AIBU to think this man should have got a prison sentence for assault with a knife against someone who offended his religion?

It doesn’t matter what you consider to be rude or insulting - that is literally the entire point of free speech.

I think there is a difference between criticism or debate and deliberate insult or burning something symbolic

Even if true (so we don't need to discuss that), it is still no excuse for waving a weapon around in public.

I think there is a difference between criticism or debate and deliberate insult or burning something symbolic.
If I hold certain religious views that would be my right and if you want to criticise them, that would be your right. We could discuss that
If you were to jump straight to insult, book-burning, etc there is no room for debate or for learning on either side which is why my perfect world would have room for the first option but not the second. That's only MY perfect world though and others are free to want something different

Why does he have to respect their religion?

Why would that be a perfect world? I’m religious and see criticism of all religions, including my own, as a sign of a healthy society and functioning free speech. If somebody burned my Holy Book I wouldn’t like it but I would see it as their right, and not something that personally impinges upon me.

I heard a discussion about this case on the radio last week and one caller made the point that, in the judgement, the judge never said "the Quran" but always said "the holy Quran" and spoke as though Islam was the national religion and could never be insulted. I haven't listened to it in full so can't say if that is correct or not but it is an interesting point.
In a perfect world nobody would insult the religion of others but it is dangerous to suggest that a minority religion, which is not the established religion of this country, can be defended so violently.
I wonder if that judge would have reacted the same way if I had attacked someone with a knife for destroying a Bible?

Like others, not happy with a PP's suggestion that this attempted assault with a bladed weapon was "provoked". That's a slippery slope especially right now where many trans people would consider themselves provoked if not addressed appropriately for the gender they present.

This judgement feels like the racism of low expectations. And devout, observant Muslims who live in a non-Muslim country must come to terms with the fact that their religion can be challenged and even insulted.

I mean its hardly surprising that this is the case. Obviously the more muslims that are in the UK the more people there are that feel this is acceptable because it is very clear in the Quran about non believers and insults to their prophet. People forget that people's values don't just change overnight if you emigrate to another country you take those values with you if you look at the demographic changes in London it is pretty obvious why this is happening. People forget Islam isn't the liberal, all accepting religion, did you know there is not a single Muslim majority country in the world that has legalised gay marriage for example (google it if you dont believe me).

Giving into bullies never ends well.

Pragmatically, you may well be right. Stopping free expression is the easy route to appease those that might kick off. But morally, at what point do we conclude that the problem is not the book burner?

Yes can you imagine how many people around the world would be murdered if this was done though. British embassies and interests around the world would be fire bombed and there'd be riots in the UK. I would also predict the more peaceful Muslims would organise demonstrations up and down the country demanding an end to these burnings, but not a single demonstration denouncing and casting out the perpetrators of violence.

Unless you are creating a public fire hazard, you should be able to burn books you own

being provocative is not a crime

if you want to live in a country where it is illegal to burn the Koran then there are at least 30 you can choose from.

freedom of speech feels very under threat in this country.

I agree with a PP where we should have public Koran burnings every week - hopefully the religious nutcases will find it unbearable and leave for a country that is more of their liking. Everyone else will note that it is just a book and their almighty god is not troubled by this at all and we can have a much more peaceful and integrated society.

People saying the guy was asking for it and being pro active…

Yeah, because we’ve been conditioned to accept things like Charlie Hebdo etc for showing images and making jokes. Why are we making excuses for these things? It’s atrocious.

Yes, it’s upsetting, enraging even, when people mock your religious book but we cannot have violent idiots on a hair trigger out in society, full stop

He shouldn't have attacked him, but it wasn't an unprovoked assault.

So what, pray tell, is a "provoked" assault ? Getting someones dinner wrong ? Talking to a male friend ?

So you're saying it was a provoked assault? How so?

He shouldn't have attacked him, but it wasn't an unprovoked assault.

