It always shows when one is losing theargument, they usually try to shout the other down,or start using attempts at sarcasm, derisory remarks ... or bad language or try to flip the Q............. Congratulations your replies tell the story of a loser especially with the flip of ........... ↑ What a silly argument, it’s a peaceful protest that doesn’t endanger life, if you think otherwise give me one example where it t has ↑ , ie the massage may become mainstream, is that because after gluing themselves down they need one to get the circulation goingagain??? I completed agree with your comments , about shouting someone down when losing an argument, your tactic though is to waffle and talk nonsense. Your last comment about getting the circulation going again is again an attempt at sarcasm, which by your own admission is another tactic of someone who’s losing the argument. So by your own admission you are using at least two methods which show you are indeed losing the argument .
really getting worried about you Ashton .. nothing of the kind, it is a play on words .. why else would need a massage? thats one of the two, so whats the second?
Thank you for at last making a reasonably argued post rather than your normal nonsense. My point is, and none of the examples you give contradict it. They use , certainly on the whole, peaceful protests. I would add anytime they don’t, I agree with you, but mostly they do. I accept sometimes there are unintended consequences. I already agreed with BCFC R&W if I was caught in a protest that stopped me getting to see a relative in hospital I’d be livid. BUT that isn’t a reason to ban peaceful protests in my opinion, as the right to protest outweighs my personal discomfort. There are somethings, a free press, the right to peaceful protests, the ability to criticise politicians, just a few I can think of off the top of my head that are so important in a free society that for me any move to stop, or curtail is just the start of a slippery slope.
Your example was a consequence of a protest not caused directly by the protest itself. The protest itself was peaceful.
What’s sarcasm if it’s not a play on words , I made a serious point, rather than answer it you made a childish flippant remark Edit By the way you still haven’t addressed the point, that your “play on words” avoided. Todays controversial subjects that are the subject of peaceful demonstrations are often tomorrows mainstream, women’s voting of which one is a very good example,
ah just deleted my post as we crossed in the post so to speak however I find it very hard to understand your thinking on the death. an ambulance picks up patient and goes to the nearest hospital uninterupted and patient survives because of the care given in TIME. an ambulance picks up patient and goes to the nearest hospital, but meets a peaceful protest that obstructs themand wont let them through, so those valuable minutes to save the life areLOST by either a diversion or arguing the toss about it being an emergency and patient could die etc. A peaceful protest is where there is no damage no arrests and a concern for human life?..! there are many peaceful protests but in the past decade many are degenerating into aggressive and costly attempts at attracting attention... and the majority of the public are totally fed up with them... there has been about 40 protests strikes about wages conditions and none have been violent... last time I recall violence was back in Red KENS era / MINERS strike and Battle of the bean fields.. when labour took on the then .gov in an effort to break them!
The protest was peaceful, ie no violence was used, or directed at anyone, it wasn’t their intention that the woman would die . For the sake of argument we’ll assume had she not been delayed she would have lived, (although we don’t actually know that for sure). Therefore it’s an unintended consequence. As you rightly said there has been lots of strikes recently, if you are saying your example of the lady dying in an ambulance is not a peaceful protest I’m intrigued would you say nurses or doctors taking non violent industrial action is likewise not peaceful, as it’s extremely likely people may have died as a result of their action.
Definition of a peaceful protest mainly courtesy of open AI (love a bit of AI) A peaceful protest refers to a form of nonviolent demonstration or public gathering where individuals or a group of people express their opinions, concerns, or grievances about a particular issue or cause. It is a lawful and constitutionally protected activity aimed at bringing attention to a social, political, or environmental concern, and promoting change through peaceful means. In a peaceful protest, participants exercise their freedom of speech and assembly by engaging in various forms of expression such as speeches, signs, banners, chants, songs, or marches. The intention behind a peaceful protest is to raise awareness, influence public opinion, and put pressure on authorities or institutions to address the issue at hand. Key aspects of a peaceful protest include: Nonviolence: Peaceful protests are characterised by the absence of physical harm, aggression, or destruction of property. Participants are committed to resolving conflicts and advocating for change without resorting to violence. Respect for the law: Peaceful protests operate within the boundaries of the law, respecting public safety, property rights, and individual rights. Participants may obtain permits or permissions from relevant authorities to organise the protest and ensure public order. Civil discourse: Peaceful protests often involve open dialogue, rational arguments, and constructive communication. Participants express their views and engage in discussions with others, fostering an environment conducive to understanding and collaboration. Mass participation: Peaceful protests gain strength through the collective action of a large number of people who share common concerns. The scale of participation amplifies the message and highlights the significance of the issue being addressed. Symbolic actions: Peaceful protests may utilise symbolic gestures, gestures, or artistic expressions to convey their message effectively. These can include wearing specific colour's or clothing, holding up signs or banners, or engaging in silent demonstrations. Peaceful protests have played a significant role in social movements throughout history, such as the civil rights movement, women's suffrage movement, anti-apartheid movement, and many others. They are an essential means for individuals and communities to exercise their democratic rights and advocate for positive change in society. NB..Nothing about "it's ok to obstruct people getting to work, ambulance/emergency services being disrupted doing their duties etc.. IMO anything over and beyond the boundaries stated should involve arresting and prosecuting the individuals and their rights to further protesting taken away..
I'm also a believer that those working for the emergency services, NHS workers or military forces should not be allowed to strike... end of..
There is nothing about it being illegal to stop people getting to work, or causing disruption. Plus peaceful protests have always “pushed “ and tested the law. Do you think it was legal to chain yourself to railings or throw your yourself in front of a horse, as happened in women gaining the right to vote. And before you say it NO I’m not suggesting it’s ok to throw yourself in front of a horse , but merely pointing out through history people have done these things for causes they strongly believe in, it’s nothing new.
Then we should pay them a decent wage and give them decent conditions. If we don’t we’ll end up without an NHS. That would cause far more deaths than one ambulance being held up. There are tens of thousands of vacant nursing posts and nurses are leaving in their droves. Unless their issues are addressed the situation will only get worse.
If they break the law, or deemed to be endangering lives (including obstructing emergency services) they should be arrested, prosecuted and banned from participating in future protests.. otherwise what’s the point of law and order?
I’m not averse to your suggestion, but in order to do that you’d have to first of all give them a massive wage rise and also lock in above inflation wage rises for the future, it ain’t gonna happen.
That would be a back handed way of banning peaceful protests, it won’t work. Protests have always, and will always, cause an element of disruption.
Peaceful protests are allowed in law. We have a right to do it. Therefore The police must ensure peaceful protests are able to go ahead. That’s why if you, or I, try to break one up, or physically move someone on, we are opening ourselves up to be arrested for assault.
Despite the tough talking Mark Rowley as the new head of the Met, I get the distinct impression that like the Civil Service, the Police in general do as they please rather than doing what they’re told as we’ve seen in London with how they pander to Just Stop Oil And how Avon & Somerset Police Police let themselves and the people of Bristol down, and stood by and watched when they allowed a mob of worthy idiots to tear down Colstons statue They are all a disgrace to the uniform
having contacts 5 at least who are in the front line of the nurses working in 3 different hospitals the public only see what the media tend to show them!!! The vast majority of pickets are often on days off as there is a need to keep as many on duty as possible to safeguard patients.This is not say there are not some who were supposed to be on duty but there was cover for existing patients. the root of this argument is based around collateral damage.... just stop oil do not seem and in fact do not worry about collateral damage... in fact most of them are "being peaceful" not screaming or ranting and raving like alot of the anti brexit idiots.. but instead cause disruption to 000's of innocents and damage to property and also tie up police fire and ambulance from doing their main tasks... why dont they for example have a route that is for emergency vehicles especially blue lighting. of all the different people picketing [ protesting poor pay conditions ] how many people have beenreported as suffered from a result of these pickets....none they even had emergency ambulances on sites of the pickets to respond to emergencies if the main force was overwhelmed. Again you need to know more than media states.... truthfully! ... 80% of ambulances do not actually respond to blue lights emergency at any given time [ might be 70% ] ... mostly it is granny been and swallowed her teeth or so and so is feeling unwell turns out to be indigestion..............
So do you think it’s ok if I drive without wearing a seatbelt and not worry about the law enforcing me to do so..? BTW, I have good reason!!
