A thread about protesters

[ganganvince]

When they start targeting emergency vehicles and only block emergency vehicles let me know.

The Insulate Britain protests are part of the concern about global warming and the threat this poses to lives. The RNLI protest was to specifically stop lives being saved. There is no equivalence. Do you not see that?

Cheers got my answer the right to endanger life when protesting is cause dependant. Personally there should be no exceptions whatever the cause there is no right to endanger innocent people.

 

[Rascal]

People on this thread saying if people die because of protests they are still happy to support their methods. Does this qualify? In my book they are cunts.

This is illegal under the 2005 Emergency workers obstruction Act.

 

[ganganvince]

This is illegal under the 2005 Emergency workers obstruction Act.

Which also covers blocking a highway when they are told a blue light situation exists with the vehicle caught up in the backlog

 

[inbetween]

Have you actually given any thought to that statement.

Illegal protests FFS , we do not yet live under a Dictatorship. Protests should never be illegal as they are a vital part of the democratic process. Close down protests, close down Democracy.

I abhor Tiny Tommy ten names and his crew of bigots and racists but i back 100% their right to protest, i vehemently disagree with everything they stand for, but if they are not allowed to protest and express their beliefs then those beliefs risk going underground and becoming subversive.

Protests that impact on the general population or at least public safety should be illegal. When I travel to work I didn't choose to take part in a protest because of people lying in the road who are therefore breaking the Highways Act.

The law exists to protect people, it isn't about preventing protests. No-ones right to protest has been affected at all if they choose to do it legally and peacefully which in both of these cases you can prove that they could do. Insulate Britain could stand at the side of the road and they'd have no problems.

I apply the exact same thing to the RNLI blocking nutters, they could stand at the side of the boat and peacefully protest without any issues. If they can't do that then they deserve whatever the consequences are, anything else is accepting anarchy.

As I said ages ago on this thread, if you think legality doesn't matter then well I fancy some breakfast this morning so why don't I go and peacefully protest my hunger by nicking something from the shop?

 

[Rascal]

Which also covers blocking a highway when they are told a blue light situation exists with the vehicle caught up in the backlog

View attachment 30866

And if it was a cause i felt strongly about i would be willing to lose my liberty for it. Stopping the protest in the first place is the issue. What comes first the protest or the emergency.

If all protest is banned because there maybe a potential emergency, we are in effect living in a Police state.

 

[ganganvince]

And if it was a cause i felt strongly about i would be willing to lose my liberty for it. Stopping the protest in the first place is the issue. What comes first the protest or the emergency.

If all protest is banned because there maybe a potential emergency, we are in effect living in a Police state.

I admire your conviction and honesty but can't agree with you on this one to my mind legal protest should be peaceful and not confrontational. But if we all thought the same this would be an echo chamber.

 

[BobKowalski]

Cheers got my answer the right to endanger life when protesting is cause dependant. Personally there should be no exceptions whatever the cause there is no right to endanger innocent people.

No, you didn’t get your answer. Insulate Britain do not target emergency vehicles just as they are about to answer a call. The RNLI protest did target an emergency craft to deliberately prevent it answering an emergency call.

Your post was a dishonest attempt at linking two separate incidents to score a cheap point.

 

[inbetween]

No, you didn’t get your answer. Insulate Britain do not target emergency vehicles just as they are about to answer a call. The RNLI protest did target an emergency craft to deliberately prevent it answering an emergency call.

Your post was a dishonest attempt at linking two separate incidents to score a cheap point.

This is just thick I'm sorry.

Insulate Britain lie down in roads and their protest aim is not to peacefully protest. Their aim is to indiscriminately block anyone from using the road. Emergency vehicles use roads so that also includes emergency vehicles by default.

There is a law against blocking roads for this and many other reasons, including potentially the law vs blocking emergency vehicles that you've already mentioned.

In the eyes of the law then these cases are absolutely no different, the only thing different is an emergency vehicle hasn't yet happened to of come down the road when Insulate Britain were led on it... Yet!

 

[ganganvince]

No, you didn’t get your answer. Insulate Britain do not target emergency vehicles just as they are about to answer a call. The RNLI protest did target an emergency craft to deliberately prevent it answering an emergency call.

Your post was a dishonest attempt at linking two separate incidents to score a cheap point.

Not dishonest at all Bob I treat all protests equally regardless of cause. NONE should be allowed to endanger life whether or not you support them.

 

[BobKowalski]

Protests that impact on the general population or at least public safety should be illegal. When I travel to work I didn't choose to take part in a protest because of people lying in the road who are therefore breaking the Highways Act.

The law exists to protect people, it isn't about preventing protests. No-ones right to protest has been affected at all if they choose to do it legally and peacefully which in both of these cases you can prove that they could do. Insulate Britain could stand at the side of the road and they'd have no problems.

I apply the exact same thing to the RNLI blocking nutters, they could stand at the side of the boat and peacefully protest without any issues. If they can't do that then they deserve whatever the consequences are, anything else is accepting anarchy.

As I said ages ago on this thread, if you think legality doesn't matter then well I fancy some breakfast this morning so why don't I go and peacefully protest my hunger by nicking something from the shop?

Every protest, every civil rights movement impacts on the general population. Someone, somewhere is always pissed off or inconvenienced. You might as well just say you like the idea of living in an authoritarian police state that crushes the first sign of protest or civil disobedience.

 

[ganganvince]

Every protest, every civil rights movement impacts on the general population. Someone, somewhere is always pissed off or inconvenienced. You might as well just say you like the idea of living in an authoritarian police state that crushes the first sign of protest or civil disobedience.

