I think this is why I detest Cameron as much as I detest Johnson. Cameron was spineless. Allowed himself to get pushed into a vote he supposedly opposed, didn’t counter any of the lies put out by Johnson et al, but more than that he walked away when he could have stayed as PM and ensured the least damaging Brexit was achieved.
This is a section of the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill, ordered by the Home Secretary following the BLM and XR demos last year. 10 years in prison for causing “serious annoyance” by protesting. It comes to Parliament on Monday, and MPs will vote on it on Tuesday. On Friday, Keir Starmer’s Labour Party were intending to ABSTAIN on this bill. Hopefully the violent scenes at the candle light vigil for Sarah Everard tonight will make the party take a long hard look at itself.
Not exceeding 10 years, or a fine. But don’t let that get in the way of sensationalism to make a point.
This bill MUST be stopped (sadly, it won’t be though because the sheep will follow party lines, even if Labour vote against it .....). People don’t seem to realise that this will stop ANY CHANCE of demonstration - even a peaceful protest, which is the cornerstone of democracy. The next step will be to give the police even more power and then we’re totally ****ed (if we aren’t already). I’ve always said that Patel is a dangerous ultra-right zealot and this proves it. I’ve written to my Tory MP (for what it’s worth) asking her if she will vote for it (I suspect she will) and how she can live with herself if she does as it’s the start of the end of any chance of democracy or even toppling this useless bunch of right wingers who are only interested in getting as much out of the trough as we and our children, grand-children, great grand-children ...... will allow ......
I don’t think the punishment is the point, Jos. It’s the fact that if anyone wants to demonstrate peacefully against anything (let’s say “the potential sell off of the NHS”) the authorities can declare it illegal and arrest them in any manner they choose ....... Rather like Germany in the 30s ........ It’s a huge issue ........
Actually that was his point and that’s what I responded to. But to discuss your point, I see it as a way of making sure ‘protestors’ aren’t going around pissing on statues and punching horses for the sake of a movement that they are likely not truly involved in. It also means that resources don’t get stretched unnecessarily.
Great piece in the Observer about the damage done by Brexit, and the denial of the damage by the government, and Johnson in particular: https://www.theguardian.com/comment...3-C0WxuarvPCLIZydnwbfluWF14NV8tkNZIWn6yurIhZg
Hmmm .... The police didn’t do a lot when that happened though, did they? Seems to me that even if a demo is peaceful it can be banned .....
Well no, because other than Public Order offences they didn’t have the legislation to do much, maybe this will help, eh? I still disagree on it being a ban on peaceful protests though, I look at it more as being a method to prevent purposefully opposed groups from inciting trouble in the first place, or protestors looking for trouble.
And that’s the problem - people haven’t read it if they think it’s not a ban on peaceful protest. They can ban a ONE MAN protest for gods sake! That’s really preventing only violent disorder, isn’t it?
Well we clearly interpret things in different ways it seems, fair enough. Variety is the spice of life after all!
You don’t think threatening people with 10 years imprisonment for “serious annoyance” needs to be brought to the attention of the public? We are being run by a government that uses bullying tactics as it’s first line of defence. This is just another example of them threatening to use a sledgehammer to crack a nut and force people into subservience. If you haven’t read 1984, then I recommend it to you. This government has already got rewriting history down to a fine art.
As before, all down to interpretation on how the government are running things, you’re cynical about everything they do and your opinion is swayed that way. I’m more concerned about things like the covid bill, but then that was supported by the other parties too so they’re all just as bad. Not sure what your point is on people should know the sentence for breaking the law though? Did you know the maximum sentence for murder is life? It’s important to know that if you’re about to go and commit it. Though again, be aware that is maximum sentence, wouldn’t want to muddy the waters semantically. As for your last part, I’ve read it thank you and I’m grateful we don’t have a government like that.
Local politics. A bit about Southampton Airport. A meeting to discuss extending the runway, with links to email addresses if anyone feels strongly enough to get involved. https://www.southamptonairport.com/...y Expansion,SOU Social&utm_term=&utm_content=
The point about people knowing about maximum sentence is important, if the government is including the possibility of a 10 year sentence for being “seriously annoying.” That is like something out of Monty Pythons. I think most people are aware that murder can carry a maximum sentence of life, so not sure what the comparison is worth. You may not think that we have an Orwellian government, many will disagree with you, but presuming that we don’t “yet” we are well on the way to having one, courtesy of people not caring enough about what is happening with regards to the way this government acts.
Anyone who thinks legislation that cites 'annoyance' as a crime potentially worth ten years in prison is good legislation needs their head examined. However, it should finally be the last nail in the coffin for all those cheese puns on this site.
Yup - you, Fats, Tom .... actually, I reckon most of us will be there .... Especially if Patel decides that cheese pubs are annoying!
