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

[SinisterBumFacedCat]

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c8xr12yx5l4o.am

He attacked a man for burning a Quran. He went at him with a blade, kicked him to the ground and repeatedly spat on him. A cowardly deliveroo rider got in a few kicks whilst he was on the floor.

The guy who burned the Quran is now in hiding due to death threats. The attacker walked free from court. There is a full video of the attack online, he is clearly a very violent person. The judge let him off because he has previous good character and was provoked into violence.

Isn’t this sending the message that actual physical violence and assault with a bladed weapon is allowed if you’re offended by something?

YABU - he shouldn’t be in prison
YANBU - he should be in prison

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 ?

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

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.

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.

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?

Giving into bullies never ends well.

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).

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 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?

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.

Why does he have to respect their religion?

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

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.

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