• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Wow, UK has lost freedom of speech

I'm still trying to understand how anyone in their right mind could think that a 500' no-protestor zone around abortion clinics is at all reasonable.

It's not. Its the opposite of reasonable and shows little regard to Free Speech.

Arresting someone for posting on Instagram, "◊◊◊◊ islam, ◊◊◊◊ palestine, ◊◊◊◊ muslims", is also unreasonable.
 
Hercules56 said:
I'm still trying to understand how anyone in their right mind could think that a 500' no-protestor zone around abortion clinics is at all reasonable.

It's not. Its the opposite of reasonable and shows little regard to Free Speech.
Click to expand...
"Don't harass women for a good long ways" seems pretty reasonable to me.
Hercules56 said:
Arresting someone for posting on Instagram, "◊◊◊◊ islam, ◊◊◊◊ palestine, ◊◊◊◊ muslims", is also unreasonable.
Click to expand...
North could have been voluntarily questioned earlier in the investigation, and likely been cleared on the spot. He preferred to do it the hard way. He got his wish.

You do know police often do the same thing here, right? You can cooperate early on or make them go through the formal involuntary interrogation?
 
Hercules56 said:
I'm still trying to understand how anyone in their right mind could think that a 500' no-protestor zone around abortion clinics is at all reasonable.

It's not. Its the opposite of reasonable and shows little regard to Free Speech.

Arresting someone for posting on Instagram, "◊◊◊◊ islam, ◊◊◊◊ palestine, ◊◊◊◊ muslims", is also unreasonable.
Click to expand...
And I’m trying to understand how anyone can image intimidation of women attending an abortion clinic is a good idea.
 
Darat said:
That’s your response?
Click to expand...
Yup
What she said was ON THE BLOODY VIDEO for all to see.
How she reacted was On THE BLOODY VIDEO for all to see.
How she was taken to task by the interviewer was ON THE BLOODY VIDEO for all to see.

These are undeniable, observable facts, yet you all deny what you can see with your own eyes.

She WAS reported to the Police, for what she said (yes, she was also reported for other things, and to other agencies but those are not relevant to the claim)
The Police DID investigate her for what she said. They THEMSELVES confirmed this in a statement.

These are also undeniable facts, therefore, I consider my response valid.

Rant warning: IMO, this thread has turned into left wing loony echo chamber full of posters slapping each other on the back in congratulations for their mutual blindness. "1984" was a warning against authoritarianism, one that you are all brushing off... but is happening right now. Freedom of speech and expression is being eroded world wide... it's happening in your country on the left with Labour and Starmer, it's happening on the right in the US with Republicans and The Fat Orange Turd, but you are all too blinded by your own respective political tribalism to accept this. Starmer and Labour are already demanding Apple (iOS) and Google (Android) provide them with back door keys to the encrypted data on ALL phones. (Apple have told them to pound sand). With those keys the government, whoever it is, will be able see everything on your phone...photos, videos, emails, texts, messages, bank and credit card details and location. Say something bad about the government, and they will be able to turn your life off with a metaphorical flick of the switch. Government will say that if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear, but you left wingers should be asking yourselves if you want a Reform government under Farage to have that power!?

Y'all are sleepwalking into an authoritarian surveillance state - you're like a bunch of frogs in a pot of water - by the time you realise something's wrong, it will be too late.
 
Last edited:
smartcooky said:
Yup
What she said was ON THE BLOODY VIDEO for all to see.
How she reacted was On THE BLOODY VIDEO for all to see.
How she was taken to task by the interviewer was ON THE BLOODY VIDEO for all to see.

These are undeniable, observable facts, yet you all deny what you can see with your own eyes.

She WAS reported to the Police, for what she said (yes, she was also reported for other things, and to other agencies but those are not relevant to the claim)
The Police DID investigate her for what she said. They THEMSELVES confirmed this in a statement.

These are also undeniable facts, therefore, I consider my response valid.

Rant warning: IMO, this thread has turned into left wing loony echo chamber full of posters slapping each other on the back in congratulations for their mutual blindness. "1984" was a warning against authoritarianism, one that you are all brushing off... but is happening right now. Freedom of speech and expression is being eroded world wide... it's happening in your country on the left with Labour and Starmer, it's happening on the right in the US with Republicans and The Fat Orange Turd, but you are all too blinded by your own respective political tribalism to accept this. Starmer and Labour are already demanding Apple (iOS) and Google (Android) provide them with back door keys to the encrypted data on ALL phones. (Apple have told them to pound sand). With those keys the government, whoever it is, will be able see everything on your phone...photos, videos, emails, texts, messages, bank and credit card details and location. Say something bad about the government, and they will be able to turn your life off with a metaphorical flick of the switch. Government will say that if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear, but you left wingers should be asking yourselves if you want a Reform government under Farage to have that power!?

Y'all are sleepwalking into an authoritarian surveillance state - you're like a bunch of frogs in a pot of water - by the time you realise something's wrong, it will be too late.
Click to expand...
The police received a complaint, investigated it, found no evidence of a crime and took no further action.

Where is the problem here?
 
junkshop said:
The police received a complaint, investigated it, found no evidence of a crime and took no further action.

Where is the problem here?
Click to expand...
The process is the punishment. In cases like this there should not have even been an investigation. The first cop needs to have enough brains to read the complaint, summarily dismiss it, and tell the complainant to ◊◊◊◊ off and get a life. The subject doesn't even need to know that a complaint had been made, and no record of the complaint needs to kept.

It wasn't many years ago that, if I strolled up to the counter at a Police station and tried to make a complaint about some hurty words some other person said, I would have been (rightly) frog-marched out the front door with a stern warning to stop wasting their time.
 
smartcooky said:
The process is the punishment.
Click to expand...
No; the process how it is determined whether or not the law has been broken, and what consequences (if any) are appropriate.
smartcooky said:
In cases like this there should not have even been an investigation.
Click to expand...
No; there should always be an investigation, how else can the validity of the complaint be assessed?
smartcooky said:
The first cop needs to have enough brains to read the complaint, summarily dismiss it, and tell the complainant to ◊◊◊◊ off and get a life. The subject doesn't even need to know that a complaint had been made, and no record of the complaint needs to kept.

It wasn't many years ago that, if I strolled up to the counter at a Police station and tried to make a complaint about some hurty words some other person said, I would have been (rightly) frog-marched out the front door with a stern warning to stop wasting their time.
Click to expand...
No. That's not how policing by consent works. The Judges of Mega City One are a dystopian fantasy, not a model of best practice.

Police officers are (quite rightly) not empowered to summarily dismiss complaints. Records of complaints (and the actions taken in response to them) should absolutely be kept, if only to identify and provide evidence of vexatious complaints by bad actors (and also as a defence against claims of bias by the police).
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom