A thread about protesters

Chippy_boy said:
But taxes are not and will never go up as you suggeted Rascal. You are objecting about unrealistic theoretical nonsense which will never happen anyway.

Seems to me that laws which give the police more power to stop the sorts of utter bullshit we saw in Bristol at the weekend, should be welcomed. Is your best objection really that it would also cover ludicrously fictitious and unrealistic scenarios which would never happen? Seems like a very lame objection indeed.

I get why many tossers (not you) do object however. For they are the very tossers who would be impacted: The sorts of tossers who turn up at every march, intent on causing anarchy and disruption for disruption's sake. In short, complete arseholes. The new law is in effect, an anti-arsehole law, and one we should all therefore support.
Click to expand...
A. Was the bullshit at Bristol not already against the law?
B. Have you read the bill or just following the silence of the lambs (Tory MPs)?
C. '“It’s tempting when home secretary,” May said to Patel from the benches above her, “to think that giving powers to the home secretary is very reasonable, because we all think we’re reasonable. But actually future home secretaries may not be so reasonable.” It was a mark of how far the country has fallen that May is now the voice of liberal conscience on the government benches.'
 
Vic said:
A. Was the bullshit at Bristol not already against the law?
B. Have you read the law or just following the silence of the lambs (Tory MPs)?
C. '“It’s tempting when home secretary,” May said to Patel from the benches above her, “to think that giving powers to the home secretary is very reasonable, because we all think we’re reasonable. But actually future home secretaries may not be so reasonable.” It was a mark of how far the country has fallen that May is now the voice of liberal conscience on the government benches.'
Click to expand...
If you are not doing anything illegal, you have nothing to fear from the police. It's as simple as that really. I am happy for them to have whatever powers they like. Is it naive to imagine that the police seek to hinder criminals, and since I am not one, I am not bothered?
 
Chippy_boy said:
If you are not doing anything illegal, you have nothing to fear from the police. It's as simple as that really. I am happy for them to have whatever powers they like. Is it naive to imagine that the police seek to hinder criminals, and since I am not one, I am not bothered?
Click to expand...

The issue is the line between what’s legal and what isn’t though.
 
meltonblue said:
The issue is the line between what’s legal and what isn’t though.
Click to expand...
Yes and the line is already drawn way too much in favour of individuals and not nearly enough towards protecting the rights of the majority, i.e. me.

We are far too soft in this country and already put up with a sorts of bullshit which would not be tolerated in most other countries. It's significant I think that the usual hard left suspects - Len, Rascal, Vic, IfIwasonly..., Etc etc are the ones most vetemently objecting.
 
Chippy_boy said:
If you are not doing anything illegal, you have nothing to fear from the police. It's as simple as that really. I am happy for them to have whatever powers they like. Is it naive to imagine that the police seek to hinder criminals, and since I am not one, I am not bothered?
Click to expand...

"I am happy for them [the police] to have whatever powers they like." - Chippy boy, 23rd March 2021.
Unbelievable Jeff!
 
Chippy_boy said:
Yes and the line is already drawn way too much in favour of individuals and not nearly enough towards protecting the rights of the majority, i.e. me.

We are far too soft in this country and already put up with a sorts of bullshit which would not be tolerated in most other countries. It's significant I think that the usual hard left suspects - Len, Rascal, Vic, IfIwasonly..., Etc etc are the ones most vetemently objecting.
Click to expand...

So from a legal aspect, I’m assuming you’d have preferred them to go further?

My issue is more around the law not being clear and handing too much power to the Home Secretary.
 
Chippy_boy said:
Never have and I don't imagine after 60 years of feeling no need to do so, I will suddenly find that changing.
Click to expand...
My only protest was an anti Swales one outside the front entrance at Maine Road. I got home late proudly told my dad a big blue and got a right old bollocking. Like you I have not seen any need to protest in 60 years since.
The anti Swales protest was far more worthwhile than some of the stuff people use to push their own political agenda in one way or other.
 
meltonblue said:
So from a legal aspect, I’m assuming you’d have preferred them to go further?

My issue is more around the law not being clear and handing too much power to the Home Secretary.
Click to expand...
This is the problem with the 'protestors' we've seen over the last year or so that tend to turn up later in a protest and attach themselves to whatever the cause is just so they can kick off - it creates a (possibly false) pretext for draconian legislation.
 
Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese said:
This is the problem with the 'protestors' we've seen over the last year or so that tend to turn up later in a protest and attach themselves to whatever the cause is just so they can kick off - it creates a (possibly false) pretext for draconian legislation.
Click to expand...
I suppose the idea is preposterous that undercover police might join protest movements, even getting into sexual relationships, and then start kicking off at protests (or just shouting too loudly) to give their colleagues and the government the excuse to shut down the protest.

Oh wait...
 
Chippy_boy said:
They are not the enemy, Len.
Click to expand...
To some people they are though. They are so radicalised by their anti-establishment bollocks that they dehumanise the police and forget they are just normal people doing a job on our behalf. I can understand everyone tends to go through a bit of a phase as they are growing up and becoming politically aware, but it's tragic to see formed adults imagining themselves as some sort of Robin Hood character on the fringes of society framing the police as some sort of oppressive force.
 
Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese said:
To some people they are though. They are so radicalised by their anti-establishment bollocks that they dehumanise the police and forget they are just normal people doing a job on our behalf. I can understand everyone tends to go through a bit of a phase as they are growing up and becoming politically aware, but it's tragic to see formed adults imagining themselves as some sort of Robin Hood character on the fringes of society framing the police as some sort of oppressive force.
Click to expand...
It's this legislation that's framing the police as some sort of oppressive force.
 
Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese said:
This is the problem with the 'protestors' we've seen over the last year or so that tend to turn up later in a protest and attach themselves to whatever the cause is just so they can kick off - it creates a (possibly false) pretext for draconian legislation.
Click to expand...

Yes and their actions should already be covered by existing legislation. If people want to make that tougher, then fair enough. This isn’t about that though, it’s about increasing what is deemed as illegal activity and increasing the power in making that determination.
 
Vic said:
It's this legislation that's framing the police as some sort of oppressive force.
Click to expand...
In your head possibly. The new laws didn't exist during any of the recent protests. A big problem here is that it seems to be forgotten that the police only enforce the law, not make it. What Patel is up to is something we can deal with at the ballot box, if indeed it gets through. I'm not sure whether it's a cause for comfort or alarm, but there are actually a lot of senior conservatives that seem to have reservations, so in combination with the opposition that 80 seat majority may not be enough to bulldoze it through with out serious amendment at least.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top