Sammyboy RSS Feed
06-05-2015, 01:40 AM
An honorable member of the Coffee Shop Has Just Posted the Following:
http://sgtalk.org/mybb/Thread-Amos-U...to-be-children (http://sgtalk.org/mybb/Thread-Amos-United-Nations-considers-those-below-18-to-be-children)
Yesterday 10:57 PM http://sgtalk.org/mybb/images/mobile/posted_0.gif Post: #1 (http://sgtalk.org/mybb/Thread-Amos-United-Nations-considers-those-below-18-to-be-children?pid=1089232#pid1089232) bloom (http://sgtalk.org/mybb/User-bloom) http://sgtalk.org/mybb/images/buddy_offline.gif
Senior Member
Posts: 754
Reputation: 5 (http://sgtalk.org/mybb/reputation.php?uid=539) [quote] One might find Amos offensive. One might find him annoying, rude, arrogant, vulgar and disrespectful. One might thoroughly dislike him. One might actively choose to avoid him if caught in a social situation together. And that’s perfectly fine. No one is required to like Amos.
But all of that is completely separate from the fact that in Singapore, you can be reported and arrested for being offensive and annoying and rude and vulgar and disrespectful. That you can be charged for harassment despite the fact that no one was forced to watch your YouTube video (everyone who was distressed by the video could have, at any point, closed the browser and gone on with his or her life). That it can be a criminal offence, in Singapore, to say things that people don’t like to hear.
There are implications for freedom of speech here that we as a society have yet to really question and explore.
On top of that, this case has thrown up points of concern related to the way we treat youths. Although the United Nations considers those below 18 to be children, and therefore in need of protection even when they have fallen foul of the law, Singapore sees children as those below 14, and those above 14 and below 16 as young persons. As a 16-year-old, Amos is therefore old enough to be tried as an adult, slapped in handcuffs and hustled away. He is now in remand – probably not in a juvenile section – and might have to sit in there for some time.
Apart from the problems of using handcuffs on minors, is this really a proportional response to a YouTube video? Can we really, hand on heart, look at this treatment of a teenager and say that this is a rational, mature reaction?
[quote]
Click here to view the whole thread at www.sammyboy.com (http://www.sammyboy.com/showthread.php?206160-Amos-United-Nations-considers-those-below-18-to-be-children&goto=newpost).
http://sgtalk.org/mybb/Thread-Amos-U...to-be-children (http://sgtalk.org/mybb/Thread-Amos-United-Nations-considers-those-below-18-to-be-children)
Yesterday 10:57 PM http://sgtalk.org/mybb/images/mobile/posted_0.gif Post: #1 (http://sgtalk.org/mybb/Thread-Amos-United-Nations-considers-those-below-18-to-be-children?pid=1089232#pid1089232) bloom (http://sgtalk.org/mybb/User-bloom) http://sgtalk.org/mybb/images/buddy_offline.gif
Senior Member
Posts: 754
Reputation: 5 (http://sgtalk.org/mybb/reputation.php?uid=539) [quote] One might find Amos offensive. One might find him annoying, rude, arrogant, vulgar and disrespectful. One might thoroughly dislike him. One might actively choose to avoid him if caught in a social situation together. And that’s perfectly fine. No one is required to like Amos.
But all of that is completely separate from the fact that in Singapore, you can be reported and arrested for being offensive and annoying and rude and vulgar and disrespectful. That you can be charged for harassment despite the fact that no one was forced to watch your YouTube video (everyone who was distressed by the video could have, at any point, closed the browser and gone on with his or her life). That it can be a criminal offence, in Singapore, to say things that people don’t like to hear.
There are implications for freedom of speech here that we as a society have yet to really question and explore.
On top of that, this case has thrown up points of concern related to the way we treat youths. Although the United Nations considers those below 18 to be children, and therefore in need of protection even when they have fallen foul of the law, Singapore sees children as those below 14, and those above 14 and below 16 as young persons. As a 16-year-old, Amos is therefore old enough to be tried as an adult, slapped in handcuffs and hustled away. He is now in remand – probably not in a juvenile section – and might have to sit in there for some time.
Apart from the problems of using handcuffs on minors, is this really a proportional response to a YouTube video? Can we really, hand on heart, look at this treatment of a teenager and say that this is a rational, mature reaction?
[quote]
Click here to view the whole thread at www.sammyboy.com (http://www.sammyboy.com/showthread.php?206160-Amos-United-Nations-considers-those-below-18-to-be-children&goto=newpost).