Is it right to jail someone for being offensive on Facebook or Twitter?

On the other hand you have vicious griefer groups which stalk memorial pages like hacker groups do old Joomla installs. These are organized groups who will drive people to suicide by massive cyberbullying campaigns, then gloat about it online, for as much relatives to see. Real unadulterated meanness. They don't seem to get arrested as much as the people who will say stupid stuff under their real names. And complaining to Twitter or Facebook about these groups seems futile. In the case of blatant racism or harassment these forums have a responsibility too: They could remove it, say it is against their TOS and no complex or biased legal system would have to get involved. In my opinion it is a form of malignant spam and is to be treated as such: employ filters, community feedback and manual reviewers to solve it as a spam problem. Spammers, like griefers, will continue.

[1] http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/libertycentral/2012... [2] http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/414/t...

'A person is guilty of an offence if, with intent to cause a person harassment, alarm or distress, he— uses threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour, or disorderly behaviour, or displays any writing, sign or other visible representation which is threatening, abusive or insulting, thereby causing that or another person harassment, alarm or distress.

...

A person guilty of an offence under this section is liable on summary conviction to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 6 months or a fine not exceeding level 5 on the standard scale or both.'

(Above text somewhat abbreviated.)

There's also section 5, which is more or less the same offence but without intent, which has a fine (level 3) as it's penalty.

I believe the latter is the one more commonly used. But it strikes me that much of the day to day interactions people have with the legal system are subject to what you might call a policeman's 'give a fuck' level, rather than being a reflection of their potential powers from statute.

That's true, but there's a difference between being offensive to the government and being offensive to people. The government is supposed to be able to take that kind of punishment (which is, after all, why these related rights are enshrined in the very first Amendment of the U.S. Bill of Rights).

So I'd caution about focusing attention on offensive speech only on how it applies when that speech is directed against government and its agents, or society as a whole, since the possible kinds of damage would be different if directed against individuals.