Initially the Sarah vigils had minimal impact Allegedly other groups hijacked the platform but that's a different argument.

 

[inbetween]

Every protest, every civil rights movement impacts on the general population. Someone, somewhere is always pissed off or inconvenienced. You might as well just say you like the idea of living in an authoritarian police state that crushes the first sign of protest or civil disobedience.

Come on seriously?

Answer me this, why don't they stand at the side of the road and protest? That would be a legal protest that cannot and will not be prevented, they can glue themselves to pavements and do whatever they please then.

Maybe we should have protests where you punch people you don't like? Imagine that in the dock, yes judge I beat up the MP because I disagreed with his policies on climate change, oh fair enough then.

 

[BobKowalski]

This is just thick I'm sorry.

Insulate Britain lie down in roads and their protest aim is not to peacefully protest. Their aim is to indiscriminately block anyone from using the road. Emergency vehicles use roads so that also includes emergency vehicles by default.

There is a law against blocking roads for this and many other reasons, including potentially the law you've already mentioned.

In the eyes of the law then these cases are absolutely no different, the only thing different is an emergency vehicle hasn't yet happened to of come down the road when Insulate Britain were led on it... Yet!

Insulate Britain are peacefully protesting. It’s call a sit down protest. They offer no violence. What they are doing is trying to cause maximum inconvenience and impact the general public.

Trying to link their actions to the RNLI protest is dishonest and reveals much about those trying to make that link. Criticise the Insulate Britain protests on its own terms by all means, but not with this pathetic false equivalence.

 

[BobKowalski]

...Answer me this, why don't they stand at the side of the road and protest? That would be a legal protest that cannot and will not be prevented, they can glue themselves to pavements and do whatever they please then.

Maybe we should have protests where you punch people you don't like? Imagine that in the dock, yes judge I beat up the MP because I disagreed with his policies on climate change, oh fair enough then.

That’s a job for the police. It’s one of the perks, manhandling and punching protestors. Or those at a vigil for a young woman murdered by one of their colleagues.

And this violent behaviour is invariably ‘fair enough’ for the ‘let’s ban all protests‘ brigade.

Your stance and arguments are nothing more than partisan hackery.

 

[inbetween]

That’s a job for the police. It’s one of the perks, manhandling and punching protestors. Or those at a vigil for a young woman murdered by one of their colleagues.

And this violent behaviour is invariably ‘fair enough’ for the ‘let’s ban all protests‘ brigade.

Your stance and arguments are nothing more than partisan hackery.

What's your view on pro-Brexit protesters blocking roads, I'm assuming that's fair game too then? Maybe all of these people in London have had the wrong idea, just chuck yourself in a road and then everything is fair game?

You can't change tack at will to apply certain laws based upon protests that you agree or disagree with. You either apply the law consistently or you don't apply it at all, and I'm the one who's partisan?

In either sense the RNLI protest is illegal and the Insulate Britain protests are equally illegal. Anything else means you have to choose which is more illegal than the other but in a court there is no such distinction.

 

[BobKowalski]

What's your view on pro-Brexit protesters blocking roads, I'm assuming that's fair game too then? Maybe all of these people in London have had the wrong idea, just chuck yourself in a road and then everything is fair game?

You can't change tack at will to apply certain laws based upon protests that you agree or disagree with. You either apply the law consistently or you don't apply it at all, and I'm the one who's partisan?

In either sense the RNLI protest is illegal and the Insulate Britain protests are equally illegal. Anything else means you have to choose which is more illegal than the other but in a court there is no such distinction.

Other than wondering why they are blocking traffic, I have no view on pro-Brexit protestors blocking roads - although given supply chain issues caused by Brexit I would suggest they would do more good by directing traffic rather than blocking it.

I support peaceful protest, I can even support peaceful protest that causes disruption even if I don’t agree with the cause the protest is supporting ie Brexit or advocating for people dying at sea. I may wonder what sort of twat advocates people dying at sea, but then the world is full of twats, so no real surprise.

I even think Insulate Britain, even just in purely PR terms, should have made a show of allowing emergency vehicles through. Not that I really think there was any major issue, but it may have reduced the gibbering hysteria from the ‘ban all protests‘ brigade.

 

[Ancient Citizen]

Have you actually given any thought to that statement.

Illegal protests FFS , we do not yet live under a Dictatorship. Protests should never be illegal as they are a vital part of the democratic process. Close down protests, close down Democracy.

I abhor Tiny Tommy ten names and his crew of bigots and racists but i back 100% their right to protest, i vehemently disagree with everything they stand for, but if they are not allowed to protest and express their beliefs then those beliefs risk going underground and becoming subversive.

I didn't need to give it any thought, the protests were illegal, why do you think they
were jailed? This isn't a dictatorship, it's a democratic country applying the law to
lawbreakers, you appear to believe anyone can do anything whatsoever to anybody,
in support of whatever it is they want.
Thankfully, that's yet another extreme view that has not even been considered, so
they pay the price.

 

[Rascal]

I didn't need to give it any thought, the protests were illegal, why do you think they
were jailed? This isn't a dictatorship, it's a democratic country applying the law to
lawbreakers, you appear to believe anyone can do anything whatsoever to anybody,
in support of whatever it is they want.
Thankfully, that's yet another extreme view that has not even been considered, so
they pay the price.

So you would have supported the cavalry charge at Peterloo.

 

[hilts]

So you would have supported the cavalry charge at Peterloo.

I think he may have hung the suffragettes

 

[Phil1]

So you would have supported the cavalry charge at Peterloo.

Without a seconds though I reckon.