World News
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News [email protected]
Politics [email protected]
World Politics [email protected]
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
view the rest of the comments
Or just don't be a cunt. They brought this entirely on themselves.
Why should it be legal to shout and swear at people who are just doing their job.
In many places it's illegal to do this to someone on the street.
In the UK this would be a public order offense for threatening, harassing or intimidating behaviour. 2k fine or 6 months in prison.
You wouldn't have your sentence increased from a fine to a prison sentence for trying to appeal against it though. Let's not pretend that the legal system in Dubai and UK are similar
It should be illegal and they should be punished, but the fine is ridiculous and 3 months of jail is disgusting.
In the UK you don’t treat someone like this for a single offense, where someone’s annoyed and has an outburst.
If you and the UAE are on the same page about how to punish people, maybe you should reflect on that.
The initial sentence was a fine. The sentence on appeal was 3 months imprisonment. Why should people be allowed to verbally assault others with no recourse?
Because it should be considered free speech (i know, this is Dubai)..unless you physically cause a scene you shouldn't be arrested. Dubai is nuts, and this whole thing is nutters.
The guy is a dick, but a 10,000 dollar fine for being mean to someone? Come man, this isn't pre-school.
Assault is not free speech.
Did he hit the person, or just was rude, and inconsiderate? If it's the former. Sure, but if it's the later, then that's just unfortunately stuff you deal with when you're in customer service.
Why should anybody be forced to tolerate verbal assault?
Because they are not 5 years old and bursting into tears when someone does it. Get a grip dude, the world isn’t full of nice people dancing around the campfire, someone bitching at you for whatever reason out of your control is a normal day in the life of any customer service worker.
You are not harmed by mean words.
Apparently the Emiratis had the good sense not to take such a position, hence the legal consequences for vile and abusive language.
Sounds like another day in an authoritarian hell hole if you ask me, but language like that would get me locked up there. Cheers from Canada, fascist!
Because it's part of their fucking job.
It's not their job to be an emotional punching bag. That is not in any job description that I've read nor posted.
This is a shit application of free speech.
"I should be allowed to verbally assault anyone I want" nah abusive behaviour is not covered by this.
10 000 Dh is not $10 000. It's a lot less than that, more like $2700.
As for free speech...
Why differentiate between physically abusing somebody and verbally? Abuse is abuse. It should not be tolerated.
Still, 2.7k fine for an insult, in a single instance, is already bonkers, but three months jail time?
Whatever your stance on whether or not the guy should be punished, the extent of this punishment here really shouldn’t sound fair or just in any way
I'm thinking about it from the staff's point of view.
I have mental health problems and an interaction like that would make it difficult for me to work.
His little outburst will actively affect the member of staff. Weird how no one is mentioning that.
I think it's totally fair personally.
To fine an absurd amount and/or send them to jail for 3 whole months?
If one person being an ass causes one to spiral bad enough to warrant that kind of sentences, I would hazard a guess that they are extremely likely on a wrong occupational path. There’s no way interactions like that aren’t weekly for everyone working any service gig.
I get that it has an effect and nobody should behave like that, but I can’t believe anyone would deem these as proportional punishments.
You likely get same 3 months jail here where I live (a western social democracy) for manslaughter, if you are first-time offender. Depending on a lot of course, but that anyone would consider these appropriate seems insane to me.
Pretty standard really. This is from the UK
I don’t know UK law, but I’d be surprised if that would be applied in a similar case. Maybe someone can educate me here and give examples of such rulings, but I feel like the wording is so vague and wide, that this very same law could be applied to wildly different and much more serious and alarming cases, entirely on a different level.
If getting frustrated and calling a service worker names in a single, non-recurring instance, warrants anything more than a small fine at the very worst in the UK, I will be very surprised. But I’m willing to accept that’s a thing there, just not convinced by that quote alone.
“Pretty standard really” sounds very wild a statement, but then again, maybe UK is weird like that.
Edit: At this point I’m just very surprised to learn so many are of this opinion, so I’m just trying to get my bearings and understand if this is a common sentiment and way to look at things. I’d really like to know more if something like this truly is commonplace in a western country at this day and age.
At the end of the day people don't go into work to feel threatened and scared for their safety.
Why the hell should people be allowed to do it? I'm surprised by the amount of people who think this is fine and shouldn't be punished harshly tbh.
Well, I for one never said that it’s okay. And it isn’t. But there’s a long gap between “not fine, should have consequences” to “3 months in jail”.
Obviously people don’t go to work to get abused, I don’t think anyone claimed that. It’s hard to imagine anyone thinking that people should go to work to get abused. That’s just a weird thing to say.
“Why differentiate between physically abusing somebody and verbally?” Because of the obvious difference in severity. One insult doesn’t need medical attention, while a punch could put someone in the hospital.
You are intentionally underplaying the importance of mental wellbeing to justify odious behavior.
If someone insulting you causes harm to your mental wellbeing, you weren't well in the first place.
Words have power. Politicians wouldn't talk if they didn't. Adverts would be mute.
How’s the mental wellbeing of women and foreign workers in Dubai? Know many gay men who feel safe there?
Ok, so since women already feel unsafe there, they should be allowed to be verbally abused by tourists?
Would you rather someone beat the shit out of you, or call you a bitch?
Neither.
Ah, the cowards way out. Why engage with a question that obliterates your argument when you can feign moral superiority and refuse to think about it?
If you don't pick, someone beats the shit out of you. Pick one.
I find it absolutely shocking how many people here are siding with the abusive asshole. 🙄
Because punishment should be proportional.
proportional to what exactly? to your poor ass, or to the rich dubai native? I would say the latter, because, you know, it happened in dubai.
punishemnt should be high enough so that next time he will think twice before he's abusive. He was warned first, he said he didn't care. He got a fine, he wasn't happy with it either. So he's in jail. I think it's all perfectly fair. I bet my left nut he will never again be abusive to the staff in dubai.
Proportional to the crime..
how exactly do you objectively decide that? please, specify the methodology, I'd love to hear it. If anything, the crime should be based on what makes it stick, which usually means proportional to the wealth. Obviously the higher the standard in the country the higher the fines are going to be, and that standard is pretty damn high in dubai.
e.g. if you're living in india where everything is objectively cheap for people in the west and you visit germany, get a 500 eur speeding fine, you cannot just cry "it's not proportional to my standards!!11!1".
If it's a first time offence and non-violent it's more likely not going to be custodial. Even if it was anything under 12 months custodial will be suspended.
Especially with prisons as packed as they currently are.