He was found guilty of the crime, but the risks he poses to the community wasn't felt to necessitate a custodial sentence.

They seem like a pair of arseholes to me, and I'm glad they were both convicted. But it doesn't seem two tier to me for a first account of assault under provocation didn't mean prison. I've seen that outcome in lots of cases.

Violent crime such as knife crime should always get a prison sentence unless the provocation was the other person was attacking you with their knife and you somehow got it off them in a fight maybe.

That isn't provocation. That is textbook self defence (which is an absolute defence to the charge if "reasonable").

We really need parliament to legislate that provocation is never a defence or mitigation (which is how it was used in this case) to violent behaviours.

Never.
Never.
Never.

There are no hurty magic words that are ever grounds for physically attacking anyone.

Endof.

Yeah agree. Violent crime such as knife crime should always get a prison sentence unless the provocation was the other person was attacking you with their knife and you somehow got it off them in a fight maybe.
Are book burnings of holy books legal? If not then the person who did that should receive the appropriate sentence for that too. (I think it depends on the circumstances which surely is for the justice system to consider not random vigilantes).

He didn’t just pull out a knife he was already carrying. He went and got it and returned to the scene. Which makes it worse in my book.

No, the guy who burned the Quaran does not deserve to be beaten up. It was clearly a controversial and provocative thing to do (and I don't agree with it at all), but it does not deserve violence.
To suggest he deserved a beating, is a worrying precedent, which means a vigilante society where we it's 'justifiable' to hurt those who offend us.

I had an argument on FB with someone who is an interfaith representative for a non-mainstream religion (that's not really treated as a religion), and one that would not be tolerated in a Muslim country.

I said that the beheading of Samuel Paty in France. Paty, if you recall, was the teacher who was giving a lesson on freedom of expression and allegedly showed students the 2012 cartoons of Mohammed from Charlie Hebdo.

This 'inter-faith' person, said that the Paty was deliberately provocative and it's not surprising that he was murdered. He said that Western countries must realise that some will act with violence if their prophet was ridiculed and we should accept that and not do things that cause others to behave violently.

He called me a fascist when I said that in a secular country, no religion should be held in such regard, that teaching about the murders of cartoon employees would be murdered for digressions.

He preaches 'be kind' and sees himself as superior for his inclusive thoughts, which means apologising for murderers and blaming the victims. TWAT!

I don't believe in burning books, but we SHOULD be allowed to criticise and mock the beliefs of others, without violence being justified. This will never happen of course.

The guy who beat someone up needs charging with the violent crime he committed, and potentially a jail term.

Fixed that for you. If it's jail for waving a weapon in public (as it should be) then it's double jail for actually harming someone.

E2A:

The guy that burned the Quran needs a community service

Why ?

@themerchentofvenus

The guy that burned the Quran needs a community service and to be honest deserves being beaten up for trying to provoke someone and being such a twat.

He didn't get community service but he was fined...his court case was earlier this year.

The guy who beat someone up needs charging with the violent crime he committed, and potentially a jail term.

The guy that burned the Quran needs a community service and to be honest deserves being beaten up for trying to provoke someone and being such a twat. Karma.

The issue I was addressing was the suggestion that this case was treated more leniently.

I don't think this case has been treated "more" leniently.

However it has been treated leniently. Which suggests a whole load of other cases have been similarly treated.

So the question is how many men people are walking our streets who have gone around waving weapons "Because ....." ???

We know the answer is not zero. But how many ? And who will be the person who gets a knife to the heart because someone felt emboldened that it was OK to go home, get a weapon and return to show how "upset" they are ????

@SerendipityJane
It’s fine to disagree with the sentencing guidelines that wasn’t the point I was making.

The issue I was addressing was the suggestion that this case was treated more leniently. I don’t think it was. Some of the somewhat dated stats I found suggest that around 26% of cases end up with custodial sentence either immediate or suspended. The outcome of this case was not unusual and so the two tier accusations are not supportable.