From Yahoo News

Facebook page praising Moat removed after row

The creator of a Facebook tribute to the killer who shot himself dead after a standoff with police removed the page Thursday after it sparked condemnation, including from the prime minister.

Siobhan O'Dowd said she had taken down the page dedicated to Raoul Moat -- but was unrepentant and did not rule out reinstating the group, which had attracted more than 38,000 members. She set up "R.I.P. Raoul Moat You Legend!" after the former nightclub bouncer killed himself on Saturday following one of Britain's biggest manhunts. He was on the run for a week after shooting his ex-girlfriend and killing her new boyfriend, and shooting and severely injuring a policeman.

Explaining her decision to remove the page, O'Dowd told a radio station: "I don't know really. A few of us came to a decision but it's going to be up again running. "We don't condone what he did as what he did was wrong. I feel sorry for the families but he was still a human being at the end of the day." She added that the killer "hid from police for a week... I think he's a legend for keeping the police on their toes."

Prime Minister David Cameron led condemnation of the online tribute page and lawmakers and the media joined his call for Facebook to act. But the social networking giant refused to bow to the pressure, insisting that its users had the right to express their own views. Cameron said in the House of Commons on Wednesday: "It is absolutely clear that Raoul Moat was a callous murderer, full stop, end of story. I cannot understand any wave, however small, of public sympathy for this man." He was responding to a question from Conservative lawmaker Chris Heaton-Harris, who urged Facebook to remove the page.

"We don't want to set laws on Facebook at all, but we do want people who are hosting these sites and other pages to have some responsibility," Heaton-Harris told BBC radio on Thursday. He condemned the comments on the site, which include "RIP Moat. Misunderstood man who was killed by the brutal police who ruined his life", and "U are a true legend". The Internet group triggered a media storm, with Britain's top-selling daily newspaper The Sun dismissing the "Facebook morons" who idolised the killer. "The prime minister deserves credit for swiftly passing on his anger to Facebook bosses," the tabloid said in an editorial. "How can such revolting web pages be justified? They should be removed."

Facebook had earlier defended the decision to leave the tribute online, saying: "We have 26 million people on Facebook in the UK, each of which has their own opinion, and they are entitled to express their views on Facebook as long as their comments do not violate our terms." Not all the members of the group supported Moat -- some people posted messages condemning him.


So, freedom of speech or insensitive and innappropriate?

Freedom of speech. I say this only because I've seen many many far more revolting things on the internet, and no one even bats an eye at them. But we're not even going to get into some of the stuff out there. I'll just say that there are also 'tribute pages' to almost every other infamous murder out there as well. You name them, and there will be a 'tribute page'. It seems the more revolting the crime, the more 'fans' the criminal responsible gets, too. Why should Facebook be held responsible when none of the other sites are?

I think that it was a little soon to be having something like this. (Has it even been a month since this happened? I remember seeing it, but I don't remember exactly when.)
That to me makes it very insensitive.

But I don't think it's any different than people who have clubs/Facebook pages dedicated to other insane murders. Some people are odd and think it's an amazing thing to elude the people that are supposed to protect people. (Yet the people who are all "F the police" are usually the first ones to be like 'ohmuhgawww halp, i haz a stalk3r.' The irony!)

I believe they should be allowed to have such a group, however inappropriate it might be. Apparently 38,000 didn't think it was very inappropriate... which is kind of sad.

Would like an edit button, please? :(

***Apparently 38,000 people didn't think it was very inappropriate.

It was just over a week ago.

(There was a worse shooting in England at the start of June though, if that's the one you're thinking of)

Is that the one with the 15 or so people killed? If so, then yes, that's the one I was thinking of ;D

But less than a week? That's even worse!
Just goes to show you; some people are real assholes :(

Yes, that's the one. Shootings in the UK are extremely rare because of our gun laws, so it's concerning that there's been two so close together. Although it sounds as if Moat may have been inspired to an extent by the earlier shooting.

i think its insensitive and innappropriate... he killed 2 people and wounded an officer.. legend my ass!!

I'm glad FB didn't remove it. There are a hell of a lot worse groups out there; namely EDL and BNP groups that spout vile racial hatred.

Whilst I didn't agree with the sentiment of the Moat group (I also didn't follow the news story so have nothing worthwhile to say about it), it wasn't a group preaching hate. It was the exact opposite, and even though he wasn't a nice/sane man, a group like that is better than an anti-Moat group that would have bred resentment and discontent.

I personally feel that it's fine for facebook to allow these groups, yo!

If people I have on my friends list are ignorant, stupid, racist, bigoted... or anything else judgeable, then I like to know about it! Which is easily achieved by checking out the groups they join! ;D

I don't think 'freedom of speech' and 'insensitive and inappropriate' are mutually exclusive. People do have freedom of speech which they often use in insensitive and inappropriate ways. And what some people might find insensitive, others do not, so it is often subjective. I don't think Facebook should be policing everything.

I remember everyone making a huge fuss of the (far worse, in my opinion) page which said that people with Down Syndrome shouldn't be allowed to live. That page was clearly just made to troll for attention, and I think it would have been better ignored rather than people making another page petitioning for that page to be removed. Although with that page, I think removing it was appropriate - but then if someone is a troll, they'll just keep making more pages like it. But this Moat page doesn't sound like it's trolling - it sounds like it is really what some people thought and felt, and was not actively harassing anyone.

People do have very different opinions on things, which will offend each other, and will often hit sensitive spots - but I think it's about the individual deciding what to express and accepting the social consequences, rather than external censorship being enforced. I see all kinds of Facebook pages which, if I took them to heart, I would find very offensive/insensitive/inappropriate, but I wouldn't want them removed.

i may not be understanding the whole story as this is the first i've heard, but why exactly are people supporting some crazy guy that murdered two people and killed himself? i don't think i understand how any of what he did is good and how it warrants legend status.

From what I understand, it's because he evaded police that he's a "legend".