kid who doesn't care how many bans he gets. A bully that's doing it out of boredom and someone has to take the result.

1

fellipec t1_iy63u6j wrote

Okay, but I really wish people a meeting with the creator, whoever it is, ASAP.

1

The-Old-Prince t1_iy63zr0 wrote

Replying to J_T_Reezy (#739,522)

People joke but many Asian countries successfully crack down on drug trafficking woth draconian laws. Americans just dont have the stomach for it. But fentanyl trafficking is a top priority for the feds these days

0

psylentj t1_iy68gu2 wrote

Have they NOT learned from the “War on Drugs” ??

2

ArrozConmigo t1_iy6byht wrote

I think 4chan calls this "an hero". I guess they'll stop now.

2

clickwir t1_iy6ep9a wrote

This has Dumb-Idea written all over it.

3

Nowhereman50 t1_iy6lc6w wrote

Well that's TikTok gone. All the people telling others that their self harm is normal and doesn't need therapy will be out the job now

1

Ok-Teaching-983 t1_iy6m9u9 wrote

Keep it vague so they can selectively use on dissidents. Hate this thought control shit

1

FocusFlukeGyro t1_iy6nwkt wrote

There are three letters that when combined in a certain order (kay y es) are very nasty and I hope is curtailed because of this.

1

vikko212 t1_iy79zzr wrote

Replying to Superjuden (#737,677)

from the artical, emphasis mine:

>the update to the Online Safety Bill would create a new offence, bringing self-harm content in line with communications that encourage suicide - which is already illegal.

2

NeverrSummer t1_iy7de7z wrote

Replying to ShowBoobsPls (#740,846)

Twitter is a private company with people arguing about how they should moderate their own, optionally used website.

This is a law. The only way to "not use" it would be to emigrate, which is often expensive and can take years.

There's a difference between deleting your Twitter account and deciding to stop being British, thus the difference in opinion of how much censorship is too much.

6

spike4379 t1_iy7e1wt wrote

call of duty lobbies about to get real weird

1

El_Sjakie t1_iy7lfa9 wrote

So if I tell my gaming buddies to 'go choke on a fat cock', I am going to be a criminal?

1

nadmaximus t1_iy7q1hw wrote

So advertising junk food will be illegal?

1

paranoid_horse t1_iy7xk3r wrote

for anyone confused, it's "(Encouraging self-harm) to be criminalised in Online Safety Bill" not "Encouraging (self-harm to be criminalised) in Online Safety Bill"

i was confused.

1

Apocrisiary t1_iy88cje wrote

Oh yeah, great fucking plan.

We all now drug addicts seek help for their problems because of this /s

To put it in plain text, this will just lead to people contemplating/having issues with suicide not to seek help, because they can be punished.

1

KanadainKanada t1_iy99ex0 wrote

Replying to YoungPatrickBateman (#743,355)

> 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

KanadainKanada t1_iy99sk5 wrote

Replying to Chief_Beef_ATL (#743,262)

> 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

YoungPatrickBateman t1_iy9kz6b wrote

Replying to KanadainKanada (#773,002)

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

Replying to YoungPatrickBateman (#775,505)

> 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